Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The
Library
CHRONICLE
OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
pjumk^^^H1
The
Library
&***-%
CMIROMICLE
OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS
AT AUSTIN
133
,73
V-30
Mr*****************-**********]
Volume 20, Numbers
Indiana University
1/2
s
SEP
3^
7 1990
Library
ISSN
0024-2241
Cover illustration: Woodcut from St. Bernard's The Golden Pistle. printed in 1531 by Robert
Wyer. Reproduced from Hand-Lists of English Printers, 1501-1556, Part IV, ed. E.G. Duff,
The
Library Chronicle
is published by
Center
at
Austin
The
Library Chronicle
Editorial Board
Thomas F. Staley
Carlton Lake
Sally Leach
Cathy Henderson
Harold Billings
William B. Todd
The Library Chronicle is issued quarterly at a subscription rate of $30.00 for four issues. The
purpose of the Chronicle is to present information on available materials in the special collections
at The University of Texas at Austin, to publish scholarly articles based on these materials, and to
record matters of interest concerning new acquisitions, exhibitions, and other events related to
the University's special collections. Writers should query first before submitting articles for
publication. All correspondence should be addressed to the Editors, P.O. Box 7219, Austin,
Texas 78713.
Contents
Michael Warren
Beckett,
J onson,
Randall McLeod
The Theatricalization
13
of Text:
Shakespeare
from Tranceformations in the Text
61
39
Walter Gabler
87
111
127
151
167
Notes on Contributors
184
tts
ft
'
7/-
ft
I
ntk"-.
v*^(
rattling
,0On coronation
day, on coronation
merry time,
O, won't we have
Drinking
his bucket,""
day,
)'
r"(dances slowly,
contentment
Private Carr
Here. What are you saying about my king?
Stephen
it
20
is
Private Carr
?
Ufa) AT *,.,<
k,n,!,.7,K.ng.lR
^.
,, *uc*,] ,.*** al'
Above: pages 552 and 553 of the Texas page-proofs of James Joyce's Ulysses, bearing additions in
the author's hand. Below: from page 1300 in Hans Walter Gabler's Ulysses.
Critical and
Synoptic Edition (Garland, 1984), reflecting through editorial markings some of the additions
made by Joyce to the Texas page-proofs.
HRHRC Collections.
Introduction
This special issue of The Library Chronicle is devoted to the papers given at
The Harry Ransom Conference on New Directions in Textual Studies held at
The University of Texas at Austin on 30 and 31 March and 1 April 1989. Harry
Huntt Ransom, our late friend, esteemed colleague, accomplished adminis
trator, and man of letters, considered among his greatest accomplishments
the creation of the Humanities Research Center, one of the world's finest
collections of rare books and manuscripts. In large part the Center, renamed
in 1983 in honor of its founder, owes its reputation to Harry Ransom's
and to his love of books and his
extraordinary
energy and leadership,
understanding of their central place in the life of this culture. Thus, the
HRHRC proved a particularly propitious setting for a conference of scholars
from the United States, Canada, England, and Germany gathered to assess
the developments in one of the most controversial and rapidly changing of
scholarly fields, that of textual editing. For not only did the participating
scholars reflect Ransom's personal and professional vision of the value of the
humanities, but in developing and testing their textual theories they also
made use of the HRHRC collections that have provided and will continue to
provide evidence for their work.
In between sessions, Jerome McGann, no stranger to the HRHRC, found
another chance to look over the Ezra Pound Collection; Hans Gabler
examined the James Joyce materials; and Michael Warren and Donald
McKenzie were able to work with the newly acquired Pforzheimer Collection
with its first folio of Shakespeare and its rich holdings in seventeenth-century
printed books. For Ian Willison, the Clarence Cline Distinguished Professor
of English for the spring semester of 1989 at The University of Texas and one of
three editors of the forthcoming A History of the Book in Britain, the HRHRC
collections have proven especially helpful in understanding the history of the
book from its beginnings the realities of medieval texts and manuscript
production as revealed, for example, by the HRHRC's Cardigan manuscript
of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales up to the book's current relationship with
film as evidenced, for instance, by the HRHRC's David O. Selznick archive.
Lotte Hellinga, whose most recent work sheds light on editorial procedures in
early printed books, was able to examine, though all too briefly, the marginal
annotations in the HRHRC's Gutenberg Bible. In her judgment, this copy
may be a "rare
if not unique
for
liturgical practice.
Clearly, systematic
Anne
Middleton had the opportunity to look at Owen Rogers's 1561 reprint of Piers
Plowman, examining the text for marginalia that might give her clues as to how
this poem was actually received by sixteenth-century
readers. Randall
McLeod somehow found time to further his study of the first editions of
Harington's translation of Orlando Furioso (and illustrate the virtues of the
McLeod Portable Collator) by collating the HRHRC's 1591 Pforzheimer
another
usage" besides
analysis
monastic
edition.
If
HRHRC's
to understanding what has been happening in the field of textual studies in the
past decade, a decade that has seen the relationship of editor to critic, the
procedures for editing books, and the very idea of authorship itself all being
The publication of Michael J. Warrens "Quarto and Folio King Lear and the
Interpretation of Albany and Edgar" in Shakespeare, Pattern of Excelling
Nature, edited by David Bevington and Jay L. Halio; Jerome J. McGann's A
Critique of Modern Textual Criticism; Hans Gablers Ulysses. A Critical and
Synoptic Edition; and D.F. McKenzies Bibliography and the Sociology of
Texts to mention a few of the more significant contributions in the past
decade gave evidence in engaging, often elegant ways that textual scholar
side. He reminds us, that is, that reading is the complement of editing. To be
an aware reader, according to McGann, is to read "radially," which "involves
decoding one or more of the contexts that interpenetrate the scripted and
physical text." In turn, the critical edition fosters radial reading "because it is,
to this point in time, one of the most sociohistorically self-conscious of texts."
Implicit in McGann's argument is a call for readers and editors to be aware "of
the materials, the means, and the modes of textual production as they develop
and interact over time."
Michael Warren, drawing upon his own experience in the theater, calls
attention to the validity of and need for multiple texts of plays both to reflect
historical reality and to meet the needs of contemporary audiences. As one
solution to his dissatisfaction with the tradition of editing plays as literary
texts, he envisions an electronic text "capable of storing text in forms that
would allow for the easy representation of the four endings of Every Man Out
of His Humour, for the immediate construction of Q or F Cynthia's Revels, for
the simultaneous display of Q and F King Lear."
Editors have traditionally stressed the need for taking into account all the
relevant evidence, but the increasing emphasis on the history of the book, on
historical audiences,
to someone
studying
the reaction
of the
if an editor
wishes to represent
"what the Renaissance was saying and how it said it." McLeod's essay, about a
third the length of his original talk, has both in its presentation and in its
findings more than a little of the maverick, is rebellious, perhaps even
revolutionary. In emphasizing the particular, McLeod mounts a nominalistic
assault on past editorial practices, calling into doubt the validity of making
general statements, of establishing principles of textual criticism.
In his 1986 study, Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts, D. F. McKenzie
argued for a concept of "bibliography as the study of the sociology of texts" that
"directs us to consider the human motives and interactions which texts involve
at every stage of their production, transmission, and consumption" and that
"alerts us to the role institutions, and their own complex structures, play in
affecting the forms of social discourse, past and present." Here, in "SpeechManuscript-Print," McKenzie continues to define and explore "bibliography
as the study of the sociology of texts." In this case, by citing an impressive
range of writers literary, religious, and legal McKenzie is able to show
how the concern over the shift from orality to print in seventeenth-century
England became embodied in printed form, influencing that form and in turn
reflecting the intentions of the authors. McKenzie's sociology of the text, that
is, seems to be headed in a different direction from McGann's. While both
seek to widen the definition of relevant evidence that editors should examine,
McKenzie does so in order to shed light on authorial intention, not to call into
question its existence or to redefine it as a collective enterprise.
Ian Willison would appear to be headed more in McGann's direction.
Citing G. Thomas Tanselle's Textual Criticism Since Greg: A Chronicle, 19501985, Willison sees the issue as turning "on whether one is willing to admit the
legitimacy of being interested
While Lotte Hellinga confesses that "nobody expects to put the Rationale of
"
Durandus on stage, she is nevertheless able to show that the textual critic has
an important role to play in examining books produced in the early years of
10
Such a "versional"
of
a lost
Larry Carver
11
Dustjacket of Mortimer Adler's How to Read a Book (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1940).
HRHRC Collections.
By Jerome McGann
I.
For eight years everyone in this room some of us more than others could
scarcely avoid reading, over and over again, the following "text," which came
to us as a narrativized series of sounds and images on the TV screen. In the
background is the White House (or Camp David, or a ranch in California,
etc.). In the middle distance is a large helicopter, its rotors sending out their
characteristic chuffing noises. The decibels are running fairly high. Then the
camera picks up Ronald and Nancy Reagan, often with their dog in leash-tow,
moving diagonally acrpss the screen from the background building to the
waiting helicopter. Both are smiling and waving toward the TV camera, which
serves as the surrogate of ourselves, the watchers.
At the corners of this camera's eye can be seen a group of agitated
journalists. As soon as the Reagans and their dog emerge from the building
and come into the field dominated by the helicopter and its noise, the
journalists begin hurling questions. The questions, like the obedient children
of legend, can be seen but not heard or not heard distinctly by ourselves
the watchers, or (evidently) by Ronald Reagan, who continues to smile as he
cups his ear, appearing to try to make out what he is being asked. He will
shrug his shoulders alas, the noise is just too great, the questioned cannot
hear the questioners.
I could
instance,
of this fascinating
scene: for
frantic in their
as the
Reagans
13
The most important persons in this text are invisible. They are ourselves,
the unseen presences for whom the display has principally been constructed.
The scenic narrative is a classic example of what is meant by propaganda in
this case, the manipulation of the social institution of the so-called free press
for certain state political purposes. This is not a "news event," it is the illusion
of a news event, a ceremony of the news.
Many people are aware of this, of course, and while the scene has been
critically commented upon before, no one, so far as I know, has pointed out
the following extraordinary fact: that in a scene where speaking and communi
cating with words appear to be of central importance, language has been
structurally translated into visual and oral tokens as image, or as nonlinguistic sound. Complex meanings are being communicated here, but the
verbal discourse what Ezra Pound called "logopoeia" functions principally
along nonverbal lines. To understand this text it is not necessary actually to
hear anything said by Reagan or anything asked by the reporters.
This is the form of what I suppose we should now have to call "Great
Communication" to be named as such after its principal vehicle, the Great
Communicator, who employed itor rather, who was employed by it
between 1980 and 1988.
But of course this is a "media event" not a book, and least of all a poem.
Reading a book is very different from reading a TV screen. Nonetheless,
"Reagan's Farewell" (for such is the title I shall give to this text, Reagan's best
performance in a short-subject film) exhibits a textual structure which can
help us understand how books and even poems communicate just as the
latter can help us, reciprocally, to understand the character of a text like
"Reagan's Farewell."
Let us begin to explore these matters by posing this question: What is the
structure of the act of reading? The question has fascinated Americans, and
especially American educators, throughout this century. Mortimer Adler's
How to Read a Book. The Art of Getting a Liberal Education (1940) was one of
the most famous and influential of a whole series of similar books, pamphlets,
and textbooks designed to teach the "art" of reading. Almost equally famous
and (finally even more) influential was Ezra Pound's ABC of Reading, first
published in 1934. Adler's book has been out of print for some time;1 Pound's
book is still available from New Directions, and is even taught in some schools
(though usually as part of specialized courses in twentieth-century literature
or culture).
Unlike Adler's book, ABC of Reading is aggressively anti-academic.
Nevertheless, it shares with Adler's book the view that "the fate of reading" (as
it were) is the Great Book (so-called). Learning "how to read a book" means
'In 1972 a revised edition of Adler's How to Read a Book, prepared by Charles van Doren, was
issued by Simon and Schuster.
14
putting oneself to school to those who know how to read and even more
important who know what are the important books to read. Reading has to
be grounded in the Great Books because they alone can provide stable models
of excellence standards by which to measure other texts, both good and bad.
In this sense, How to Read a Book and ABC of Reading are both about how to
read a great book (or text). In each case, active readers are postulated who will
put themselves to school to the best that has been known and thought in the
world.
In Adler and Pound's books they are quite typical of the genre "reading"
is equated with deciphering the linguistic text. This equation is most clearly
maintained in Adler's book, which is academically grounded. For Adler, "how
to read a book" means learning how to decode "one kind of readable symbol,
the kind which men invent for the purpose of communication the words of
human language."2 To read is to acquire possession of the text's verbum, its
logos, its conceptual content. Adler's model of reading is ultimately a
hermeneutic (as opposed to a constructivist) one: in a seventeenth- or
eighteenth-century battle of the books, Adler would come down on the side of
the ancients rather than the moderns.3
at its expository
about the act of reading, its structure and format suggest very
different commitments. ABC of Reading has engaged in the battle of the
books, but finally it has not been able to make up its mind whether reading is
an act of decoding or an act of construction. ABC of Reading is at least as much
a text about writing as it is about reading.
The differences between Adler's book and Pound's are nicely displayed at
the most physical and apparitional levels. Adler's book is twice as long as
Pound's, and while both are published by established houses (Simon and
Schuster, in Adler's case; Faber and Faber, and Yale University Press, in
Pound's), Adler's book is a much more sober performance. Half of Pound's
book is comprised of reading exercises and exhibits, while Adler's by
contrast is a 400-page tome written in a style that is at once clear, ponderous,
and inexorable. For all its title of "How to," Adler's book resembles a series of
assumptions
academic lectures.
Pound's text, on the other hand, does resemble a "How to" book. This
feature is quite apparent in its long series of "Exhibits," which Pound uses as
practical illustrations of certain kinds of writing. But it is also foregrounded in
a dramatic way by the book's formatting. ABC of Reading uses caps, boldface,
'Mortimer Adler, How to Read a Book. The Art of Getting a Liberal Education (New York:
Simon & Schuster, 1940), p. 18.
3For a good discussion of contemporary reading theories, and the crucial choice of emphases
(decoding v. constructing), see Gregory G. Colomb, "Cultural Literacy and the Theory of
Meaning: Or, What Educational Theorists Need to Know about How We Read," New Literary
History 20 (Winter 1989): 411-450.
15
like
advertising
texts, public
broadsides,
manifesto.
These physical aspects of Pound's book carry out his expository argument at
the work's illustrative level. Pound is, like Adler, committed to the tradition of
the Great Book, but his engagement with that tradition is largely constructivist and modern (rather than hermeneutic and neo-classical/romantic).
example, Chapter Six begins like this:
For
. . .
II.
In this general context, then, let me ask once more the question: "What is
the structure of the act of reading?" Like Adler, we commonly think this
question will be addressed by analyzing the linear processes of the linguistic
text. That is to say, we seek to investigate that form of reading by which one
'Ezra Pound, ABC of Reading (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1934), pp. 44, 28-29.
16
ABC
ABC of Reading
of Reading
LIVE IN.
Figure 1: Pages 28 and 29 from Chapter Four of Ezra Pound's ABC of Reading (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1934). HRHRC Collections.
17
HEWSai
ND
^^|^B^'D
^^Kf^Z
"
"
a lump of tufa,
And S. had got back their horses
And the poor devils dying of cold . . .
(And there was another time, you know,
He signed on with the Fancsi,
and just couldn't be bothered . . .)
Pitigliano
Et
" anno
And
he said:
Figure 2: From Canto X of Ezra Pound's A Draft of XVI. Cantos (Paris: Three Mountains Press,
1925). HRHRC Collections.
Thirdly, you take the greater risk of using the word in some special
relation to "usage", that is, to the kind of context in which the reader
expects, or is accustomed, to find it.5
In this formulation Pound remains tied to a linguistic model of language. His
linguistic orientation is most apparent in his definition of phanopoeia, which
evidendy does not correspond to his own practice as a writer. For in Pound's
work, phanopoeia may be observed not only in "images" evoked by words and
strings of words; it operates as well in rhetorical and even abstract construc
tions of the page as a visual field. We have already seen Pound employ
constructivist procedures even in ABC of Reading, but the method is most
elaborately deployed in the Cantos.6 Two examples, from Cantos X and XVII
(figures 2 and 3), use decorative materials in ways that distincdy (and
deliberately) recall the tradition of ornamental books which was passed on to
Pound by William Morris and the late nineteenth century in general. Because
Pound is "quoting" those traditions, however, the illustrative materials
function at an abstract and cognitive level at least as much as they do at an
"imagistic" level. Though grounded in the tradition of symbolic book illustra
tion, this kind of page is highly abstract and self-referential,
and distinctly
anticipates the presentational forms developed by Action painting and that
movement's more representational
(postmodern)
inheritors.7
The second example, from Canto LXXXVI, underscores the point. Much
has been made of Pound's "ideogrammic" theories, and the view persists
through some of Pound's own misleading (and contradictory) misconcep
tions that the ideogram is for Pound a kind of image. On the contrary, the
ideogram is for Pound the idea of the image. In the Cantos, therefore, Chinese
like
ideograms function not linguistically or logically but phenomenologically,
the abstract and conceptual forms in Action paintings. On page 567 from
Canto LXXXVI (figure 4), for example, the ideograms are carefully arranged
on the field of the page as a kind of "unwobbling pivot" for the more nervous
play of the European text.8 Phanopoeia, melopoeia, and logopoeia become, as
"Ibid., p. 32.
These illustrations are taken from the first two book installments of Pound's cantos, A Draft of
XVI. Cantos (Paris: Three Mountains Press, 1925) and A Draft of the Cantos 17-27 (London: J.
Rodker, 1928).
'Pre-Raphaelite decorative traditions, which the early cantos allude to and invoke, are
themselves located squarely in the tradition of pictorial abstraction which the twentieth century
has pursued so resolutely. Pre-Raphaelite pictures are illusions of representations "quoted"
representations; their highly decorative and ornate surface features disrupt the integrity of the
images and call attention to the medium. More than anything else, in fact, Pre-Raphaelite art
carries out a disguised attack upon the conventions of pictorial representation.
The text here and in the subsequent illustrations from Pound's Cantos is from the recent (1986)
reprinting of the New Directions edition of The Cantos of Ezra Pound.
19
ggXSH
cjfyuo
\_)
vines
THAT THE
burst from
my
fingers
And the bees weighted
with pollen
Move
heavily
in
the
vine-shoots :
-chir-rikk
a purring sound,
I
On
in the stillness,
the sun.
Chrysophrase,
And the water green clear, and blue clear;
On, to the great cliffs of amber.
Between them,
Cave of Nerea,
she like a great shell curved,
And the boat drawn without sound,
Figure 3: From Canto XVII of Ezra Pound's A Draft of the Cantos 17-27 (London: J. Rodker,
1928). HRHRC Collections.
Iou Wang,
770
JQ
King Jou
killed by barbarians
"I
IP
in angustiis
Houo
me defendisti,
with
hundred arrows
'Will
end quote.
will not
will
"
to
K'in
of the
against
insurrection
Houai river
Figure 4: From Canto 86 of The Cantos of Ezra Pound, reprinted by New Directions in 1986, p.
567.
The abstract and conceptual aspect of the melopoeia of these texts can be
observed by paying attention to another feature of Pound's presentation of his
Chinese material (figure 7 from pages 544-45). Pound's text supplies the
ideograms with their oral equivalents, but it does this conceptually as the
numerical superscripts indicate. These numbers are the conventional signs by
which linguists indicate the tonal values to be given to the different phonetic
equivalents of the ideographic characters. The tones are crucial because in
Chinese the same "word" will "mean" completely different things, depending
upon the tone of the utterance.
This last example shows very plainly, therefore, how the linguistic and
linear reading model may not by any means comprehend the structure within
which the reading process is to be executed. At least two other structures
operate in every act of reading. The first of these spatial reading is
repeatedly called out by the Cantos and even ABC of Reading; but it is a
ubiquitous function of texts, although some dramatize its demands more than
others.
22
(Chicago:
LXXVII
if not
toujours
tend to return
Chung
in the middle
upright or horizontal
"
and having got 'em (advantages, privilege)
there is nothing, italics nothing, they will not do
whether
to retain 'em
"
(Austrians 1914)
"Decent chaps" (Schwartz
"Mais le prussien!
Le prussien
Kungf utseu
Entered the Bros Watson's store in Clinton N. Y.
" I'll
43)
yrs truly
Konody,
dona
fc,
pao
CHEN
in
Figure 5 (left): From Canto LXXVII of The Cantos of Ezra Pound, reprinted by New Directions
1986, p. 464, and Figure 6 (right): from Canto 86 of the same edition, p. 566.
is
we think of reading
if,
for example,
tchSung
cheu
or foundations.
jen*
chih*
i-h
(Sat, Mlhtvn)
shih*
poi
tt
all
it
ch'en*
C &
Soipls
(No, that
is
pou
but
is
gning
eccellenza
24
pole,
of
7:
Figure
544-45.
the page carried out by many other modern poets.10 These texts are not so
different from ideographic works like Herbert's "The Altar." But all poetry,
even in its most traditional forms, asks the reader to decipher the text in
spatial as well as linear terms. Stanzaic and generic forms, rhyme schemes,
metrical orders: all of these deploy spatial functions in scripted texts, as their
own roots in oral poetry's visual arts of memory should remind us. Even the
prose poem communicates through its spatial arrangement. When the prose
a purely linear appearance into the text, it
poem artfully reintroduces
paradoxically heightens our sense of the spatial form of the work. Consciously
or not, readers of prose poems recognize and decode that spatiality.
is
is
(it
is
(1936),
other.
This last point the position of Pater's Mona Lisa text within Yeats's book
draws our attention to another important spatial form which the reading eye
decodes. Reading much contemporary work on texts one might easily
overlook the relevance of these kinds of materiality.12 But all texts come to us
in one or another material form, and each of those material forms carries rich
of
's
"The best treatments of this subject in relation to early modem writing are Marjorie Perloff
The Futurist Moment. Avant Garde, Avant Guerre, and the Language
Rupture (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1986); see also Willard Bohn, The Aesthetics of Visual Poetry 19141928 (Cambridge, [Eng.]: Cambridge University Press,
1986).
"See Ron Silliman, The New Sentence (New York: Roof Books, 1987), especially Section II.
UI am thinking of the traditional work of G. Thomas Tanselle and Fredson Bowers; see
5.
especially Trevor Howard-Hill's defense of this tradition in the forthcoming volume of Text, vol.
25
potentials.
and
BMW
These two spatial styles (or codes) appear in a wide range of variant types.
We do not have to read a single word of many newspaper texts in order to have
already "read" part of what they are saying. Material printed in The New York
Times will necessarily be read very differently from material printed in, for
example, USA Today. Both represent themselves as national newspapers, but
the formatting of these two dailies is radically different, and the difference
calls out to very different reading expectations and procedures.
News
including their
magazines like Time and Newsweek organize their materials
advertisements with great care, and the formatting arrangements design
specific kinds of reading processes (which we can either follow, or choose to
resist or which, after that choice has become possible, we can once again
choose to follow). In the same way, the very physique of a book will embody a
code of meaning which the reader will decipher, more or less deeply, more or
less self-consciously. To read, for example, a translation of Homer's Iliad in
the Signet Paperback, in the edition published by the University of Chicago
Press, in the Norton Critical Edition, or in the limited edition put out by the
Folio Society (with illustrations), is to read Homer's Iliad in four very different
ways. Each of these texts is visually and materially coded for different
audiences and different purposes.
The way that advertising skills are taught in art school is significant and
illuminating. Every advertising text is theorized in two parts, the graphic and
the linguistic the one under the authority of the art director, the other of the
copywriter. The two can be one person, of course, and in the final product the
two functions must be coordinated. But in art school the student is first taught
to treat the entire work graphically, not linguistically. This fact appears in the
convention which governs the handling of advertising copy in student
advertising exercises. The linguistic text, which the student buys at an art
supply store (!), comprises a parodic kind of fractured Latin blocks of
linguistic nonsense organized into word strings, sentences, and paragraphs.
26
is
is
if
(if
phanopoeia
the importance
it
3,
2,
is
is
if
1,
is
is
it
however, and raise this matter simply to call attention to the large functions
which Pound was imagining for his materialist textual innovations. Toward the
end of the Pisan Cantos in fact, at the penultimate page of Canto LXXXIV in
the New Directions collected Cantos we confront the text on page 539
am interested only in the last two lines of this text, where the
(figure 8).
Chinese "word" ming- appears in the English text that reads "These are
distinctions in clarity/ming2 [ideogram] these are distinctions."
This text
an enactment of the ideas
concerned with, ideas about
clarity, making distinctions, and ultimately about the need for paying
attention. The superscript "2" might have been
or draws
melopoeic distinction which has to be attended to we are to "read" the text.
The ideogram itself comprised of pair of independent characters, the first
being the character phonologically rendered "Jih," and meaning "sun," the
second the character phonologically "Yehuh," meaning "moon." This new
(literally)
that
is
it
if
is
is
Pound's highly spatialized text may indeed, must also be read as double
injunction. In the first place, the reader
called to pay the closest attention to
every detail of the passage. In the second, readers are enjoined to see that
not
natural but an acquired skill,
skill deeply imbedded in
"reading"
distinct societies and distinct histories. For Western reader, this text will
have to be put down for time, and returned to later,
to be read.
of
27
And note the implication of this injunction. Because one must consciously
acquire the ability to read the Chinese material in the text, the passage tells us
something about the English text as well a part of the text which we native
readers (Pound's immediate audience) tend to forget: that there is no such
"
thing as a "natural language. All language is a constructive acquisition, and to
the degree that we treat it as a "natural" phenomenon, to that degree we have
abandoned the possibility of exercising control over it. For readers this means
that the texts will control us, and not we them.
But I take it as axiomatic that reading, like writing and speaking, is a type of
communicative exchange, and hence works through a structure of reciprocals.
Consequently, the last example of a Poundian spatialized text points us in the
direction of what Pound called "usage." The spatial text already has a radial
inertia which no reader will find it easy to avoid.
Radial reading involves decoding one or more of the contexts that inter
penetrate the scripted and physical text. It necessitates some kind of
abstraction from what appears most immediately. The person who temporar
ily stops "reading" to look up the meaning of a word is properly an emblem of
radial reading because that kind of "radial" operation is repeatedly taking
place even while one remains absorbed with a text. Emily Dickinson tells us
that "There is no frigate like a book" in order to remind us that reading sends
us away from, and with, the books we enter.
Some texts foreground and encourage acts of radial reading whereas others
work to prevent or limit radial processing. A good instance of the latter would
be a Harlequin Romance or Bodice Ripper or some similar kind of text. In
these cases the text tries to establish a reading field that is as completely selfabsorbed as possible, so that the reader does not have to reflect upon the
scene of reading at all. Of course such works can and should be read critically,
and in the scholarship of popular culture we observe good readers brushing
such texts against their own grain in order to deconstruct the meanings they
work to transmit. But works like these do not positively call out to the critical
and self-conscious reader on the contrary, in fact.
In this respect, the Harlequin Romance stands in the sharpest contrast to
critical texts of various kinds, where radial readings in the scripted forms are
encouraged. What is called "scholarship" is one territory highly specialized
to be sure where radial types of reading are continually being put into
practice. To the extent that the work of scholarship is an intramural set of
operations we would have to see its radial readings as essentially technological
rather than critical. Nevertheless, because scholarly texts are works which can
only be read consciously and with great deliberateness, they provide a
number of excellent examples of texts which encourage radial reading.
Perhaps the most striking example of such a text is the so-called Critical
Edition for instance, the Cornell Wordsworth volumes, or any of the
editions of English authors produced through the Oxford English Texts series.
28
Europe
like Natalie
"
it
"
moon my pin-up,
chronometer
Wei, Chi and Pi-kan
Yin
or jen2
Xaire Alessandro
Xaire Fernando,
il Capo,
Pierre, Vidkun,
Henriot
and
as
to gradations
not to
be nourished
by blood-bath?
de l'escalina
yjdot
gradations
ming*
w
fME-M
these are
distinctions
Figure 8: From Canto LXXXIV of The Cantos of Ezra Pound, reprinted by New Directions in
1986, p. 539.
One does not simply move through works like these in a linear way, starting at
the beginning and then proceeding page by sequential page. Rather, one
moves around the edition, jumping from the reading text to the apparatus,
perhaps from one of these to the notes or to an appendix, perhaps then back to
some part of the front matter which may be relevant, and so forth. The edition
also typically drives one to other books and acts of reading, ancillary or related
materials which have to be drawn into the reading process in order to expand
and enrich the textual and the reading field.
This is a process by which the entire sociohistory of the work from its
originary moments of production through all its subsequent reproductive
adventures is postulated as the ultimate goal of critical self-consciousness.
That the goal is in fact an unreachable one is clear. A practical move toward its
attainment is essential to criticism, however. Such a move appears as some
particular version of a work say, Hyder Rollins's Variorum edition of
Shakespeare's sonnets, or Stephen Booth's more recent critical edition. Each
is a particular attempt to define a comprehensive sociohistorical field for the
sonnets. Whereas Rollins works with a traditional apparatus, Booth's edition
is framed as a set of facing page texts which dramatize the historical gap
readers. The particular signifi
separating us from early seventeenth-century
cance of these two editions is as much a function of their limits as of their
special strengths, both of which they execute as corresponding sets of
presences and absences.
is a
to reconstitute past texts and versions in forms which make them usable in the
present and for the future.
edition over,
" The
say,
a more
simple
"reading
is to an analogue
in recent years,
so much
30
This example from Yeats may remind us how radial reading operates as a
function of linear and spatial reading. One sees the same connection in the two
volumes which comprise the first editions of Pound's first twenty-seven
cantos. As we saw earlier in the illustrations from Cantos X and XVII, each of
those books makes a clear historical allusion not only to William Morris and
the bibliographical face of the late nineteenth-century aesthetic movement,
but also to the longer tradition which those late nineteenth-century works
were invoking: the tradition of the decorated manuscript and its Renaissance
bibliographical inheritors. 16The linear and spatial codes of such a text function
properly only within the horizon of radial reading which the book has invoked.
But that radial field is by no means the only one in which Pound's book is
involved. Once again, we are cued to the presence of this other field by certain
material features of A Draft of XVI. Cantos. The title page states that the
decorative material in the book was done by the artist Henry Strater; there is
an Imprint on page [67] stating that the book was produced at Three
Mountains Press in Paris, over a fairly extensive period of time (MayDecember 1924); and a Colophon on page [2] declares: "The Edition of Ninety
Copies consists of Five on Imperial Japan paper autographed by the author
"For
and the Book in England from 1790 to 1914 (New York: Pierpont Morgan
Library, 1976).
31
.1
//
T>%AFT OF
XVI.
the "Beginning
of some
now
of a
Toem
Length
HENRY STRATER
PARIS
THREE
MOUNTAINS PRESS
M. CM. XXV.
Title page from A Draft of XVI. Cantos of Ezra Pound (Paris: Three Mountains Press,
HRHRC Collections.
1925).
collaborations
poetical text not only summons but finally must submit to as well. The title
page, Imprint, and Colophon have to be carefully read if we want to be clear
about the context within which Pound's poem was being initially defined. Not
least important,
in this connection,
embraces. Equally significant are the historical allusions being made through
fundamental
indeed,
of the latter
readiness
as a mere apparition.
alive
It
to the fact that the text is and has always been involved in
every scripted
1925
That "reading" is a reaction upon a textual field that comprises far more than
the linguistic text, far more even than the linguistic and the spatial text. It is a
reading which assumes that the physical texts of Pound's work are not only
linguistic and spatial, but multiple and interactive as well. It is a reading which
seeks to visibilize the textual field the scene of radial reading by a close
observation of the materials, the means, and the modes of textual production
as they develop and interact over time.
As the first example from Pound suggests, radial reading is a function of the
(if
34
Popular Fiction
of
&
is
I DIAL
THE
NOVEMBER
1*922
S.
U di
in ampulla
pendert;
ELIOT
Cumis
ilia:
In
the mountains,
HRHRC Collections.
LXXIII,
no. 5 (November
was finally published in book form in December 1922, its artistic importance
had already been institutionally imagined,
The story,
if not
detail
by Lawrence Rainey,
involves a complex act of reading (and writing) The Waste Land by various
social agents and agencies in 1922. 181 shall not rehearse the story here, but I
will call attention to a few salient details. The Waste Land was first published
in The Dial in November 1922 in a complicated financial arrangement
between The Dial people, Eliot, and the publishers Boni and Liveright, who
had contracted to publish the poem in book form a few weeks after The Dial
publication. The terms included giving Eliot the Dial Award for the year 1922
as part of his publishing contract with both of the publishers. When the poem
appeared, in other words, it already wore the insignia of its special status and
importance. Many of the early reviews are written in full consciousness of the
import of those insignia. Their knowledge is perhaps most apparent in certain
hostile reviews, which registered their disapproval at the special privileges
which the poem had acquired for itself.
The first readers of Eliot's published poem encountered the work in a radial
reading field that had already been sharply, if not wholly, defined. That
horizon of reading would dominate The Waste Land's reception history the
legend of the poem for the rest of the century. To retell the story in all of its
details is to step outside the circle of that initial horizon, and hence to re-read
The Waste Land with a clearer understanding of why it is a radial, and not
simply a linguistic, text.
III.
field, that they interact with their
for the way we will read them. For
one thing, it forces us to realize that books involve a "reading" of their
audiences which those audiences may or may not realize, and may or may not
submit to. "Reagan's Farewell" means to interact with its audiences by
absorbing and regularizing the possible modes of response. Unlike The Waste
Land, it labors to minimize its own internal conflicts, as well as the possible
conflicts its message might generate. In order for us to read "Reagan's
Farewell," then, rather than simply be read by it, we have to explode the
illusion of contextual seamlessness which the work projects. We have to "step
outside" that fiction of a homogeneous context and read the work in a
framework and point of view which it has not already absorbed and antici
pated. This requires reading the work in those contexts which "Reagan's
Farewell" has tried either to forbid, or to declare nonexistent.
To
function in
a radial
"Lawrence Rainey, "The Price of Modernism: Reconsidering the Publication of The Waste
Land," to appear shortly in The Yale Review.
36
Literacy is achieved when one is able to decipher, judge, and use many
different kinds of text. One may be as easily enslaved to the high-minded texts
of poets and philosophers as to more vulgar and demotic productions.
Producers of texts correctly assume that their audiences will possess reading
But many text-producers neither want nor expect anything
competence.
more than a purely responsive act of reading an act which will decode the
transmission in precisely the way that the sender desires.
If messages and senders were innocent and reliable agents, this idea of
communication would be all that we would require. It is the ideal of
advertisers, of course, as well as the ideal of all those who desire to create
homogeneous and self-gratified audiences. The many texts produced by our
government during the Reagan years offer a rich archive of materials designed
to short-circuit reflective and critical thought. For this very reason they are
texts which reading teachers ought to use as often as possible: if they are not
really "great communications," and least of all "great books," they are texts
which beautifully illustrate how communicators can manipulate their mes
sages to create certain meanings and prevent others. They are, in other words,
texts which show us how and why we must read beyond the linear im
mediacies of their powerful propaganda.
Let me close with one final reflection on my original text, "Reagan's
Farewell," which I have been treating as if it were authored by Reagan's media
staff. In point of fact "Reagan's Farewell" was put together, many different
times, by the public media, by news institutions like ABC and CBS and NBC
and their local affiliates. If "Reagan's Farewell" is a ceremony of the news, the
news machines more than cooperated in the presentation of that ceremony.
"Reagan's Farewell" is, like any Shakespeare production (on stage or in a
book), a social text. One of the more disturbing and grotesque "meanings" of
"Reagan's Farewell" lies in its revelation of the fourth estate's susceptibility to
This particular meaning one would expect to be
propaganda manipulation.
in
our
own
widely registered
society, where the idea of a free and critical press
is founded at the deepest institutional levels. That it has not seemed an
important meaning to many people, including people in the fourth estate, is
yet another, and even darker, meaning to be found in the text of "Reagan's
Farewell."
Even under the best of circumstances, messages and their senders are
neither innocent nor completely reliable. This is why readers must be
prepared to defend themselves against both the errors and the perversions of
those who communicate with texts.
37
Above: Jean Martin as Lucky and Roger Blin as Pozzo, with Lucien Raimbourg and Pierre Latour as
Vladimir and Estragon, in the premiere performance of Samuel Beckett's En Attendant Godot at the
Theltre de Babylone in Paris, January 1953. Below: Alvin Epstein as Lucky, Bert Lahr as Estragon
(Gogo), Kurt Kasznar as Pozzo, and E.G. Marshall as Vladimir (Didi) in the April 1956 production of
Waiting for Godot at New York City's John Golden Theatre. HRHRC Collections.
By
Michael Warren
by J.C. Maxwell entitled "How Bad is the Text of The Jew of Malta?" In it
Maxwell engages in an attack upon the idea of "continuous copy" that plays
were subjected to regular modification in the playhouse, often by hands other
than the playwrights' a thesis much favored by those E. K. Chambers called
"disintegrators."1 Arguing for simplicity, common sense, and authorial sanc
tity, Maxwell states boldly: "It is worth while pointing out (a) that the doctrine
of 'continuous copy' is 'a figment of the editorial brain' and (b) that manu
scripts, unlike apples, do not become corrupt simply by lying in a drawer."2
My second quotation is from a more recent source, The New York Review of
Books of 6 December 1988. Denis Donoghue writes:
The text of Watting for Godot is providing
Whenever Beckett
tinkered with the references to time and place; notably for a German
production at the Schiller Theatre, a performance at San Quentin
Penitentiary, and a performance in Dublin last August. In any strict
sense, there is no established text of the play. The New York
production [of which Donoghue was writing] uses a text provided by
Samuel Beckett in August 1988, which will be published soon by
Faber and Faber.a
'For the
6 December 1988, p.
30. See Carlton Lake, No Symbols Where None Intended (Austin, TX: Harry Ransom
Humanities
39
be interested
in performance
major characteristic
Research
Center, 1984), pp. 65-74, especially item numbers 124 and 130, for descriptions of
manuscripts, in French and English respectively, of Waitingfor Godot.
original autograph
40
and the problems that they present; the third uses theatrical experience
as
evidence in arguments surrounding two textual cruxes. I shall end upon the
subject of possible future texts.
II.
Unlike Marlowe or Shakespeare, Jonson cared profoundly about the
of his works for posterity. He appears to have attended to details
of publication in person, and to have paid extraordinary attention to what was
published. This is certainly the tone of his 1616 Folio, and many quartos also
preservation
to have them appreciated by the discerning readers of his own and future ages.
In so doing he established an authoritative text of much of his work, and later
editors, especially Herford and Simpson, who produced the standard edition
respected Jonson's wishes.4 But
and, I will suggest, obscured
in
his
revisions
Jonson suppressed
the theatrical reality while giving details of the plays' theatrical histories,
which currently available editions still tend to do.
Jonson's Every Man in His Humour is an excellent example of persistently
literary editing that obscures theatrical origins, and that tends to see revision
as replacement rather than as multiplication. EMIH was printed in a quarto in
1601; the title page says of it simply that it is "As it hath beene sundry times
publickly acted by the right Honorable the Lord Chamberlaine his seruants."
The Folio prints EMIH as the first play of the collection, and the title page
indicates that it is "A Comoedie" and that it was "Acted in the yeere 1598. By
the then Lord Chamberlaine his Seruants"; at the end of the play appears a
similar statement, and there is a list of the "principall Comoedians," headed
between
1925
and 1952,
have generally
a great deal
*C.H. Herford and Evelyn Simpson, eds., Ben Jonson, 11 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
I am following here their position with respect to Jonson's meticulous attention to his
1925-52).
text.
41
ters, shifts and eliminates emphases, and tinkers restlessly with a multitude of
details, including rewriting part of the conclusion.5
presentation
true in the Folio that "This Comoedie was first Acted in the yeere 1598" (my
italics), unless the statement on the Q title page is untrue. Jonson was acting as
editor of his own biography and theatrical history. Fortunately Herford and
Simpson do not follow him; however, the behavior of editors since them is
instructive in that most have agreed to represent in their texts Jonson's view of
what happened in 1598. In the New Mermaid edition (1966), Martin
Seymour-Smith prints an edited version of the F text after a reproduction of
the F title page. For the Yale Ben Jonson edition (1969), Gabriele Bernhard
Jackson also edits the F text, although she "restores . . . the Q stage
directions wherever their applicability has not been changed by Folio
revision"; she begins her appendix on "Text and Stage History," however,
with a statement that is notable for its contented ignoring of this important
issue:
Every Man In His Humour exists in two versions, for each of which
there is one authoritative text, apparently seen through the press by
Jonson himself. For the first version, set in Italy, it is the Quarto of
1601; for the second, set in England, the 1616 Folio of Jonson's
works. The present edition is based on the latter.6
Jonson's most recent editor, G.A. Wilkes, presents in his four-volume The
Complete Plays of Ben Jonson (1981) a modernized version of the texts of the
plays from the Herford and Simpson edition; he prints only a modernized
Folio text, neither justifying nor defending his action but merely stating flady
and exasperatingly that "It [the collection] is complete but for the early quarto
version of Every Man In His Humour (to which the later folio text has been
"7
By contrast with these editors, J.W. Lever confronts the
preferred).
...
'For an excellent brief summary of the changes, see Every Man In His Humour, ed. Martin
Seymour-Smith (New York: New Mermaid, 1966), pp. xxvii-xxxi; for a lengthy critical discussion
of the changes, see Jonas A. Barish, Ben Jonson and the Language of Prose Comedy (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 130-141.
6Ben Jonson, Every Man In His Humour, ed. Gabriele Bernard Jackson (New Haven: Yale
1981), vol.
42
I.,
tp*
EVERY MAN IN
his Humor.
As
publicly
.
Iohnioh.
GuoAnon d<Mtproctrts,dabit
Hijlri*.
1*01.
Title page from Every Man in his Humor by Ben Jonson (London: Walter Burre, 1601), with
inscription: "Sulcey Streats Book." HRHRC Collections.
reader to do what even Herford and Simpson do not permit (unless one has
access to two copies), which is to choose between reading each play for itself or
studying conveniently the nature of the revision, the marks of Jonson at work.8
Of these four publications, then, only one fully manifests the existence of an
early
EMIH,
between the texts that will provoke any intelligent reader to seek out the Q
text.
The editing tradition and the economics of publishing both encourage the
I stress the curious overlooking of Q EMIH
because it has a special interest for historians of Jonson and the theater. The
dating of the revision of EMIH is a matter of doubt; the two dates most
commonly suggested are ca. 1605 (Chambers, Lever) and ca. 1612 (Herford
and Simpson, Barish, Seymour-Smith).9 An exact conclusion is not possible,
but the issue is relevant to our sense of the play on the stage in Jonson s
lifetime. Beyond the references to performances already cited, the only other
recorded performances prior to 1660 are a revival for James I on 2 February
10
While it is possible that the F text was
1605, and two performances in 1631.
played in 1631, which text was played in 1605 is a matter of uncertainty:
Chambers suggests that "this revival would be the natural time for a revision,
and in fact seems to me on the whole the most likely date . . . ,"" but Herford
and Simpson's view of a revision in 1612 would mean that King James saw the
Florentine rather than the London EMIH, and that what we most readily
think of as EMIH what played in Stratford-upon-Avon in 1986 was not
played during the heyday of Jonson 's career. Amid all this doubt three things
seem clear: first, contrary to the assertions on the title page of F, the play that
was played in 1598 was almost certainly the Q text; second, the play that
Shakespeare acted in was the Q text; and third, the customary hypothesis that
Shakespeare played the Elder Kno-well, a character in the F text only, is
carelessly formulated.12 One must in fact be very wary in one's statements
about EMIH, and very cautious of these editions. The play's study as part of
single-text edition. In this context
"Ben Jonson, Every Man In His Humour, ed. J. W. Lever (Lincoln, NE: Regents Renaissance
Drama Series, 1971), p. xx. This is not the first parallel-texts edition of EMIH; H. Holland Carter
produced such an edition in the Yale Studies in English series, vol. 52 (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1921). It should not go unremarked that the Everyman's Library Benjonson's
Plays, ed. F.E. Schelling, 2 vols. (London: J. M. Dent, 1910), prints both Q and F EMIH (though
not in parallel format),
of the
same volume.
4 vols.
possibilities favor 1607-08 and 1612-13; but events do not always favor possibilities."
'"Herford and Simpson, 9. 169.
"Chambers, 3.360.
"Herford and Simpson, 9. 168.
44
A similar pattern of behavior can be seen in regard to the two plays that
In His Humour in Jonson's folio. Although Herford and
declare
that
between Q and F Every Man Out Of His Humour
Simpson
Jonson "worked over the entire text with microscopic care, systematically
revising spelling, type, and punctuation" (the last at least to be considered
and that "it is the first play of which we have parallel
semi-substantive)
texts . . . and both were scrupulously edited," these editors do not publish
parallel texts;13 indeed, one of the most fascinating aspects of the texts and
their theatrical history is presented with remarkable obscuritythe fact that
the play has two different endings in each of Quarto and Folio for a total of four
endings to the play. Thus, for all the accuracy of Herford and Simpson's
apparatus and appendix material, the sequence and nature of these endings
are hard to discriminate from the information that they provide. I recognize
that parallel texts editions are expensive, but I would settle for an edition that
would at least print each ending clearly so that the theatrical movement would
be immediately intelligible in each case, and the history of the work on the
stage easily discerned. As it is, in a play that Jonson worked to render literary
"
by its expansion for publication even in Q, the editors conspire with him to
obscure the theatrical associations, the occasional qualities of the play, in favor
of the representation of the timeless, definitive, ultimately literary-historical
succeed Every Man
textual object.
If I
which they assert "is a revision and expansion of the Quarto" by some 1000
lines. " Whatever the date of the F-only material, it is my suspicion that Q CR
is the play that was performed in the Blackfriars Theatre and at court, and that
F, whose title page insists that it was "Acted, in the yeere 1600. By the then
Children of Queene Elizabeths Chappell," is a literary expansion, almost a
closet drama. At least one notable critic of Jonson who treats F as if it were a
theater text declares that "the final act . . . is stupifyingly dull, and bears
painful witness to the extent to which Jonson's passion for detail and surface
has stifled his feeling for movement in the theater."'6 As a literary text, it
would seem to me to be an object inappropriate for theatrical judgment.
The pressure for the single published text obscures the question of
theatrical origins and reduces the range of possible perceptions.
"Ibid,
3.414, 412.
"Each of the three quarto printings indicates on its title page that the published text is "as it was
first composed by the Author B.I. Containing more than hath been publikely spoken or acted.
With the seuerall character of every person.
"Herford and Simpson, 4. 17.
"Barish, p. 113.
"
45
III.
Herford and Simpson were engaged in
a monumental
author whose extensive remains suggest an aspiration to the classic and the
lapidary.
respected Jonson's formal aspirations and have not littered his plays with new
stage directions. If Jonson does not attract frequent performance, his editors
also see little obligation
although
my experience
that most editors seem conditioned by what has been printed before.
If one
is
to have editions, what should they produce? What stage directions should be
added, and why?
of Henry V
(Oxford:
textual
editor G.
on an earlier edition, eschews the beaten path, but it does not, as it well
might, decline to explain. Rather it prints its own direction "making to strike
it,
is
is
J.
is
The Riverside edition prints the same, omitting the sentence about the barge
but adding the word "close" before "pavilion" and "reclined" before "on
couch." The Arden adds that Pericles "reclined" and "unkempt and clad in
sackcloth" (following C. Maxwell in the New Cambridge edition). The New
Penguin restrained, and to the Quarto adds merely the discrimination of the
sailors. The Oxford reads: "Enter Helicanus [above; below, enter] to him at
the first door two Sailors, [one of Tyre, the other of Mytilene]," which appears
more practical, less pictorial, but
still unjustifiably prescriptive in placing
Helicanus' entrance "above."21 Later when Helicanus says "Behold him"
J.
"I discuss this passage and other similar instances of "editorial fossilizations" in "Textual
Problems, Editorial Assertions in Editions of Shakespeare," Textual Criticism and Literary
McGann (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985), pp. 23-37.
Interpretation, ed. Jerome
"William Shakespeare, The Complete Works, general editor Alfred Harbage (Baltimore:
Penguin Books, 1969); James G. McManaway was the editor of Pericles. The other editions to
which
refer here are: Pericles, the New Cambridge edition, ed. J.C. Maxwell (Cambridge,
[Eng.j: Cambridge University Press, 1956); Pericles, the new Arden Edition, ed. F.D. Hoeniger
textual editor G. Blakemore Evans
(London: Methuen, 1963); The Riverside Shakespeare,
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1974); Pericles, the New Penguin edition, ed. Philip Edwards
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1976); The Complete Works, general editors Stanley Wells and Gary
Taylor (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986).
it
is
is
"The Oxford edition here uses "broken brackets": "At many points the requisite action
apparent from the dialogue; at other points precisely what should happen, or the precise point at
which
should happen,
in doubt and, perhaps, was never clearly determined even by the
to some extent
Inevitably, this
is
...
..."
tion, p. xxxv).
47
by
66
P tricks Prince of
Tfrt.
fit/. SirjistlK goucrnot of A/tnline , who hearing of
your trie Iancholic ftatc,did come to Ire yout
Per. I embrace yougiuc me my robes.
I am wilde in my behoIding,0
Ljf* S,
Act V, Scene 1 (verso) of the second quarto (1609) of William Shakespeare's Pericles reproduced
from the facsimile edition of the British Museum copy (London: C. Praetorius, 1886), p. 66.
HRHRC Collections.
it
it
is
it
5.
is
is
is
it
it
is
(5.
1.36), the New Penguin adds: "Helicanus draws curtain revealing Pericles
"
lying on couch. The Pelican also indicates that Helicanus draws curtain.
The Riverside and the Arden say non-committally "[Pericles discovered]."
The Quarto itself, naturally enough,
allows Helicanus to
discreedy silent;
"Behold
him"
and
the
to
as
will.
The
Oxford edition,
stage
say
company
however,
curtain, revealing Pericles lying
extravagant: "Helicanus draws
couch with
upon
long overgrown beard, diffused hair, undecent nails on
his fingers, and attired in sack -cloth."
After Lysimachus has described Marina's excellence (5. 1.44-52), somebody
no stage direction in the
presumably has to leave to get Marina; there
Quarto. New Penguin: "Exit Lord." Similarly Oxford, but with broken
Lord, who departs]." Riverside,
brackets. Pelican: "[Gives an order to
acknowledging its antecedents in Kittredge and Malone, produces largely the
same. But the Arden credits Malone and the Cambridge edition for:
"
"Whispers Lord, who goes off in the barge of Lysimachus. Two things here
require comment: first, "Whispers Lord" hardly modern English; second,
in the Arden editor's theater the barge, conspicuous in the first stage
direction, appears to sail away in fashion unexplained in any note (in the
Cambridge edition the barge returns at 1.64).
Explicit indications of staging are few in the rest of the scene in the Quarto,
but
does include one printing oddity. When Pericles has been left by
Lysimachus and his companions, there appears at midpage of V.i verso in
midline the word "Diana" (5. 1.240), and her speech follows without speech
prefix; like everybody else she does not get an exit. All the texts except one
interpret this oddity as "Diana appears to Pericles in vision" with or without
brackets after "Diana," and at the close Arden, New Cambridge, and
Riverside say "[Disappears]"; Pelican, "[Vanishes]"; New Penguin, "Exit."
attractive, since
The neutrality of the New Penguin
resembles
simple
probability of the Quarto text and not the illusionistic qualities that the other
editors presume (deriving their authority from Malone). Oxford introduces its
own illusionism, more specifically than the others: "Diana [descends from the
heavens]" and "[Diana ascends into the heavens]" (broken brackets).
This scene in the Quarto ends with an exeunt. The Quarto has no more stage
directions. Gower speaks unbidden, and says
is
it
For the last scene the stage needs (beyond some "maiden priests" specified by
Diana) the six main characters: Pericles, Thaisa, Cerimon, Lysimachus,
Helicanus, Marina. But the Arden, the New Cambridge, and the Riverside all
before Gower's speech;
adapt Malone's stage direction, placing part of
variation in accidentals among the three):
reproduce the Arden text (there
49
[Scene II The Temple of Diana at Ephesus: Thaisa standing near
the Altar, as High Priestess; a Number of Virgins on each side:
Cerimon and other inhabitants of Ephesus attending].
it
if I
is
a
it)
Later, after the words "[Scene HI The same.]" appears "[Enter Pericles,
with his Train: Lysimachus, Helicanus, and Marina.]," to which Riverside
adds "and a Lady." The Pelican produces a version of the above, but (actually
as M alone had
all after the speech of Gower. The New Penguin, while still
bringing in everybody after Gower's speech, observes theatrical decorum by
following the tendency of earlier stage directions in indicating entrances at
two doors, thereby avoiding the indecorum of having Diana's votaresses and
Pericles' company enter through the same door. But actually that indecorum
does not exist in the others, because their syntax suggests that the Temple of
Diana at Ephesus
tableau discovered its many denizens are given no
verb that suggests entrance. Oxford concurs in that decision, and places their
discovery and the entrance of Pericles and his company differently, putting
them
line apart and both dependent on Gower's "see" "At Ephesus the
temple" (5.2. 17). M alone and his editorial successors clearly expect things on
their stage that do not necessarily expect, although
accept their plausibil
However,
the play was originally played that way,
needed
ity.
large
discovery space.
In
is
more complex theater than the stage with two doors and
suggest
IV.
is
of
"See, for instance, my "Quarto and Folio King Lear and the Interpretation of Albany and
Pattern of Excelling Nature, ed. David Bevington and Jay L. Halio
Edgar," Shakespeare,
(Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 1978), pp. 95-107; Steven Urkowitz, Shakespeare's
Revision
"King Lear" (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980); Gary Taylor, "The War in
of
of
Kenneth Muir,
an attempt
with textual
But most of the published research on this topic has nevertheless
taken place in the study, and what I wish to record is a recent research
experiment that was performance-based, a product of group interaction it is
appropriate that the theatricalization of text should take place in groups. At
Rice University on 11 February 1989 I was invited to join five associates of
ACTER (the Alliance for Creative Theater, Education, and Research): Homer
Swander, Phyllis Gorfain, Alan Dessen, Audrey Stanley, and Steven Urkowitz; and five British actors: Bernard Lloyd, Geoffrey Church, Patti Love,
Vivian Heilbron, and Clifford Rose, in a research seminar on text and
performance of King Lear. The five actors were on tour presenting a version of
the Folio King Lear that they had developed and rehearsed for themselves,
working from the edited Folio text in the new Oxford Shakespeare a few
cuts had been made where doubling made conversation with oneself not just
difficult (which was tolerable Kent speaking with Gloster), but excruciating
hard for Lear to die and then get up and say Albany's speech). Time was
devoted to only two passages, yet each yielded crucial insights that were
available in the study but were arresting and apparently inevitable in the
laboratory of the rehearsal space; thus performance validated interpretive
(it
is
scholarship.
argument.
a
The first example was sequence that has been written about already by
both Steven Urkowitz and Randall McLeod, the events that succeed the
sounding of Goneril's trumpet offstage in 2.4.a The conventional text follows
F, which reads:
is
Is
"Urkowitz,
foolish," The
of
the Kingdoms, ed. Taylor and Warren, pp. 180-182. Their arguments are supported
by the events
Division
is
describe.
51
(TLN
1463-87, 2.4.179-97)
Lear has the initiative as he presses the question of the responsibility for the
stocking of Kent, and assumes the central role in the theatrical action. Lear
maintains his dominance of the scene, ignoring the sound of the trumpet and
focusing on Oswald. At Goneril's entrance
I haue
good hope
(Q1608, sig.
Flv)
While Lear might command the stage action at the beginning of the sequence
in the Quarto also, the entrance of Goneril with an immediate speech
required a very strong stage position for her that would reinforce the way in
which she immediately becomes the focal point of the audience's attention
and claims the dominant role in the action. Moreover, the speech to Regan
served to allow the actress playing Regan to develop a new dimension of her
M^iUiamShak-fpearc:
HIS
//
death of King
Lear
Daughters.
//
At it
//
Tom of Bedlam:
VUfUjti
vp*
LONDON,
Butur, nd are to be foid at his fhop in tttUt
Church-yard at the iignc of the Pide Bull neere
S<. tyf'JIim Gate . I 6 o 8
Printed for
Ntibniil
ot^., J&zt.
*fo?
zS-
V
AT;
"*
Title page of the first quarto (1608) of William Shakespeare's King Lear reproduced from the
facsimile edition of the British Museum copy (London: C. Praetorius, 1885). HRHRC Collections.
subordinate
by Goneril,
apparently aggressive challenge. And Goneril too revealed the various modes
in which she might address Regan: direct, appealing, reproachful, ironic, and
so on, expanding the categories to which all interpretation of the passages
usually conforms. But most crucially the actors found that they needed a
different blocking for each version: in the Folio version Lear appears to turn
from Oswald to Regan to Goneril, all the time assuming control of the scene,
but in the Quarto version Lear addresses Oswald and then loses the strong
position on stage: when he comes to say "Who comes here" it is after power
and stage focus have shifted to a different location. For the actors and the
scholars there was a common recognition, that the alternation of two words
radically alters the staging. To quote Bernard Lloyd, the actor playing Lear,
upon first walking through the Quarto version, "oh that makes a great
difference." His "great" was not hyperbole: good actors are the real close
readers of texts, and in this instance they vindicated the work of imaginative
scholars, work that has not been generally accepted.
The second pair of passages that I wish to address should be the major focus
of all debate concerning texts of King Lear, nothing in a work of art can really
be more important than the way it ends, nor in the constitution of a character
than the mode of death. In this case I want to concentrate on what is an
obvious question, but one which presents problems as one seeks a clear
answer. When does Lear die? What stage direction should be used for Lear's
death?
I prythee
breake.
TLN
3277-3302)
I have yet to find an edition of Lear that does not indicate when Lear dies; with
two exceptions there seems to be general agreement in published editions
that Lear dies saying "Look there, look there," for the Folio provides us with
the stage direction "He dies" that has dominated all thought on this issue until
recently. Indeed, of Q's ascription of the speech "Breake hart, I prethe
breake" to Lear, Kenneth Muir can still print in his latest revision of the Arden
my favorite instance of unjustified editorial confidence represented in a
footnote: "Bradley suggests that Kent may be speaking of his own heart. Q,
55
impossibly,
It would
seem then that Q's death of Lear needs not only locating but justifying also.
I would like, however, at this stage to introduce criticisms of Q from the
In the summer of 1982 Tony Church, who had been playing Lear in
the Folio version at Santa Cruz, rejected the Q version of his death speech in a
seminar, particularly criticizing its lack of two of the five "never's, and its
theater.
being not in blank verse. In this rejection he revealed two conventional habits
that are quite common among us all: first, in needing five "never's he
exhibited the tyranny of the known our incapacity even to entertain that
which is unfamiliar: after all, the five "never"s may be, as he suggested, the
greatest line of blank verse in Shakespeare, but "never, never, never, pray
you undo" (though less complete) is not bad verse; second, seeing printed
prose he assumed that it was prose, and rejected it as improper Lear should
not die in prose (the passage actually may be imperfect blank verse).
There is a record of a second practical examination of this scene: David
Rich in an reports a production at the University of Rochester that started from
the quarto text, but was ready to admit the "necessity" of introducing F
material if Q was found unsatisfactory. a Though much Q material was found to
be playable, Lear's death was not a success. Richman writes:
As we discovered
become ludicrous in
Again the dominance of the familiar is apparent, although the same article
reports the success of playing the Q version of "Who struck my seruant."
At Houston, Bernard Lloyd began with similar misgivings to Tony
Church's, about the absent "never"s and the prose, but produced in ten
minutes of collaborative work with his colleagues a comfortable adjustment of
his regular performance of the Folio death speech to the Quarto lines.
"King Lear, the Arden edition, ed. Kenneth Muir (London: Methuen, 1972): 205n. For a full
discussion of the variants in Lear's role, see Thomas Clayton, "'Is this the promis'd end?':
Revision in the Role of the King," The Division of the Kingdoms, ed. Taylor and Warren, pp. 121141.
"Ibid.,
56
p. 379.
and
Performance," Shakespeare
However, it was in the other material that the revelations occurred. Lacking
"Do you see this
he slumped with a long groan on "O, o, o, o." The
spectators anticipated his death; those of us with preconceived ideas about the
scene awaited his quiet and willing prayer "Breake hart, I prethe breake," and
his gentle but prompt passing. Instead, to the surprise (I think) of all of us, he
exclaimed it as an angry outburst of self destruction from a man who in
desolation is exasperated that he cannot die sooner. And he did not die
immediately. He lasted (to my perception) until the end of Kent's three-line
speech so that Edgar announced the moment of death with "O he is gone
indeed." This was a different death from the one we are accustomed to, but
equally valid. Indeed in some respects it was far preferable. When Kent says,
"Vex not his ghost, O let him passe" about a man who is still alive, it makes
tender, painful sense. Edgar's "Look up my Lord" is different too, if Lear still
breathes. In the Folio Edgar is engaged in uncomprehending behavior beside
a corpse, while Kent talks consolation in the present tense in relation to a
person who is now past; by contrast, in Q Kent talks sense to the Edgar who is
watching Lear die. And indeed, that performance in a rehearsal space gave a
further dimension to what some had perceived in the study the extraordi
nary power of Edgar's silence after "O he is gone indeed," most notably
..."
obsolescence"
(p. 62).
Shakespeare,
ed.
1935).
57
Of course it
to die anywhere
in that
speech and in that respect the Q text is in an odd way admirable in that it
does not provide for an exact moment, even though Shakespeare had probably
made his conception
conclude
only a few
actors
are ready to pursue the intricacies of old spelling. But at the same time, the
edited text is so often a reading text; for all our vaunted delight in uncertainty,
In
this respect
object
V.
to conceal the theater history of works in their own time, conspiring with the
form of the play. Alternatively, one has the
edition that, in attempting to enable the reader to read with a quasi-theatrical
author to present his authorized
imagination,
risks decisions
about actions
in
the text.
What I am seeking is
a means
I believe
that
I have been
or a computer.
The electronic text should be capable of storing text in forms that would
allow for the easy representation of the four endings of Every Man Out Of His
Humour, for the immediate construction of Q or F Cynthia's Revels, for the
simultaneous
display of Q and F King Lear. The computer, relishing
multiplicity, would allow us to break with the Platonic Idealist notions so
inherent in editing the single text, and establish instead a world of unique
items manifesting difference. If R.B. McKerrow could conceive of various
equally satisfactory editions of Shakespeare designed to serve different
purposes, such a format would allow for their assemblage.30 As far as stage
directions are concerned, they could be presented in optional form at a series
of optional locations. The text could draw attention to its own indeterminate
features.
...
^William Shakespeare, The Complete "King Lear": Texts and Parallel Texts in Photographic
Facsimile, prepared by Michael Warren (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989).
XR. B. McKerrow, Prolegomena for the Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939),
pp. 1-2.
"T.H. Howard-Hill,
Chess," TEXT 3, ed.
DC.
Title page of the 1591 edition of John Harington's translation of Ariosto's Orlando Furioso.
HRHRC Collections.
by
Random
Cloud
Y-
I recoiled
I can't I I I I can't
I can't read a book I can't
LOOK at it at the same time.
READ
read
a book and
logoeccentric
earliest
61
through the verso of its leaf, which you are now turning to gaze on. For the
light falling over your left shoulder still illuminates the opening that you have
Not a single solitary mirror-image word of it departing,
glimpsed before it could evenAt first I did very well in the Combray School. I
was training to be a textual editor.
The doctor they referred me after it happened the second time actually a
whole battery of them. One of them suggested that the backaches headaches
and dreams (and the "behavioural things") were concocted in some way with
this missionary position. This person thought up this term. (Would / have
dreamt of it on my own?) That I should left my eye sometimes go right where it
wanted to go. Or the other eye. That it was alright for either of them to want
to to do these things on its own. 'The book will not be hurt," she quiped.
"Let your eyeballs do their things it's OK," I can recall her quiping and
cajollying me encouragingly many times.
So five six years ago I've become as you see me now in that time. You
wouldn't mistake me for a textual editor, now, eh? I sought a way to adapt my
training. (No question ofjust chucking it!) I undertook a systematic MATURE
not fully closed.
looking at copies of first two eds. ever since. (They are like big picture books,
but for grownups.) My project is not just not to read the Orlando, but not to
read it over and over again until I have a new way to read. (I will explain why I
slush epuiE Xq ojoijj
gaze at it upsidown in just a minute. )
62
O o
I I
it
it
it
is
if
092
omissionary
ft
the McLeod
it
does. So, two images but you see only one object, right? (Explain that!) This
the precondition for seeing in
lateral displacement relative to background
a
depth. You don't "read" to find the depth, do you? So when the two copies of
book have lateral displacement
(it's in every copy of the Orlando]), you'll see the variant in depth on the
McPortable Collator. Again, you don't have to read to find it. You see
it
is
is
a
mere artefact of
(The depth isn't really "out there," of course;
and fusion/non-fusion
in the
same composite image and
these four effects on theM cLeod
Portable Collator will together
disclose all the graphic variations
between the images. (This essay
going to be about the kinds of
things
ore
questions so far?
Good. Now
want to ask,
What do you see when you're off
this missionary jag? when you
don't identify with raster scan?
Well, you see words tranceform
'.'
'.'
I Ul
Hi
I o
is
'!<
it
it
it
For
Ho
&3
The letters express themselves now, right? Not enslaved in some mission
ary's definition. No morizontal, why this text leans at every goddam playmorphous angle there is except the horizontal! (Hint: there is a sensuous joke,
if you let yours elf think of it.) Or like this: before I used to have a lot of
difficulty with Finnegans Wake, like when Joyce talked about the allforabit
(joking naughtily about "ptee" and "holos" and about how the littliest
allfablesit). (Hint: think of peter and hole. That says it all too!)
JS
a firefing
PW
cd* a *??
H. yu
fiC '
^^F~ "
^^
so ptee
does dutv
**it
the eaSed !
f^P
I % I Face at the
^ *"" t0 **
** h* w.
soon grow
'When a
rf0f*
Kind of "69", Bane of Missionaries back in Combray. They edited that part
out of the Wake we used in class, faceless to faceless. But it all seems familiar
now because I've watched Harinton froglic in the same tradition, invoking the
downright heness of the male, by playing with his letters. Who says Joyce is an
innovator? Redefine the Renaissance, and she's a tradictionalist.
g"
fu
it)
it
is
if
is
W*^'
^trohau^inundaccor5
,cas.Jd
64
yetyour brother.
Emergingc learly from the "treatments" was that I wasn't always this way.
Memory is liberation. Before the missionaries Iwell let me just tell you the
story that arose to my Consciousness completely unassisted one day at the
Clinic not what it means.
At
Combray,
time when
as every afternoon
^^'aDnornSfly wretttTn^gic
which used
to be set on top of my lamp while we waited for dinner-time
and glassto come: in the manner of the master-builders
the
for
opaguene^-*
painters of gothic days it substituted
and
trTs'itoJ ^^
'urmsnea^^
d'e
Sa"
^ST^
Z^f S
Genevieve
curved line which
was in
transparent ovaTln
* vT'
depicted' as
sorrows were
*d JUSt
arrived- ^
"*
CUt
* *"
T<
short **
ff
^ Go,
S* **
C,[CUmferen of one of
PUShed int
and'embod^
SCemed
T*
**
stPP<*
Per*<%
"****
to
dWnot
* COnf0rm
ST TT^1
Att/eff':
2?
overcfme
h
,
givJ
'
by
~^""T^*
^t ^ ^ ** ** ***** "*
understand
hTmS
devoid of
degree oTmf.V
dications
nthe
his steed's
skeleton
a shifting
lantern,
t0 the *'
SUbStanCe
tfe ^oor-handle.tor
"
ble at such
65
Substitute Angelica for Genieve, and Olrando's quest is mine: the swelling
curves,
MYSELF.
*
PART
2:
"
fruit A.
"3." is
fruit" is
from the edited text. (One presumes that the editor would
regard this quotation as "correct" or at least "authoritative." But since I'm
66
a quotation
of my
slender skill.
growing
It
because my ground
the gathering
set plant.
love to
Your graci
even to the
be plaine. Whatsoever
to
it,
if
'5
it,
20
if
it,
8.
Iohn Harington.
"
9. blessed BC.
(I
is
is
is
is
if
is
is
It
How would your perception of the status of my edited text change if you saw
the evidense? Here are photographs of the Dedication, taken from page Ulr in
exemplars of A and B. (I forget which copies.) With these before us, we are
now in a position to retrace the editor's steps.
To key his lemmata to these exemplars of A and B, I have underlined the
phrase "first frute" on A photograph, and the corresponding "first part of the
NOBLE PRINCESSE,
ELIZABETH
OF
THE F A I T H,&(.
i O s t Rcnowncd(&
it,
If your Highncfle
what
can reproue it ? if protedi
can
anie
hurt
or
annoy
way
ting
v
s
ioy.
it
Iohn
Harington.
1*i
(1591)
fruit" on B. Also underlined are the remaining two cruxes identified in the
editorial notes of the Oxford edition. Please take three minutes right now to
look for yourself at all the textual evidence the editor had to scrutinoze before
making his decisions. Of course, I wouldn't be asking you to do this if McNulty
had done the job right, would I? So be on your toes.
AND NOBLE
PRINCESSF,
DEFENDER
OF
pnowned)foueraigoeLadie;
ttoyourHighnes
it,
wilhjthatyourhighfcliciticsmayneuerceafe.
Yourmofthumblcferuanr,
HAIHMGrON*
>i
OHM
B(1607)
bi
lt
(e
it,
if
Ready? Let me focus on just the first ten lines of the paragraph,
contain the editor's three cruxes.
I'll
reproduce
which
(1591)
O s t Renowned(&
You will have noticed that many of the line endings vary,
a fact we cannot
appreciate from the editor's text (whether body or notes). I have added bars on
B to mark the locations of line breaks in A. I have also underlined words of
variant spellings in A and B, the existence of which is generally ignored in the
editor's notes. Finally
I have underlined
editor. (You likely missed it too, as I did for six years, until I was writing the
semi-final daft of this essay.) I am speaking of the third variant, "s/ender'V
"ssender." Check the enlarged photos of the settings of "lender" in A,
"ssender" in B (with its broken kern) and, for contrast (with kern unbroken)
"blessed" in B. The photographs of ligatures and damaged types warn that the
70
flehd er
crisp modern typefaith of the Ox ford text and collations is not subtle enough
to render thee quivocal Elizabethen evidence.
Now let us determine how my Oxford text is drawn from these two bodies of
evidence. Look at the editor's three cruxes (now boxed) in relation to their
typographic
environments.
Most Renowned
of my
Look now
at the
Oxford
and
and
&
to
to
too
colde
colde
cold
frutes
frutes
fruites
beames
beames
beams
pore
pore
poore
10
shall
shall
shal
mistes
mistes
mists
would
would
wold
Yet, the first two underlined words in the Oxford text reflect second-edition
spellings.
Oxford
3
fruit
frute
fruit
garden
garde
garden
Why does the editor's "fruit" come from B rather than A? And why does his
textual note (the one with the assertive caret) give "fruit" as the A spelling,
when it isn't? Four lines later in the text the word recurs; A offers
"frute
. . .
. . .
Neither imaginative act can proceed very far, of course, unless we go back to
basics, the ABC of the photographic evidence. Once the images of the early
authorities are present, their literal truth shorts the complex circuitry of the
editorial Z. I'm not saying that photographs don't lie, that they don't have
their own bias. Do you think I'm that stupid? Merely that photography has
killed editing. Period. (Someone has to tell the editors.)
Editorial punctuation should be discussed along with spelling. In the
excerpt on p. 71, you may have noticed the commas dropped after "gathering"
72
10),
(1.
"it"
and
(Both
true that
8).
9), and
is
it
(1.
and "soile"
(1.
5), "countenance"
colon to
(1.
OX FORD
of the first edition" "a
light modern logical punctuation designed for rapid, easily comprehensible
there so much editorial care to
reading" (Iiii). But the question arises, why
to substitute
punctuation
is
freedom
conserve
(even augment!)
the confusing
spelling,
is
EXCELLENT,
is
it
is
gone:
against
rule, which
the modern
penultimate
says
after the
only one, of course. When the editor talks of "light modern logical punctua
tion," for example, I see he didn't use my rule. But neither did he use his own
rule whereby he punctuated the first line of letterpress on the page, where
only the penultimate adjective in the series rated a comma. Perhaps he used
no rule? Or different rules on different occasions?
You may have noticed too that "PRINCESS" in Oxford has no final "E"; this
form was not common in printed English books for decades after A and B; but
like Oxford's "fruit," it has been standard now for two centuries. Perhaps it is
not only punctuation that can be light modern, and logical.
More worthy of challenge than these items are the structures of editorial
misprision. Note that a few sentences back I labelled a location as "the first line
"
of letterpress on the page. Why not simply call it "line 1 "? The answer is that
the editor doesn't begin to enumerate until the sixth line of letterpress on the
page. As text, the Salutation simply doesn't count.
To put it another way, the edited text is not homogenous. In both the last
unnumbered and first numbered lines occurs an ampersand.
OF THE
FAlTH.&t.
Oxford conserves the first of these, but spells out the second
as "and"
Of
to be most re-
inconsistency
74
lexical
meanings
straddles
are scarcely
original documents, the less we can find them reflected in the modern,
schoolarly edition. Harington's text keeps turning into McNutty's.
The Closing and Signature may also be subject to a different editorial
regard. In AB their positions seem to be functions of the centre and the right
margin the same right margin which determines where the lines above
break. But, whereas the Oxford edition respects As standard for line endings
in the Body of the text, it assigns its own right margin for the Closing and
Signature, which is a function of the right edge of the editor's collations. Many
parts of the Oxford text, therefore from its layout, to its spelling and
diction can be identified as artefacts of its editorial projection.
This Oxford Dedication is astoundingly ungainly, especially when we
contrast it to the ornamentation, the symmetry and balance, and the
gradations of fount size and letterspacing that typify the mise en page of the
first editions. Oxford simply can't tongue the original body language, as this
comparison of the Salutations bears out.
VERTVOVS, AND
AND IRELAND,
FAITH, &c
OF THE
DEFENDER
THE FAITH,
&c.
ELIZABETH,
OF THE FAITH,
&c.
75
It has become a celebration of Elizabeth in its own right. Her name, given a
line of italic by itself, is now the focus of the composition whereas in the AB
settings her name is so lost in the Salutation, that the tribute to her does not
effectively begin until the body of the Dedication. Yes, the Centaur Press
setting appeals to the modern eye. I like it instinctively. The only problem is
that we are dealing with a Renaissance book, remember?and Renaissance
books use different visual codes than ours. And not just neutrally different
codes, but pointedly different, because we arrived at our codes by undoing
theirs! The simplest description of Harington's collaborations with his printer
is photographic. Someone has to tell the editors that critical editions suck.
Like the Oxford with its spare style, this florid edition has imposed its own
formal language on the contents. Neither edition exhibits much understand
ing, or takes care to see what the Renaissance was saying, and how it said it.
Contrast Hough's antique "VERTVOVS" with his "QUEENE" which
looks modern, until you come to the last letter. Notice the intelligent modem
comma after
"ELIZABETH",
spare and fleshy styles, just too self-absorbed to render the Renaissance text.
But the Oxford setting of the third line of the body takes the cake. As we
saw, the editor combines
the lineation
from B ("part of the fruit"). The end of the line now dangles into the void of the
right margin. More accurately, it dangles NTi into a bay recessed from the
margin, which is the gap in the text the editor introduced on the right-hand
side of the page by his disregard for what his left hand did to the large
ornamental letter and capitals on the other, where the early editions'
OstR
dwindles in the Ox ford to
Most R.
Some texture is just more equal than others.
But why this teapot-tempest about the right margin and the size of type? Is
not a word a word for a' that? Because, in Renaissance prose, type size and line
The spellings of Renaissance settings were
forms; rather, they were shape-shifters,
which responded to their typographic environments. Take away the right
margin, and the odds is gone. It is gone again when words or spellings are
inserted from some other text. What rationale can there be for jumbling
different features of text cheek by jowl, and pretending that we can control the
process and that the results will be anything more than connoisseurvative?
Indeed, what rationale can there be for editing? Indeed, what rationale can
there be for editing?
length are complexly interrelated.
not self-constituting,
76
stand-alone
Harington.
John
it,
li
bi
it
may
your wilh,tlut
ccafc. ncucr
felicities high
to ccafe not will though write to
ccafc boldnciTc, this for don pai
annoy or
way
crauing humbly moft thus And
anic can ting
hurt
o or barking, Momvs what
proteft if ? it reprouc can
it,who allow if it? darcrcicA ir,who rcadc will Highncfle your If ioy.
take lean which in all vndcrwhichlcnioy protection, thatgracious
to recommend humbly I ) worke vnworthie and vnperfect tliough (
Vhcrforcthis V ourheircs. and vs to bountic gcncration,your third
poorc my
the to cucn familic
in extended bene fauourshauc ous
graci Your Maicftics. your is can, or am I focucr Vhat V platnc.
be
,
loueto becaufel
bebricfe to defire I plant. fet (hallow ftaructhis
would Fcl-dcws)that Mcl-dews,or be they (whether diffolucall fily
(bdb^alk>6ilodiipcHbntHii]fiiiiIhutfeihauubli)bfecnc8rij,andcat>piirht^h>lY<aonnenane^iwl*^^
^dvkfcthaMiabnariwf
bjiaimiuscbaa-cokrdFta y^'feadaai'mffljogcoulghiy
'jy
,,
y^btlaT^^rdofB^IIfldtdbilsiatiichiithbogcclkt
atfefie
OF QVEENE
FAIllUi.
THE OF
DEFENDER
PRINCESSE,
LL
"Edition"
is a collective
"!)
Now let me separate the photographs, and show you (opposite) just the
variant area, beginning with the state you have already seen. (For this smaller
range just happen to have better photo than the Toronto one, so we don't
have underlined on the
B;
is
is
it
is
collations.
O s t Renowncd(&
butthebeames
of
it,
(1591)
prefume to offer
foueraigne Ladie
to yourHighnes this firft part ofthe frute of the
litle garden of my flender skill.lt hath bene the
)
nowned
is
in
the beams
Al (1591)
But the master list(s) for correction must have been subtly different from
this list of "Faults escaped," for (1) some of its instructions are never acted on,
is
is
was about to say "market," but that cannot be entirely the right word, for
smaller one of the
large proportion of the expensive-paper
copies (and
79
cheaper-paper
copies)
were
into the covers) textify.) Oxford's bald abstraction "A" does not countenance
this diversity of formats of production and distribution; but these formats
firft d.hi
ofilir frute
Arguably, this deletion in the exquisite Toronto copy was one of the prepublication pen-and-ink alterations. I can't explain why it was made in only
half of the six surviving Al copies. That it is not listed in the "Faults escaped,"
however, is not as odd as it may seem at first, for a preliminary gathering like H
was often the last to be printed too late to be referred to in a list of "Faults
escaped" in Oo gathering, at the end of the book.
The logic points in one direction: (a) The phrase "part of the" was printed in
Al (on sheets of both expensive and common papers, I should add), (b) Stoppress alteration removed this phrase, shortening the A2 text, and vastly
relineating and respelling in subsequent lines, (c) Printing continued on both
expensive and common papers, (d) Before publication, some of the expensivepaper Al sheets were altered by hand to delete the phrase "part of the", (e) A
decade and a half later, in 1607, an exemplar of A with the Al Dedication
served as printer's copy for B. Thus, the earlier and rejected reading found its
way into the revised edition, where McNulty must have deemed it the
author's latest thought. Strike one.
The following trees sum up my argument for this crux. McNulty understood
this as the derivation:
80
lost ms
"first fruit"
(revision)
B
"first part of the fruit"
But
I argue
the following:
lost ms
Al
"first part of the frute"
A2
(stop-press alteration of type)
"first frute"
A3
(pen-and-ink alteration
of typeface on printed sheets
of some expensive-paper copies)
"first <part of the > frute"
B
"first part of the fruit"
Richard Field
of the
litlc garden
to your Highncs this firft frutc
Delete "part of the", retaining some spacing from one side of it. Fill the gap
by sliding the right end of the line ("frute of the") snug left. Bring up "litle
garden" from line 4. Substitute "e" for its final "en". Slightly increase the space
between "frute" and "of, and so justify the line.
3.
cold for
becaUfc my ground is barren and to
eoldefor
Slide the remaining type snug left. Set a space after the last word, "to".
Bring up "cold for" from the start of line 7. Set "e" at the end of "cold" (to make
6.
82
"colde"),
so
7. Slide the remaining type snug left. Bring up "perhaps" from the start of
line 8 to the right end of the present line. Set a space before
and so justify
the line.
8.
pore
foile,
fo
foile,
9.
Slide the remaining type snug left. Delete the first "o" in "poore" (to make
Diminish spacing before and after "to" and "on". Bring up "soile,"
from the start of line 10. Add space before it, and so justify the line.
it,
foone difperfe
a
11
al
ih
"pore").
and ea-
Slide the remaining type snug left. Set "1" before "1" in "shal" (to make
final "1" in "hurtful" (to make "hurtfull"), an "e" in "mists"
"shall"),
"u" in "wold" (to make "would"). Increase spacing
(to make "mistes"), and
around the comma to justify the line, and so complete, seven lines after the
initiating deletion of "part of the", the complex process of "driving out".
a
10.
83
cold
ouershaded
shal
10
mists
I)
. . .
. . .
wold
beams
became
)
v
colde
ouershadowed
. . .
beames
shall
mistes
. . .
would
garden
poore
I gathered
became
garde
pore
revision.
84
UA f jORu
no bull
85
PLAINEAND
perfect
Mcthcd,for
of chq whole
Bible:
CONTAINING
Seauen Obferuations,
Dia-
ioguewife, betweenethe
Parish
the P
i oNER^and
T O R.
L 0 2^D 0 *:
Printed by T. S. for the Widow
Hdme, and arc to be fould at
herfliop in S.Dunftan. Church
yard in Flutjfreet. 1617.
Title page from Edward Vaughan's A Plaine and perfect Method, for the easie vnderstanding of
the whole Bible (London: T.S., 1617). HRHRC Collections.
Speech-Manuscript-Print
ByD.F. McKenzie
In
a recent
remarked
paper on literacy
. . .
in early modern
It is
of culture, literate and illiterate, oral and written, which gives this period its
particular fascination."1 Even the tide of Jack Goody's recent book, The
Interface between the Written and the Oral, makes the same point;2 and I was
pleased to see it restated in Ruth Finnegan's Literacy and Orality.3 Finnegan
writes that orality and literacy "take diverse forms in differing cultures and
periods, are used differently in different social contexts, and insofar as they
can be distinguished at all as separate modes rather than a continuum, they
mutually interact and affect each other, and the relations between them are
problematic rather than self-evident."4 That was certainly my own conclusion
in a study, some years back, of orality, literacy, and print in early New
Zealand.5
These reminders are timely, for a phrase like "the impact of print"
however carefully it is qualified cannot help but imply a major displacement
of writing as a form of record. In the same way, too great a preoccupation with
writing and printing (as the technologies of literacy) may lead us to forget the
superior virtues of speech. After all, we did not stop speaking when we
learned to write, nor writing when we learned to print, nor reading, writing,
or printing when we entered "the electronic age." For those who market texts
in those forms, some of them may seem mutually exclusive (do we read the
'Sir Keith Thomas, "The Meaning of Literacy in Early Modern England," in The Written Word:
Literacy in Transition, ed. Gerd Baumann (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1986), p. 98.
2Jaek Goody, The Interface between the Written and the Oral (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1988).
'Ruth Finnegan, Literacy and Orality (Oxford: Blackwell, 1988).
4Ibid.,p. 175.
5D.F. McKenzie, Oral Culture, Literacy and Print in Early New Zealand: the Treaty of
Waitangi (Wellington: Victoria University Press, 1985). In that essay I was concerned to reveal
the serious political implications of certain Eurocentric assumptions
when introduced into an oral society.
87
book, hear it on tape, or see the film?), but for the speaker, auditor, reader or
ways.
forms
had it
they
were thought to relate to one another; what anxieties there were about these
different ways of communicating; what adjustments were made; whether or
not the physical
the
but it is also the one most difficult to call from the past and give in evidence."
What we can recall, however, are records of moments of anxiety and of
hesitant adjustment.
The opposition of wicked men, and of the Diuell in all ages of the
world, against preaching, and his and their quiet allowance of
reading, argueth the extreame euill of ignorance, and the destruction
that comes without preaching.7
Behind all this, of course, lies an important theological debate but the
problem is also, I think, a psychological one. Even we feel some reverse
anxiety as we shift from pen and paper to our PC screens the fear that, by the
flick of a switch, or the touch of a key, our words in this new form may once
more prove as evanescent as . . . speech. But we do, in time, adjust.
habitual
mode is oral,
to receive
or record
To make
a recordation
I not
to my soule
here was spoke:
two did coact;
if those
[Fl.V.ii.
113-23]
Shakespeare, of course, goes right to the heart of the matter. Yet even
among lesser writers we find, if poorly expressed, a similar concern with the
psychology of knowledge in relation to the forms in which it is communicated:
"What the Pulpit sent to some of your eares, the Presse now sends to some of
your eyes; the good God send it into every one of your hearts, info your hands,
and lives; the Argument is worthy of your eares, eyes, hearts, and
hands. . . ."" So wrote Edmund Staunton in 1644, self-conscious still about
turning speech into print and suspicious of its ability to enter the heart. Or
John Strickland, the same year: the words "have been already in your eares,
they are now before your eyes, the Lord write them into our hearts, that we
may be doers of the word, and not hearers onely. . . ."9
The problem is familiar to everyone who has pondered the relation between
dramatic performances and printed play texts: John Marston, for one. In his
address to the reader of The Malcontent in 1604, he says it is "my custome to
speake as I thinke, and to write as I speake." And so he complains that
"Scaenes invented, meerely to be spoken, should be inforcively published to be
read," and asks "that the vnhansome shape which this trifle in reading
presents may be pardoned, for the pleasure it once afforded you, when it was
"I0
So too Peter Smith, in 1644,
presented with the soule of lively action.
laments the loss, in print, of both his own and his congregation's "lively
action," for his printed sermon "will now want that little life it seem'd to have
when it was utter'd viva voce, and entertained with your chearfull and
religious attention.""
John Marston thinks of his text as one to be spoken and heard, not printed
and read; he laments the loss of "the soule of lively action"; and he thinks of the
book as fixing his play in an "vnhansome shape." But Marston had at least a
pre-written and memorized text whose translation to print was not impos
sible. We have only to think of other essentially theatrical places the
fairground and the market, for example to recall that some oral modes are
even less compatible with print. Fairground speech is a series of most
remarkable oral performances, and yet the delivery of the words themselves is
only one of a whole range of bodily skills, both audible and visible, we see
deployed
still shows, the skillful use of props. These are all including speech kinetic
arts, flexibly inter-active with their spectators, ephemeral as the fair itself.
And we can't write them down. There's no script. Their conversion to print is
impossible.
90
Oral communication
remained central, whether as speeches in
Parliament, pleadings in the lawcourts, teaching in the schools, or
preaching and catechizing in church. Despite their reliance on the
Bible and the Prayer Book, the clergy still expected their flock to
learn their articles of belief by heart and to listen to spoken sermons. 12
And yet that dual pressure to listen and to read created problems of choice and
adjustment. Almost every printed sermon in the first half of the century has
something to say by way of apology for the loss of the preacher's presence. "I
know well that the same Sermon, as to the life of it, is scarcely the same in the
" In 1617, in his new
hearing, and in the reading," wrote John Ward in 1645.
edition of A Plaine and perfect Method, for the easie vnderstanding of the
whole Bible, Edward Vaughan presented a pastor who urged his parishioners
to "sequester your selues from your publike affaires, and sometimes from your
most private occasions, for the orderly and thorow reading" of the Bible. The
whole point of his book was to encourage reading. Yet the pastor also needs to
exalt preaching:
Our eares were specially giuen vnto vs, to be as messengers and true
embassadours to the heart.
No man can haue Faith without the
...
"...
oral evidence at common law far superior to the written evidence in courts of
The cook started forth . . .; and, 'My Lord,' said he, very quick and
earnest, 'I was paid but to 1676.' At that moment his lordship
concluded the cook said true; for liars do not use to burst out in that
unpremeditated manner. . . . Then his lordship . . . sitting under a
window, turned round, and looked through the paper against the
light; and so discovered plainly the last figure in the date of the year,
was 6, in rasure; but was wrote 7 with ink.16
The paradox of writing that what seems exact when first written can be
torn a thousand ways by critical reading led Francis Bacon to resist the
reduction of common law to statute form. As he said in 1616, "there are more
doubts that rise upon our statutes, which are a text law, than upon the
common law, which is no text law."17
When William Laud delivered his last "Speech or His Funerall Sermon,
10, of Ianuary, 1644[-5]," it was, we
Preacht by himself on the Scaffold
are assured by the title page of the printed text, "All faithfully Written by John
Hinde, whom the Arch-bishop beseeched that he would not let any wrong be
...
15Sir Matthew Hale, History of the Common Law (1713), 2nd ed. corrected, cited by W.S.
Holdsworth, A History of English Law, 16 vols. (London: J. Nutt, 1922-66): vi.592n.l.
"Holdsworth, English Law, vi. 389 n. 3. The story is told by Roger North: see The Lives
of. . . Francis North . . . Dudley North . . . and John North, 3 vols. (1826), i. 234.
"The Works of Francis Bacon, ed. J. Spedding, 14 vols. (1857-74): xiii (The Letters and Life, vi.
J. H. Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History, 2nd ed. (London:
67); cited by
done him by any phrase in false Copies."18 Laud had carefully written it out,
not to read it but to speak it from memory, and then to leave a true manuscript
record of his last words. But even these were edited, for his printed speech
does, and as he did in person, that
"as for this people They are this day miserably misled . . . , for at this day, The
blinde lead the blinde. . . ."1S Nor could he continue to say in print, as he did
in person, "I am not only the first Archbishop, but the first man that ever dyed
by an ordinance in Parliament in this way."20 But the printed text of Laud's
speech does catch a sentence in which we can see him more troubled by the
transmission of his words in their perilous passage from manuscript back to
memory, from memory to speech, and from speech to its printed memorial,
than by his then more imminent journey. "I cannot say I have spoken every
word as it is in my Paper, but I have gone very neere it, to help my memory as
well as I could; but I beseech you, let me have no wrong done me
a
""
phrase may doe me wrong.
does not allow him to say, as a manuscript
...
Laud's head was no sooner off than Henry Burton published an attack on
him, accusing him of merely repeating by heart a lesson he had "writ out"
and as to his so-called "Sermon, how it could be truely said to be preacht,
when he read it verbatim, as also how he could properly be said to pray, what
he read in his paper (for without his book he could neither preach nor pray) I
leave it thy right judgement. "a My own quotations from Laud's final speech
come from a Bodleian copy of one of the printed versions altered in a
contemporary hand after collation with what the annotator must have thought
to be an authentic manuscript.
But there must have been many other
versions, for manuscripts were ubiquitous.
Just as some social functions could still only be performed orally, so too
society could only be administered effectively at a distance by manuscript.
Acts and proclamations might be printed and widely dispersed (though many
orders and resolutions of Parliament were not some were merely pro
claimed), but most of the executive actions taken to implement them were
initiated in writing. All government agencies, the church, law, education, and
commerce were more dependent upon written records than printed ones.
Scriveners drove a thriving trade in both the formal and informal production
of texts; and for what we might think of as literary and political texts there was a
well-organized manuscript trade, functioning concurrendy with the one in
"For Laud's sermon,
copy cited
"Ibid.
"Ibid.
"Ibid.
"There were several attacks on Laud's sermon. For Henry Burton, see his (anonymous) A Full
and Satisfactorie Answere, Wing B6162A, and The Grand Imposter vnmasked, WingB6163. See
also William Starbucke, A briefe Exposition . . . upon the Lord of Canterburies Sermon or
Speech, Wing S5266.
93
printed books. Indeed, Dr. Harold Love has recently gone so far as to claim
that "Scribal publication. . . [was] an accepted and important medium for the
transmission of texts during the seventeenth century, quite equal in terms of
status to transmission in printed form. . . ."a His findings chime perfectly
with those of W.J. Cameron some twenty-five years ago." When preparing his
volume in the series of poems on affairs of state, Cameron discovered how
many different manuscript collections seemed, from their materials, con
tents, and scribal features, to come from a single source. His conclusion was
that, far from disappearing with the advent of print, commercial scriptoria
played a continuously active role in the publication of texts in manuscript
copies right throughout the century. They were still highly productive even in
the 1690s. In a 1662 "Project for Preventing Libells," we find the comment:
"Of Libells some are only written, others printed; and those in Manuscript are
commonly ye more seditious & scandalous of ye two; Besides that they are
forty times as many, & by the help of Transcripts, well nigh as publick as the
other."25
The fact that some scribal products were libels should not be allowed to
distort the more important recognition of manuscript both as a normal form of
personal record, and as a normal form of publication. Ordinary booksellers
and stationers dealt in manuscripts, new and secondhand, as well as printed
books. L'Estrange in 1675, though still obsessed with manuscript libels, said
that "certain Stationers are supposed to bee the chiefe, and profest dealers in
them, as having some Affinity with their Trade. "x Law stationers, like Starkey
and Collins, provided what was almost an instant service for students at the
Inns of Court, supplying popular cribs quickly and (one supposes) cheaply.
The last point is important. Manuscripts were economically competitive
because printing requires high initial investment in typesetting and a low unit
cost which is achieved only by having a large number of copies. Anything
under a hundred is hardly economical. Manuscript production, however, like
binding, was in part a bespoke trade: one-off or several copies could be done
on demand; the market was almost self-defining; there was no problem of
keeping type standing; and no problem of unsold stocks.
Cambridge Bibliographical
be consulted.
MW. J. Cameron, "A Late Seventeenth-century Scriptorium," Renaissance
and Modern
Studies 7 (1963): 25-52.
"The report was probably drawn up by Roger L'Estrange. He repeats parts of it in "Mr.
L'Estraings Proposition concerning Libells, ore." of 11 November 1675: see H.M.C. 9th Report,
Appendix, p. 66b. PRO SP29/51/10.1.
""Mr. L'Estraings Proposition," p. 1, cited by Love, p. 142.
94
FULL VIEW
THE
OF
Canterburies fall
From POP deliver us all.
(/race, and no grace 7
Hatbifarougbt th}
difgrace.
From William Starbucke's A briefe Exposition, Paraphrase, or Interpretation, upon the Lord of
Canterburies Sermon or Speech (London, 1645), p. 14. HRHRC Collections.
Robert Cotton,
as
virtually confined
himself to
Talk, when printed in 1689, was simply one of several transcripts produced in
a scriptorium. Again, as Harold Love reminds us, not only Donne, but King,
Crashaw, Strode, Corbet, and Suckling all gained reputations as poets during
their lifetimes "without ever issuing a printed collection of their verse. "a One
immediate, surprising, and textually challenging fact revealed by the relevant
volume of The Index of English Literary Manuscripts is the existence of some
4,000 seventeenth-century
manuscript copies of individual poems by Donne.
Any single collection, of course, may contain up to a hundred; even so, to
quote Mr. Beal, these "must be only a fraction of the number once in
existence"; and only one English poetical autograph of Donne is known to
survive.30
Apart from the brief accounts by Cameron and Love, and the invaluable
Index volumes edited by Peter Beal, the extent, implications, efficiency, and
normalcy of scribal publication have remained unreported and unstudied.
Because of that gap in our knowledge, we have perhaps too readily assumed
the "non-publication" of texts (often also imputing irrelevant motives such as
fear of censorship) simply because there is no printed edition. I suspect,
however, that for all the normalcy of manuscript publication, the handwritten
text also helped to assuage some of the psychological anxieties associated with
print.
There were, of course, any number of reasons why authors might prefer to
be read in manuscript. In part, it has to do with that question of presence
(greatest in speech, still implied by script, least of all in print). Some writers
were troubled by their loss of control over their texts; for them and for many
others, printing was too impersonal, too public, too fixed, and often far too
expensive for the small number of copies required.
Sir Thomas Browne, referring to the first unauthorized edition of Religio
Medici, says any reader "will easily discerne the intention was not publik: and
being a private exercise directed to my selfe, what is delivered therein was
rather a memoriall unto me then an example or rule unto any other."31 But
private use often included a circle of friends. Browne lent it out and it was
copied. Subscription to a newsletter made one a member of such a circle. So
Ben Jonson's Staple of Nerves would report all the gossip in manuscript:
Volume I, 1450-1625,
96
I never meant
...
use as to deny the request of any friend to have either view or copy of any of
them: so till of late I never could be persuaded
to commit them to
...
"This work I
view to my own private instruction only,
originally entered upon with
without the least thought or intention of letting it appear in print. . . ."*
Matthew Hale spent forty years collecting and ordering his manuscripts, but
even in his will prohibited publication of anything he had not expressly
approved as ready for press. He specifically enjoined Lincoln's Inn not to print
print."35 Edmund Plowden, writing of his law reports,
says:
*Ben Jonson, Staple of Newes, I.v.46-55, in Ben Jonson, ed. Herford and Simpson, 11 vols.
(Oxford, 1925-52), vi.295. Jonson had used almost identical words in his masque Netves from the
New World, first performed early in 1620: see Herford and Simpson, vii.515.
"John Donne, Letters to Severall Persons of Honour (1651), p. 22; cited by Love, p. 140.
"Beal, English Literary Manuscripts, p. 245.
"Holdsworth,
"Ibid.,
v. 364 n. 2.
97
"I would
use of the industrious learned members of that Society." They were, he said,
"a treasure that are not fit for every man's view, nor is every man capable of
making use of them.
"37
as
Hale and John Holt, but they remained unprinted until 1823. Whether
laziness or busyness was the reason, Egerton published nothing except his
judgment in Calvin's Case; and this he says was only done at the King's
command: "Thus I was put to an unexpected labour, to review my scribbled
and broken papers.
"39
But papers like these were not all safe from the energy of copyists.
According to the 1694 edition of Hale's Pleas of the Crown, he wrote it wholly
for his own use, but an edition had been printed in 1678 "from a surreptitious
and very faulty copy. "40 Plowden lent one "to a very few of my intimate friends"
but "their clerks and others knowing thereof got the book into their hands, and
made such expedition by writing day and night, that in a short time they had
transcribed a great number of the cases. . . ."41 Since they did it so badly,
Plowden felt obliged to prepare it himself for press. Such explanations, or
excuses, abound. In an oft-quoted passage, George Wither complained that if
a bookseller "gett any Coppy into his powre, likely to be vendible, whether
the Author be willing or no, he will publish it; And it shall be continued and
named alsoe, according to his owne pleasure: which is the reason, so many
good Bookes come forth imperfect, and with foolish titles."42 Of the hundreds
of seventeenth-century
editions of law books, many are wrongly atttributed
and only a few have reliable texts (Humphrey Winch even records his own
death). The main reason was the immense variety of manuscript sources, their
wide textual divergence, and the reluctance of the best legal minds to accept
that the law should be fixed in public print. On this last point, L.O. Pike says
"the continual use of [manuscript records] must have rendered many obvious
corrections in them a matter of comparative ease. "43 Manuscripts could be
shuffled, and re-ordered more easily than the folded and
supplemented,
bound sheets of a book. But printers in time rose to the challenge. A favorite
"Ibid.,
"Luke Owen Pike, Yearbooks of the Reign of King Edward the Third, vol. 12 (Condon: H.M.
Stationery Office, 1883), p. 535.
ys
commonplace
preachers.
The same is true of many poets. Some of course did print their work, though
not without qualms. As Dr. John Pitcher has pointed out, citing the following
example, Samuel Daniel seems to be a clear case of a writer troubled by the
of print, its unrevisability, the unretractable
In 1607, in a collected edition which he modestly
called Certaine Small Workes, Daniel opens with a newly written poem
addressed to the Reader. Would to God, he writes towards the end, that
embarrassing
permanence
...
"l am
99
That interplay
is
*For Richard Baxter, see A Christian Directory (1673), p. 60. The passage from Baxter is worth
quoting more extensively: "Vocal preaching hath the preheminence in moving the affections, and
being diversified according to the state of the Congregations which attend it: This way the Milk
cometh warmest from the breast. But books have the advantage in many other respects: you may
read an able Preacher when you have but a mean one to hear. Every Congregation cannot hear
the most judicious or powerful Preachers: but every single person may read the Books of the most
powerful and judicious; Preachers may be silenced or banished, when Books may be at hand:
Books may be kept at a smaller charge than Preachers: We may choose Books which treat of that
very subject which we desire to hear of; but we cannot choose what subject the Preacher shall
treat of. Books we may have at hand every day and hour: when we can have Sermons but seldom,
and at set times. If Sermons be forgotten, they are gone. But a Book we may read over and over til
"
we remember it: and if we forget it, may again peruse it at our pleasure, or at our leisure.
"'Richard Vines, Wing V557.
100
proportion by the sinews of coherence, that I may present you with the intire
(though yet unpolished) body of my Meditations. . . ."" What is revealing
about these unprofound comments is their frequency, their selfconsciousness, and their still tentative quality.
When we look at the books themselves, we can see writers and printers
seeking to limit the difference of print by devising ways to suggest its affinities
with speaking and writing. It is most notable of course in forms of address and of
dialogue; and it is there in the typography itself. So, as a rhetorical strategy,
. .
."K By
adopting such a form, Milton becomes present to the Commons, and yet his
pamphlet is clearly written to be read, not heard. The amphibolous state of that
"speech" or "pamphlet" is shared in part by the addresses to Parliament which
precede The Doctrine and Discipline
of Divorce
and Tetrachordon.
And when
double roles, and that his fluency in speech, manuscript, and print is not simply
a mark of his genius but one of the times. Writing of toleration in 1673, in his
little tract
...
by Arguing,
Preaching in their
a variety
of
forms is one of the fascinating features of the book trade at this time. Milton's
"Publick writing" is a phrase exactly right for his own sense of address. This
as if it were a public speaking and
efficient
in
the informal genres of ephemera, the
writing
small pamphlet, and the printed speech. There is a form of communicative
interchange here, the extent of which, as a proportion of the texts published,
might be hard to parallel in the years immediately before or after the
practice
of
seventeenth
century.
S5969.
PROMISED.
BY.
OVR.EVER-LIVING.POET.
WISHETR
THE. WELL-WISHING.
ADVENTVRER.IN.
SETTING.
;sFORTl!t
T.T.
Dedication from Shakespeare's Poems. A Facsimile of the Earliest Editions, published for the
Elizabethan Club (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1964). General Libraries.
It is quite remarkable, for example, how many texts imply some kind of
direct address or dialogue. Milton's Colasterion is "A reply to a nameless
answer against ..." The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce.55 His epi
graph "Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own
conceit" is a common imperative in the period.56 Wing lists 424 titles which
begin in the form "An answer to." Another 562 begin as titles of address in the
form "To the. ..." "Humble" addresses, desires, hints, petitions, proposi
tions, remonstrances,
representations,
requests, supplications, and so on,
account for another 327. Petitions, Proposals, and Propositions (ones which,
not being "humble," are entered under "P") number 317. "His Majesty"
answers, declares, or sends messages to another 30. Titles beginning with the
words Animadversion, Answer, Antidote, Confutation, Dialogue (153 of this),
Reflection, Refutation, Remarks, Reply, Response, Voice, and Vox, together
number 604. "A Letter" or "Letters to" account for 802 items. The round total
they make is at least 3,066 a figure which excludes all separate-issues and re
issues and reprintings, and (with the sole exception of His Majesty) every item
(at least as many again) whose author is known to Wing and is therefore found
under the author's name. This rapid interchange of highly topical texts, of
short pamphlets with short lives, helped to break down the anxiety-provoking
distinctions among speech, manuscript, and print.
Those features of social exchange are expressed also in the very form of many
texts. We should not allow the almost uniformly poor execution of English
printing in the seventeenth century to blind us to the virtues of its typographic
display, or, in the phrase of the time, its "setting forth." The phrase is one we
recall from the dedication to Shake-speares Sonnets (see facing page). This
"setting forth" is both a financial venture and a careful display of the dedication
and the text.57 Marston in The Malcontent wrote: "I have my selfe . . . set forth
this Comedie."55 Heminge and Condell wished that "the Author himself had liu'd
to haue set forth, and ouerseen his owne writings."59 Harington's 1591 Orlando
Furioso has before it "AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER BEFORE
HE READE THIS POEM, OF SOME THINGS TO BE OBSERVED, as well in
the substance of this worke, as in the setting foorth thereof. . . ."e0 That "setting
foorth" is a highly intelligent disposition of all the book's communicative modes,
not just to present a text for the reader, but to present a set of different texts for
103
different readerships ("because all that may reade this booke are not of equall
capacities").
CHILLINGWORTHI
NOVISSIMA.
THE
OR,
Sicknefle, Herefy^
Death, and Buriall
OF
SET FORTH IN
A
Letter to his
a Relation
By
Francis
of M
Ch
PMJbed
Printed for
l l,
e y n e
late Fellow
T o N Colledge.
by
Authority,
LONDON,
Samuel Cellibrand
, at the Brazen
I tf 44.
Title page from Francis Cheynell's Chillingworthi Novissima. or, the Sicknesse, Heresy, Death,
and Buriall of William Chillingworth (London: Samuel Cellibrand, 1644). HRHRC Collections.
some brief and necessary Observations, to refute the Lyes and Scandalls that
are contained
in
it."66
These observations
are interposed
in smaller type
the main
"/
it
).
.
.
it
of
it
it
it
it;
presentation
was compiled
but
6-
of
it
them when
of of
of
of
as functions
designed pocket book, whose lines are set to a short measure for easy reading,
with shoulder notes keyed to the text to apply the lesson and give the biblical
reference. Harington's Orlando is more ambitiously and explicitly helpful.
It's plain from his advertisement about its "setting foorth" that he knows his
book will afford different meanings and different pleasures to its different
readers, and he sensibly provides for them. They may read it in any of at least
three ways for its narrative (straight through, selectively, pictorially), and in
any or all of four ways for its import ("the Morall, the Historie, the Allegorie,
7,S.H. , Knaves and Fools in Folio, Wing H 121.
72William Lilly, Merlinus Anglicus Junior (1644), Wing A1919 and A1919A.
"See George Wharton, Mercurius Coelico mastix. Or an anti-Caveat, Wing W1550, which he
appends to his reprint of Booker's Mercurius Coelicus. Falconer Madan, Oxford Books, 3 vols.
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895-1931): ii. 317, details the exchanges between Booker and
Wharton.
74See D. F. McKenzie, "Typography and Meaning: The Case of William Congreve," Buch und
Buchhandel in Europa im achtzehntenjahrhundert, Funftes Wolfenbutteler Symposium 1977,
ed. Giles Barber and Bernhard Fabian (Hamburg: Hauswedell, 1981), pp. 81-126, esp. pp. 103105.
107
and the Allusion"). Unlike the first edition of Paradise Lost, the Orlando puts
an argument before each book, so that readers may "remember the storie
It
is
is
is
a
[it
better" and "understand the picture the perfecter."75 And the use of the
pictures before each book, he says, is "evident; which is that (having read over
the booke) you may read it (as it were againe) in the very picture." Among the
many other reader-friendly devices are a list of "The principall tales . . . that
may be read by themselves"; and of course the marginal notes, which range in
function from signally "apt similitudes and pithie sentences or adages" to the
selective reading of the different stories "worthie the twise reading." As he
says, "(because all that may reade this booke are not of equall capacities) I will
endevor to explane
all] more plainely then for the learned sort had haply
bene requisite."
There
refreshing common sense about all this which blows through
whole hay-wain of theory. There
no great anxiety here about print as new
medium: what we have
an exhilarating acknowledgment
of its resources,
craftsmanly pleasure in the exploitation of their materiality, and the provision
of skilled service (in the words of more famous book) 'To the great Varietie
of Readers."
would be folly to write the mentality of century into marginal note, but
the use writers and printers made of it, together with whole range of other
devices printers used to give voice to
text in its dialogic and inter-textual
functions, was important and distinctive to the times. Dialogic and intertextual functions
forms of print; they are certainly the ones most evident in the pamphlets,
they are those that most approximate
and
if
is
It
it
is
is
THE
EDITORIAL PROBLEM
IN SHAKESPEARE
A SURVEY
OF
W. W.
GREG
THIRD EDITION
OXFORD
of the Book
By Ian
Willison
Inspired (or, if you prefer, provoked) by the histoire totale of our French
A History of the Book in Britain will have to include not only the
book trade from Roman Britain to the present day, but the history of reading
and of libraries as well as so far as the concept of "text" is concerned the
history of newspapers, maps, music and, for the period both before and after
the predominance of script and print, the various modes of orality: the whole
to be presented in the context of the cultural-political history of the Englishspeaking world.
However, A History of the Book in Britain must also include the history of
authorship and the problematic relations between authors and the book trade.
For unlike France, where a more or less effective complicity between author
and book trade seems to have existed since France became cultural top nation
in the thirteenth century, the history of the book in Britain has been
characterized, for considerable stretches of time, by what D.F. McKenzie
calls a "disjunction" between author and trade. '
Indeed the preoccupation of scholars and critics with the resulting "edito
rial problem" in Shakespeare and its analogues from (say) Langland to James
Joyce, and the resources of bibliography enumerative (for example, the
short-title catalogues), descriptive (for example, the formulary of collation),
and analytical (for example, the concepts of "issue," "variant," "ideal copy,"
and "authorial intention") developed from the time of Greg and Pollard
onward to deal with "the editorial problem," has given the study of the history
of the book in Britain a potential inwardness I find lacking in the histoire du
livre: there having been no comparable "editorial problem in Corneille" to
confront and to moderate the imperious historico-sociological
ilan of the
Annalistes, such as Lucien Febvre, who launched the enterprise. If one can
colleagues,
'See
D.F. McKenzie's
Sandars
Century. Though still unpublished, copies of the Lectures have been deposited in the British
Library, Cambridge University Library, and the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center.
Ill
say that the sensibility forming the French enterprise derives from Lavisse
and Durkheim, then ours derives from Matthew Arnold and T.S. Eliot. We
see the bibliographical skull beneath the cultural skin.
I propose
to use, as the basis for my remarks, the intensive debate which has
arisen from Sir Walter Greg's and Fredson Bowers's proposed solution to "the
I.
From the point of view of the history of the book, I find the fundamental
issue of editorial theory has been stated nowhere better than by the main
explicator of Gregian orthodoxy, G. Thomas Tanselle, in his invaluable review
of the debate, Textual Criticism Since Greg: A Chronicle, 1950-1985:
The issue turns on whether one is willing to admit the legitimacy of
being interested in the artistic intentions of authors as private
individuals rather than as social beings accommodating their inten
tions to various pressures emerging from the publishing process.2
If
the former,
to construct
a text
A Chronicle,
1950-1985
(Charlottesville:
II.
Prefaced by a brief view of the book in the Roman province necessarily
highly speculative and likely to remain so the first major phase covered by A
History of the Book in Britain deals with the medieval manuscript codex until
the arrival of print. From the point of view of editorial theory and practice this
medieval period is now particularly rewarding. The recent intensification of
concern to revise the traditional picture of the "Dark Ages," to establish
continuity with both Late, Christian Antiquity and Celtic tribal orality by
manipulating the relatively limited and easily manageable quantum of
surviving artifacts, including the codices, attracts an unusually powerful
convergence of interests from across the humanities from political historians
3See, for example, Jerome J. McGann, A Critique of Modern Textual Criticism (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1983); and D.F. McKenzie, Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts
(London: The British Library, 1986).
4Jean-Paul Sartre, What is Literature? , trans. B. Frechtman (London: Methuen, 1950), p. 29.
tited
1978), p. 40.
113
to literary theorists
'Alastair Minnis, The Medieval Theory of Authorship (London: Scolar Press, 1984).
'See Daniel W. Mosser, "The Cardigan Chaucer: A Witness to the Manuscript and Textual
History of the 'Canterbury Tales'," The Library Chronicle of The University of Texas n.s.41
of the importance of the HRHRC Chaucer manuscript.
'See George Kane, "The Text," A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1988).
"Derek Pearsall, "Editing Medieval Texts," Textual Criticism and Literary Interpretation, ed.
\
<?
The beginning of the "Miller's Tale" from the Cardigan Manuscript (circa 1450) of Geoffrey
Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. HRC MS143. HRHRC Collections.
it)
[of the book trade] and the original activity of the author engaged in the
process of revision and recomposition is a legitimate matter for debate," not
only in the case of a major writer like Langland but also and even more so in
the case of "popular romances . . . like Bevis of Hamtoun and King
Horn . . . [where] the surviving manuscripts make it clear that each act of
copying was to a large extent an act of recomposition, not an episode in a
from an ideal form"; and that, rather than the
process of decomposition
modern, Gregian critical edition, "the argument would favor facsimiles, or at
least seriatim transcripts, of single manuscripts," on the one hand, and on the
other (we may add) not only variorum editions such as the University of
Oklahoma Chaucer, to which Pearsall himself is contributing, but also (dare
one say
the so-called "genetic" editions which the French are proposing for
all "ensembles ouverts," from Piers Plowman to Ulysses.'0
This still leaves the historian of the book in this period, the codicologist
to judge between Kane's fundamental belief that scribes were "essentially
.
and
.
.
mediocre,
most fully in
engagement." Given the vast tract of time and space occupied by the medieval
codex, and the high degree of dispersal of the extant copies themselves, an
infrastructure such
also precisely-focused
is
is
machine-readable
if
now increasingly
and detailed,
yet theoretically-sophisticated,
exem
HI.
come now to the history of the relationship between
is
authorship and
and
the editorial problems arising from that relationship. My point of
printing
McKenzie's two axioms:
departure for this phase in the history of the book
first, that the whole synoptic potential of the codex was only fully realized as
le
'"See he Manuscrit Inachevi, ed. Louis Hay (Paris: Editions du Centre nationale de
Recherche Scientifique, 1986).
"Dante's complete La Divina Commedia with Italian text and Latin glosses, HRC 45, was part
the technological
characteristic
of print,
more "ubiqui
and entrepre
neurial dynamic meant that print took off in terms not so much of the book, as
of what eventually expanded into newspaper publishing and reading, with
developing editorial problems to match.12
On this basis, the interaction of authorship and publishing can be said to
have moved through four major stages. The first was the period of effective
control of publishing by the state-sponsored Stationers' Company (15571695), when the continuing production and transmission of high-literary texts
in manuscript (principally court poetry, from Sidney and Donne to Rochester)
and in speech (principally drama, from Shakespeare to Congreve), were, until
well into the Restoration after 1660, only hesitantly and incohesively as
similated into a printing trade which was itself constrained by censorship,
under-capitalization, and internal division between a conservative oligarchy
and a radical rank-and-file looking to expand the readership for cultural and
political ephemera.
The second stage, opening with the Glorious Revolution of 1688-89, covers
the steady rise of the first British Empire to political, economic, and cultural
parity with, and then by 1815 to superiority over, the French. During this
stage, publishers and authors converge in their interest and ability to satisfy
the demands of the new "common reader," formed in his and her tastes by the
new, ubiquitous continuum of newspaper-magazine-novel,
not only in me
tropolis but also province and colony, and typified by the increasingly
collaborative author-publisher relationship: Congreve-Tonson/JohnsonLongman/Scott-Constable.
The third stage we might call the zenith of the ubiquity of print,
corresponding to the zenith of the British Empire. In this stage major authors
such as Dickens, Thackeray, and Mill perform the role of high journalists vis
a-vis the publishing profession (as it now has become) and the emergent mass
reading public of the English-speaking world. At the same time, the
dynamism of print in the colonies, and in particular following the United
States the former colonies, is replicating locally an increasingly, but never
completely, autonomous continuum of newspaper-periodical-novel: thereby
setting up the "complex fate" typical of the ex-colonial writer.
The fourth stage arises after the turn of the nineteenth century, with what
seems in retrospect the inevitable decline of the imperial ubiquity and
homogeneity of print, accompanied by the mutual alienation and turning
inward, on the one hand of the serious, modernist author Joyce, Eliot and
on the other the mass, in part Americanized, suburban newspaper pub
lisher Northcliffe and reading public. The latter, shortly, transfers its
"D.F. McKenzie, "Printing in England
volume
II of The
117
^J (Jl iMnS
GjJT\ni
MffM
mi tkr
i kiGwpvT^rtx-
rx'tC
<
-73TV
#>^A-*- Smftf
c eft ft fn
UltlHIlP
fV11'
crmo 10m
t^'^SX^ZZZp^ r~ftlUrli
<W w *r'.
..
*_P' I
Slinxtw.*
ttuw:
fr^^
jn
nc ^dw cBiiiiuinititr
(P tucims
^V rfar
(on
tune
f "IIa"
f\t n
?*~|jv" -****
(is^r cr n.flvi<MWli
|\C
{t^uaiiv null.
Sli
fnmu> mltJlw JVtftimo
^C uSn& a '-^
Tl
nurtf*
v.
<*^t***v**.
|?
^^flU
/t fiiir trWtwf*
fj
rAttfW*
^w
61""
tcu&e jAfttwiu
fty
<3 * foi
ft
fc!lliu*"!|Iif <f'',"'m'"'Jr*
?"-^:+
- ,<.
.^f
Jfc
f .
r*~
fVvtu><'
nh*M
aM&KMp
.^am
uanu
*mm,
f.
^ ^ - J-Ml1.
rff
A,
**
p^
The beginning of Canto VI of the Infemo section of Dante's La Divina Commedia (1363), with
Italian text and glosses in Latin. HRC MS 15. HRHRC Collections.
Thirdly,
as authorship
"Stanley Wells, "The Once and Future King Lear," The Division of the Kingdoms: Shake
Ttvo Versions of King Lear, ed. Gary Taylor and Michael Warren (Oxford: Clarendon
speare's
Press,
1983), p. 1.
Seventeenth
Hakkert, 1972).
"D. F. McKenzie, London Book Trade in the Later Seventeenth
1977).
"Donald Greene, "No Dull Duty: The Yale Edition of the Works of Samuel Johnson," Editing
Eighteenth-Century Texts, ed. D.I.B. Smith (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1968).
"P.N. Furbank and W.R. Owens, The Canonization of Daniel Defoe (New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press, 1988).
119
acknowledged
mediated
Millgate presented differing views of the status of the first and later editions of
Thackeray and Dickens. Further, with the pluralization of the book trade
and the reading public in the nineteenth-century English-speaking world, the
critical editor concerned to establish his Gregian copy-text has to attend to the
revision proposed to ex-colonial authors such as Melville, Mark Twain, and
Marcus Clarke by their London publishers, and at the time accepted by the
authors as being required by their residually prestigious (though by no means
their largest) market. "
Fourthly, the eventual alienation of the late-Romantic/modernist author
from the mass, secular reading public, and the consequent internalizing of the
compulsion to revise what Husserl used to call meditation continue makes
such revision (for example, in the cases of Flaubert, Proust, James, Pound,
Joyce) more of an editorial problem than does brute, and therefore editoriallydismissable, censorship (for example, Hardy, Lawrence Lady Chatterley
was first de-censored by commercial publishers, Grove Press and Penguin)
and forms a point of departure for considering the diachronic rationale of
"genetic" editing."
IV.
come,
in conclusion,
television:
textuality.
by film and
embodiment of
as analogous to book
"Peter Shillingsburg, Textual Problems in Editing Thackeray," and Michael Millgate, "The
Making and Unmaking of Hardy's Wessex Edition," in Editing Nineteenth-Century Fiction, ed.
Jane Millgate (New York: Garland Publishing, 1978).
"For Mark Twain, for example, see Dennis Welland, Mark Twain in England (London: Chatto
& Windus, 1978).
"See, for example, the contributions of Hans Walter Gabler and Louis Hay to the Transactions
of the Society for Textual Scholarship in Text, vols. 1 and 3 (New York: AMS Press, 1984 and
1987).
"Thomas Schatz, The Genius of the System: Hollywood Filmmaking in the Studio Era (New
York: Pantheon Books, 1988), p. xii.
"David Bordwell, Janet Staiger, and Kristin Thompson, The Classical Hollywood Cinema
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1985), p. 3.
120
Now if,
as
I have
book an archive
even if highly
decentralized is still lacking, this is even more the case with the post-print
media; and to help open up the field I would like to concentrate on one single
leading case. I choose Graham Greene's The Third Man, for the following
reasons. Greene has recently been canonized as one of the dozen or so major
British authors of the first half of the twentieth century (in the relevant volume
of the The New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature, if I, as the
editor of the volume, may say so); and this was done in part because of
Greene's conspicuous involvement in the post-print media, as adapter of his
own work for the screen as well as film-reviewer. Moreover, it has been
suggested that The Third Man marked a major turning point in Greene's sense
of direction as a fictionalist: his entry into the archetypal mode of "romance."23
Specifically, The Third Man has been, so far, the only one of his fictions
"that . . . was not written to be read but only to be seen," although "the
[initial] treatment [which I write . . . like a novel . . . and] which I did
before writing the script" has in fact been published by Greene as part of his
own canon." Further, as an event in the Anglo-American studio system, the
completed filmscript depended on Greene's collaboration with four major
film professionals: Alexander Korda, Carol Reed, Orson Welles, and last, but
as we are beginning to see not least, David O. Selznick. Indeed, the study of
The Third Man can be made particularly revealing, since here at the Harry
Ransom Humanities Research Center not only are the versions in the
development of the script preserved in the Greene collection, but also the
relevant Selznick production files survive in toto (this, incidentally, offsets the
failure in Britain to preserve any Korda archive). To use the terms of the
original Kane-Pearsall debate, this evidence should enable us to determine
whether or not the changes introduced into Greene's original treatment by his
collaborators, in particular (as has been often hinted) Selznick, were, in
Professor Kane's words, "predictable forms of reaction by inferior . . . intelli
gences to major literary experience."25 It is true that, despite his undoubted
mastery of film-potentialities such as montage, Reed cannot equal the
one might say in
complex images the Langland-Joycean epiphanies,
Greene's original print-text treatment: to take an example from Judith
Adamson s indispensable discussion,26 Holly Martins's disorientation when he
finally understands the implications of Harry Lime's crimes "every shared
experience [with Lime] was simultaneously tainted like the soil of an atomized
manuscript
"See Brian Thomas, An Underground Fate: The Idiom of Romance in the Later Novels of
Graham Greene (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1988).
"Graham Greene, The Third Man and the Fallen Idol (London: William Heinmann, 1950).
Kane, p. 194.
Books,
1984). The
121
town. One could not walk there with safety for a long while." On the other
film audience can take to have a soft ending Anna after Lime's funeral
capriciously slipping her hand through Rollins's arm was overridden by
hand, Greene's concern
. . .
it
The
. . .
Ramirez Berg, "The Third Man's Third Man: David O. Selzniek's Contribution to
139,(ooutd)
kartlns;
2.30.
I'll
have to step
plane ,
Calloway:
it lr ;ou":e
on
going
STREET [LAY)
to oatoh thiit
mils time
it
la
LOCaTIONi
stop walking
down
Martins:
oan't
lust
Calloway
leave
slows
...
Calloway:
Martins :
it
to a stop.
Calloway t
fcartins:
'
haven't
got a sensible
name
...
Jeep )
cllaghan.
Callowuy turns
He begins to walk baol: Com the road.
Martins stops and
Anno Is approaching.
vi watches.
he
seeks in vnin
him
and
welts for her. She readies
una
for a word. He nokes a Restui-e with Ills hand,
h in and on
right
past
woliani;
she pays no attention,
his
ores.
wltn
her
follows
Martin*
Into the dlstanoe.
Mown
Iron outside our vision we oiut hear a our horn
again and again.
i
THE END
I
Final page of the 20 September 1948 draft of Graham Greene's film script for The Third Man
which is accompanied
by a 42-page memo from producer David O. Selznick noting his
suggestions for improvement of the script. Criticism of the film's ending, "Somehow not quite
right," believed to be in Selznick's hand, resulted in the addition of several lines in shot 141, and
the deletion of the repetitive "Callaghan/Calloway" joke, Martin's gesture to Anna, and
Calloway's horn-blowing, reducing the sentimentality of the scene. HRHRC Collections.
Film by Graham Greene and Carol Reed. For example, does the
"famous"31 "cuckoo clock" speech (by report ascribed to Welles) form part of
Greene's "literary rights in the property" and therefore, presumably, part of
the Greene canon?32 The Lorrimer film script does not specify Welles'
authorship, but simply states en passant, in Andrew Sinclair's Introduction,
Man:
that it "is very much his [Welles] own inspiration."33 Again, what about
preserving, as an integral part of the text, the contributions of the actors and
camera-man (let alone the composer of the music)? Even if one has to settle for
mere illustration, as a second-best aide-memoire for the ideal film-goer/
reader, enlargements
"stills" are to be used, as Schatz points out, and this so far has been rarely the
Though the publishers of the film script "hope that [it] will serve as a
example of the change of a shooting script [sic = ?] into a film,"
writers' film scripts would seem to require far more editorial precision and
thought, presumably of a more genetic nature.34
case.
precise
V.
television,
"Graham Greene, The Third Man: a Film by Graham Greene and Carol Reed (London:
Lorrimer, 1969), p. 114.
MIbid., p. 6.
"Ibid.
MIbid. , p. 12. See also McKenzie, Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts, p. 58.
124
the Boat,
for
"writers, and not directors, are the king, [though, he adds] only if they insist
upon occupying the throne."36 Authorial intention, therefore, can be fully
embodied in a suitably approved printed text, with the classical apparatus of
the author's own presentational, "stage" directions, as in the Faber Waiting
for
"Horace
Critical View,
463.
"Dennis Potter, Introduction, Waiting for the Boat (London: Faber, 1984).
125
tjaterarmtrans
iranebiro.Cuim;
prim xttubitfito
^ralrfittet.iiijEaiint
ktrgnriruilui.pm
nnumrnriaBaldanila
nirginmrS Art rora rrgt-i fimrarai
bniraiatq!irtuurun:tttalrfariatl)o
rauuiranfiiirnjnn. RutOttutiginit
attjufonruln
q;
<
rn
^g
i
:
tt
qunfmetralnmnncfram'uiunBun!^
tauitilJimiutpnattBnaBbni&Bi'1
cr
to
11
i
I
nbtulit otntautta
panhra.ft rtpropinamo cttttmim0
nrtntt robraimtflplagaabifrabrl.
unflaauin bntignntatiJluitB5o
nrtri arript ranrilium
tit miff.
^uatubtrngiifmiJJus
nn tratrii abnma.lrnranlariBngiJ
diuubb
ao oniac arimbi uiniliB
piivmiibuB mrra apuf snrlnb nat
ninuuB tnnri ragtl:uotauit uinufos
ij
;!
it
nun
it
ipftpulm ualbnftrunuBnatupDft^
abfalnn. tt Fmnn nusW inab Mm
faiuif-inmi abiartiar fiirrctDtt:qui
abiuuabatpartte abonir.-Jbabmti
tt
tt
tt
rt
rp
al
tart
in
tii
Ipreiafani
ornnittuE
finibua u"rl':n mumtrut abiTarfuna
mitmiet
Wmamnt ra ab regtfat
pli,
xrtttBinbtaiiQt:
'jlfnnir
iwimilujiiiifi
rav.tt faiua
3i>npifJ%irrjiltnnu8.
seven
appear
by
II
clearly in lines
III.
Kings
(B
1
:
42,
and the beginning of
The Cutenberg Bible
160v) opened to the end of Kings
This page provides examples of early manuscript corrections, insertions, and directions
for readers (the roman numerals and letters in the left margin, for example). Two of six occurrences of
the punctus circumflexus the manuscript alteration of colon made
adding to the top point
Figure
By
Lotte Hellinga
127
There is a similar attitude towards the text of one of the great historians of
the age, Werner Rolewinck, who worked together with several printers in
Cologne in order to publish in print his world chronicle, the Fasciculus
Temporum, in a very complex lay-out. The succession of editions has attracted
the interest of several bibliographers, notably Margaret Bingham Stillwell
who viewed
the editions
as the gradual
solution
to a complicated
lay-out
therefore that was familiar to all textual historians of the modem era, which we
may broadly assume to have begun early in the nineteenth
century. Precisely
because these texts of the fifteenth century were presented in that familiar
modern medium, their value as texts, as specimens of textual criticism and
4E. J. Kenney, The Classical Text: Aspects of Editing in the Age of the Printed Book (Berkeley:
University of California, 1974), pp. 18-19. The concept was given greater popularity by Elizabeth
L. Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change (Cambridge [Eng.]: Cambridge
129
fir;
in
4 )n
,>?
in
fi
1
3
in
|ci
&
1
fu
qt
pc
in t
(ci
ip
)i<it.
fei
putrid
q$
iy qr
fit
cupflqcrt
nc#
abu^ot
bopiu
parffuo
.oia
wait anuut
intfUoga mmitml albd qn
$cuf
man061emitru m bit pro 5norpt 1976
totafaa*
q; pomtacnmmqjvato'^t
pti* put ib puoraiutpplmerrpi
w5 9toaprfteano
quu?hrUaa rpibrniw btilf pub;-t ant a; fuit
baiuraopfcqumSumPortfftfu$\in*-K fcttacolao mag
oto iaubint1 Qbafoacn
Paa jrtMmfpS
Dircoic on tuxa tpni tmrfus nii ocmgfBDpmfeibaf
igmo fwb tcpfucctp*P^aOOBcnafiiit.
nf oiptttipfuniit tefpiu ft 10fugiffi tcbctieOiuj-Jpi
(tak ongiU.
i
tS.
(Ta-
3(ti
n.)Dit
uabue.
MMtilt
obtot
m ejpito bSrao61ap
pnellfl notefrpna pot; tDtfrpbaUc
n or traffic ftigmatatifict pafpciebabwt mmnmbj pbi
ourf n fb
bi latrtr-iigo nouif piifacue r*6?>p9 |}?oftu
toftop (unafrfnStcriab.lifacmnipeotfirij ttfhbj otibiera
ft pourte pDJlouoobera*rcbitrt tucnoiuaritrt ca a
faau fun lom iHafanam tint.
timer.
"ffti
t
g f
?*
6e
p^rilflmit^lKEfpgwimleimogMlrTuwtphBndtra
t
nma!man m (pus iu$ ttgiam
058o3 mart
i**"" ia<tee
1 femequa panele*
*$>;
fa" c*!famc.fl>t
m ntapjb git
UM.tt SaoptrSn futt output?irmotu*
fjlcirti$omi!ia*
flcnfcttmnltUnmrubtiBt>Strolittifuif*ti|>-''(To
bbtof mlapbaui cm
fciftu
fau
it
fiba
agna
qt
mt
fu
ti
pt
?t
ft
^h
^?
^nt
<i
tp
6/
tp
in
fc
p9
fc
5nobin isfit
ftt potttvv
fiiif giU
]1tpiutJtiaic
\)k on OBTbinoIatu
nobm 15Wflttoon fit Pan a^ipbauitnHebtaaontjt b motbinfmmop'tlajoon
bairnractiic rio
pnmtoiobnlugrw*gfofrpate no tpAi-wmbc?
3nftu
pmonr^ptionabnc
qnioiosotoiino
piuo*l}icmpttr.abt*pafotbuo
me mop-f wt raS vatuft
gn9 poctoqtlance mob/an)fttitaiufetarnmof qp
obontbmalaiuotfqi (eitu
atu*. rwpotoina
meb9fc.tt pouat goofianta M
c-o&&ne omtvil5*Uciatuc
mif fuatr phtmpgnaeva
fcapotoianpjit tt
triMto-iJrratouit comco
poritruoaats.^nmjr pala6u
gtihobepbm
pin
an
nn9
tucm* flbfhibrTtrpiamma
maroi
nombiii ttnttotu
ppnnrit opi^
Jpt onrreriufcf-h^ pafTaejnlaiblas atpie* a*put
ZfAtcumimoat Bmc\zH-ti)lt)' too isia qfuoirrgn rt puf
rt%n olmaniattntfTttcomSipao 0%
Cflf i^oo wilrf ffifiqi ebf
bri&eicernnptob
Djonf r^fritFgofojigii(lJ
q; ntfo*btfty P<u.t>on
fpl 6 p4fftd|Jei.fc fudipe
bal H obutpfhabii bifponfffC
JflDBlijftu*itiaat(hin:fitttut:
,^nmififtnnuoneepormtpfi
tt ictupiu qui tunoc oorpj ipr
bfftr(rniomorttqipum-lous
ftnci7T notil tjn* tpobit (ci pf
m Jn?u txwiffigiiareis iflituit
iao noHapfo-jp* km mnonipi
ix
fca; Ran)ennaatpmolj)6h
^mp:rfTd(fl bowm'iinu^bifwir|nrf'ailntTporiiiTLimf
nflri^it
rimfobdumirruoquo^aoTuotorttTtburiaiprrlonicc^iCQ
cfrocfc
nitibu pirmunrmplaT qu^bipfr ccncrobitie nuro: (^ma^Icopfe
mambufl at fine rfq; icburtrt meamolbii rbrr buernf -fub anaic
tin-a;tt-lf pig-Dt quo AtCcuf brnebimis in fcoila 4mcn*
g
8
Figure 2a: In press variant: Fasciculus Temporum (Cologne: Arnold ther Hoernen, 1474), leaf
recto. The Hague, Royal Library-,
170
>-*M
d
efl
*
1
33.
tpbn-itippoP ui>b.cnare6itccqi!mciwiiitttt-(u;
fta u fuit if loat Ula fannranit.
fa^lSAIdTnibulaaiWatinffatBfllMi^afhuinMa
frit
IHM
qnCtbtOa rpibhrncm Snipgnb^Ct onoA)jut
frgit*- ft tat lno moj.
oontpftoumbOnnSattta
bafooens
ftaafhucnf|ia firaeatioubim
i;nittmtutoa.t* umtfr nib acniqtmy nueabal
ig-nf fcb toofuatfuanfiabaona frit.
to* 9 tup$frnsTtBtfliitJ 10frgifT* o*i *it>!'IP<
frnfitfciangtb-
qfi
n
f*(
fci
0/
fu
anibu*abfiiufm JetuttopnicatnetbtitbtTbutTW-fiil'omiK
bm-0).(clirTnijDti)uoritteulntt'ictumfca>lo<>"Ti
-<" >**
-
^***X^?!rf
*,1,""';1<
**'
-'
i^'^CT'^i'tT
/ktJU^Cr *,** W
Figure 2b: Same page of Fasciculus Temporum, The Hague, Royal Library, 170
ft
JntpitffdeIlinco^<aqwbmmtfrrciailu*fft)otutol;iricd^rfijjK
frvtoboucwcfuoquol>aamoa>nifrt)uricnriaplonicct!in (pfltTe
BUibC p:tmu n onplat qujbtpCtttmtnbifa ante: ^ytnnTm-fit
* i"-
la
awi*l
>m
fh
lWin;nifrfftn|7.ftIl1Jip.p9wti^^tfutJlM;fIti
it
b* m oioint minaii'ttdb an
ot ftoc(cu
notoAi-oombc?
Itfcoonoipfioiiuatcncfr
ntt wo. uit to2 tomniK
00oatbnialatuolfq; |citu
tnpriHnnl otntmB-ltflotwl
ttmtr.C ttaeonit 00:8to
turtuf obflubfTj;f lommn
bttcigia qdjoirtgnorr .fill
IF'nlq) obf
fin*
qj m.'a*(afq| ppic bona
W * ttf .fJin&fi ti/>onctv
t flafi a^pbauiloHtbtotlont
pneotoiabri ligmwtft(<finit
pui*l)i.' mfgnatia pnroibua
wottmtafrit uifua mw q8
nttb9font paumptonatt<tM
pmur puatr pfaioofignatr
pan triiOOOitCtontt polobG
3j(n<<n< iou afi on?
IMtlt
IjJAI-tl V'!)
p $
iS
in
iu
c
2
J(Hb>hjilaUjt(ntriltini
frit <ijtlunt ifimaw ntt pmit of
rt ttlu fru qui am aotpicipt
it ftmonwnrq: puanrafbaa
fuitl(mimo!i!l*Uipo!)n|cin>
n HK tnwff igilaoib ipuuit
*M ttnpfo.pt m2 oanntipt
lit|) att>ii no k fmit iyi.
ft
|M'
(t
i
q"
..
I
I
<
12.
There is one important exception to this procedure. The sacred text of the
time, the Vulgate Bible, with its far-reaching influence on liturgical use, could
not be treated in this way.
In
as soon
It
is
if
it
it
1).
of
"Paul Needham, "A Gutenberg Bible Used as Printer's Copy by Heinrich Eggestein in
ca. 1469," Transactions
the Cambridge Bibliographical Society IX, Part
(1986):
36-75. See also my own comments, "Three Notes on Printer's Copy: Strassburg, Oxford,
Strassburg,
Subiaco," Transactions
132
complex.
It
contrary,
I want
statements.
On the
moment of the transition of the text into print, in the early years of printing, in
"For a description of features of the copy in the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center,
B. Todd, The Gutenberg Bible: New Evidence of the Original Printing, The Third
Hanes Lecture (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1982). Todd saw the use of the flexa as
see William
133
I found
it contained
notes and
were used to
make up a copy.
fascinating
glimpse
sequence.
It
is, however,
not the
procedures of the printing house with which we are chiefly concerned here,
but the concern shown in the printing house to the correct presentation of the
text. In this respect we can only arrive at a general statement: that care for the
presentation of the text was detailed to the point of fussiness, and seemed to
be as much for the correctness of the text in relation to its exemplar as for
details of typography. To what extent this is reflected in the quality of the text
134
no.wre;'rtbnt;finei-diilr4rtf$rfinjIi<)e>ve*
meapuicnm-kjIrrtdaftAinpifti^c ll*pf*n. u
qmirafepn.injpefnpz5tm*tlercwnj
/_~^f
.iatwiaie.qo
rrpmeaMT
JHLM fepfrmD
p^gio*/.tf heJpnd
h^J tticfc*iam lWlt
ffreee*bdotnj.fi
jpndM)rcor*bBfi jjpfffa/"
Jfcp* t Mn<*e)iufi
ytPl<ioit,lP'"**"*
lepecx
mjne.p*pretoto-famtjp ti MtAd
mMr.e#>KmP%^dMV^eW^kptWM^
cifi&peL.B.pammenlo)c
^TPfclOw 1d*5
abcptJ (jfrccv.efO
ni ^.lautoejW^ebdodj
eft(*p.
tTBroeq<eft die*Wmodo* q- i%us.
ifoij ^
fprebdo^iaeft?mn'mnofne<y
reptrm-ina.^nd,
jfcj
ferUp^rcpmjgtmaebdoctjoi?.aftimi1iMi
ebdottano-1.fipmpAe* Ctpe*)Shomm
rrrtj
iWtj mqnntW*bcrHou.qt.TKqj
habit
am*vartatir**
r\mm>l ^
rniti.fin0linjwiqs
.fprcrDno*tc*-^u.c^,pfer fcP J-rg-rj. trptu
BJoqPytto ait WW fappM| mfenbtttnepei
pintJfatttf tkdttkmWW Dirtfeom|MWt) *
itomunnr a
f^rrm?a (oleqmpricepve
omiufifty-fieliOeniOiemcapateftrrrrrc-BDitv.
SeOBjlona-qetrpleTitKjee-imamtdnvfcl.ySe
TtyfirmrtmhiTrrfTiTfrrTt iftHhmiTit omj
.Claartf aftdLimfratrrf^pajqiuDa
'^pffpTOraiitr
ondidu tiww &icw
CiVwoa fttlb ioaM^Kjm
afftNtOtttvanr-ekiafa ftiUa*\rt^aluafr
Kit. tfLmcvritoStM
ftdrnpdisIunsafferr.Sfpft.*
ftdU Uturm/qefeWoerioloeauinor.amsfirr'
trirp4r
carwfin- *tpt ticket jpfpano
l*rmparnst^Vcd(fucn/qnartttitsnonHaeadt
planetrincrto-can
nan/ai fepertusru-noct
inmb
abavifa
dman^f(0Tihuc^rtfcX!^oJOit-mT.
wbi>Mni
lty_piSVyw ofoanWaMilwuuhiMilciiwgaV
upturn-vi eg^pro
mm cm niuuaainwi*?^*
*?o
.a qunWj^ftdUc^noaiiaMbtkiima^bnvm
lbs Dieb*.
mciww. ulcomdiunotJB cfl*rptbns
1*Ww.wnw UU coMUeemipuerate j|Mt
#lpnF
iHttCttefUnr
Tpntfl
^pifOtOT
HOtt9I
BV^MHHv
(ll*MMet bun AUM aidto toomhaJcdan*
eTnt.^miWoje^pttf*mairT-*.^/hbj
MM
-WKintratM
>
>>kibn.rviti .fifcnuniM habltvi-t
f *
wlwMS i.ntH^jkjW-Vlg
* ftp
r*l<u
VK1 "S**"*** *!
'-Jnma-tj
mtTMkabn
t
in
r|4ttMMt-trfaMgriw*Wi
fckllHMflMai^tqiiilih
^ * * n
bM
-:.-*
<!
'
ait mmmm/nciii
t- walaa.|)ilUSM>ii6qa/'lip<daltfff>i<
arb<aM<tiip-i-aM>-lJM.Srfdiqiiliry
Ws frtio.xfu petdmmptoin*
MMliw prwno-
ow*T
in4heeMr
NMnTkome^ttwnpUi
fd>m
Nfmit eo^mfinfflaOiebj-SpwOt
.
q>foJrejnabatprmiahjaOi/0m
phdofopr*i
idcocHeiBatrnoiauetMtaloJe-tnrj^i
Vtderitt^
bmartfTUbatprintafvraTo>e
feneideoVmhW
bmotaacrtir
abina. fieK eron*fccpatn a orfhW
ctoehojatj&tcif^<+amt'pI,inerj|ipdmefa<rtff
aOifhtt^jjieti* philolophinotafept*'
Bc4j^,iTf
ruT4eff fingfi*. Iiqmdtnhauntdie"w'nenitvt
a ionraaju man*firr*
Hhhm andidtratv
oo*ia fple(pinm-i "Vrnff*"wlaptatT
imtmino
jm cw-^-rgt
loqpmaq
wdo pianetaa>4naMM
mtni(cpnrnjnnno prrcdH.^
adprnnu eiinmr
'fti*"*
deormCrptcCries
mfepmana
fct Captcnb*
n<n*fffipcUr?{Tt)
Oic0^rrVmc.'ih>iafin
a tfprtnc Vidfdvj tft
bit Crptima
ncovbnK
&iebii"Vrc
Wirtbi\l mJirfieitjvquoO
qdajaftro
m
metW WftM h<
bnpiexaeohabaT.Prima r
rtU-wi lofnmHamrOtwpfyiopMfffononjep^.
en.cccfa
.
hiB-VfuBt^Al'-vm^-W^**caW^
(
-<T.<p_ A^l^je3t,^idb.WtiOf,<puby&;c|mcfbj
y-Cointidfea^fltbitawialideh, Imlm
AAqdajDwaqeacamfWara
Di<iuwratanc\*lta'
>p*"*
'>fitoBfnt-rri.pLctoc.;-rnmoftbn
&
t-r-r**^*
pnioifoaTcCoaficpwdmc.toprtniteoaiati'ario
X me&ftUantanifTOmTlom.xanrsfn^uarhatn'
eftm mediorrm>c*U.xOufol
1<ftu*tHetitt
trayqriiaefutititmulii batmmSf
ftaOn^o**"
adeawiafrrtideii
3taeKinifoU-Wt<prTniaap1t.< aOcjcm hicmhairdo? mertscm(nmtwtatWto
v>b. fftntuiAlraeftpma0it*6x faitprtmonKS
jfteit. ffcte
V, ^**Wear cJm.qi foiparnocbw
friianoanoTaeftpnmMlra^li''i<'>omaha*
ftp***iJ^^i<(b5.iripweTk<it
eftprrmiiiitiujrn Irr t)omattftfcoji**'r**
aiiefoWmrrnpmeinitMiueftmmii
poeonjii
1>
qMpWrDomefi.r.hbru.xOeftprrmaKiiftii^'
'tHibiesmapm
l*r
eT6m-rfeftpe^malirhn.T^*abii.-1ir*
ntM*/r.fiM4Wt^
<P|iMmti.
mhipdipda(jjndlnc^t
ntleqne.^fpWUa.qiJp<detprrtodo<- l"riiNC*fi
o>a^rmano-iracpIMp *nl pmaft pm*nUabt
ImmmtftaiiMlM m
ritH*
cffipoac mitfomi*H
onicrmtilUeif>oopTtado
nnino>fao<ojn4*4bf,
fttii frf tmotatriepmato
M rcOVftUtemaJpknro-mt^cnt
0<ecfppnae?n
ilo nA cmfnWilaoitro aporadoafine>fcpti<
ciptn^bi)(nAngaria ptna0w>o- foitpmo
n^riaiwanoantftpma fiUaoai itftprimi
Ubw Mate, eftpnmjmjlph>bm>.erffOt>ic
phn Imm d>egwnacala 9 eftfroafolaba.i
eftimalraipratnHaba'.T.g.i^fcpnam.ilpfea/
brr9.^fepB?Die*tamwrnnut>i<'JinHo
fine**nts
pnripvieftejppciata-1 fiemabf*fpeobfoato.$
v
'
c a
iMmMM
^_f]
*y
3:
Figure
Earliest proof corrections: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale Divinorum
Offlciorum
(Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schoeffer, October 1459), leafs verso. Murichen Bayerische
Staatsbibliothek Ink. D-324.
fi
t '
4l
mgrnvf
v prnipr-tv imifti>ft^Otmf.tn.qn-fcr
._f
-c^imqmVrafWKinvrpcpW(rla><no>
HU/lptnitaTun-inrp<l>af
4l
fi*
4,
q\-
fi
ff
(t
JF.
tc.if'iir*mtf
ibinoflf-ttr
^..i--.(-n
orp.4r<tmdu.qo
of-td-p-nod;
J-c*oib- ^rcmn&ielofnoamfrwnir-*-*:
-^ aadi'f
jvhtbnqamanMlirniual)na^arViib.udn*rai
vOO,
4
jCan(.htfnT
f.
r
fprgnnbiU
m
duari
fmteporii
nodtbwt
Adnoxam-1 do
41
rtVtifft-imqBidvJtc*
rlwwpboi
r5m1cuihHHcn>intBp9flW.
m ubMm
Vamta*afnaBTipwpn*mO'awnVl^n>Dt-<,-^r.jocTV.q.i.
iwirt.
bwJTrnfTio-frnK(Jltntp-ponf^mlnft-wcatatiqui'
.noarbj-ifBt*>flxficipi
ip4--ti&
* fen-cjt-("%
fjmtx
-tyqwoy fewnfjwwtat.qt
Dieq>nohab;bi<loo*tjuwpcii
apiiaprn
w boi cvnditjdnocwn.r*MOca<j",pHiodaj
H>a-adBop>.o^pirfai>m-f.,,.
faffpoorft
sm^ftonr)
,_
-;
mt.* flAgjprfnil-W P"Cm-'-'SAno.q>
*r batmdicrat ht
fminnoc.ficanaMUrm
4lSair>oncT.mcVojraaddir'rrnA^oDmno-in-S-mfii. iiwaii'itl.T
paraque
mi rmpmam
>tb
sftatnohabilon'i
fatntprpM-qnare
i am<$
rmendar-ro
qmpn*wmcmtC-w
4, dOdaw-Lwdabilioi
- talonindictnopunt-qo*>arfti
ft.eeu
fmt>.toft.olfja*c)torrt
:nonmrotwfedprparmmgimritlwl
WtnrCT'u.Li.q^fJTirq*.
anopfaf
idm
.(k
mom
lacaaf*qomrrlligon
In*
rypmtr*urq
4,fVrformanduj
-*oq<
ftaortii^-vidabin. '-nxno.lo.m>
^fjrndona-'taifMVutMr
4jScdi*ap.qttulvotdnui^Vimqmd
na<;?fton<-Di<
fm6-iemj
d
T<oo.cpioidina'qjno.tpsrcft
inert*
Dig-mtaabj
ad&j 6oraaftwrt
ife-s.Brdno rofi.c.itf-bic
noooadenrooDpocJUc-qt dcnosvrwi
hgr-ftnowmaW*qtfTant>mwsc.mfmaioibv)cT.awt-r rijlMbentmlm
Vnde cnafmpli
Hrnrosmittat
01dmart|.ncrsrmfno.
Ofb>nvWifnu.aqatwuq.-itaminwblaip.otibt.t
..tafof-ncTcaj
pMntfni
(
j*fmtplfTdfnvBCTrdlt.-nnttarcrfn>nlo*'tOipnorra
Ptgmtawr
iftyqiftw
m
i
jfclobat.Sj
<
t
\c<
.ff-taf
remd.qfwda
qm
q*alt
foamdi1pandoedenmaftDtvicr* rpt
aWwrdi'i
titc-eimcu^a-ifwvt*
pfonaru
ab)aaigidcfj(a-v?v-anmVft-v
nocwrndatw
fit cnSq*gfrtrtViprofp*-igir*adatdinanoo
qno
caulc>min.htfth(*
Wfwr^imnibj.rTV.ifnnopoffmt
Jjm'ft6>t rftfi>qo
mfcnu*ranframtMa>fiieuit.B-f
-nonalh-t
nt>mmirifipfomomtifinn)
anjpermt
SoluwftcanftnoplT<
*?ij
dTtcfratosqu^bui
j
piJircrr6tu-iF-m:.0>.f-i.mnHti(r;ah.>c
jjtvdrt
p
fbiMiu
smtra
obWdho-MpvAMi
ti<
fttttm*>
WXvl
m.ifcigreraq6Dir.ur-B.
tamgn.dinrrmomtbilcg.nn-quoo
canofncM
nriiv (jtf*d!w mqnbaanorcqrniAani.itaMf
rv k'
^-c-n-(-i-qi>\rnupun9
tr of-lcg-a-f-pnlf.!
mdiAVr.-nr'-citt
*"l'"cobi**io
insja*
^b^^l'.J.^dte.*yofl*',**',,*,*,''**,r,'
liafmrrtlig-av
mcrlcgan.rnKn
3nm>t01Jl"M<
altqtnBt>ab<tgmt.w*wlps f;aaStaV*grr
dit-DKij q^DirprnfafltpotTft
sftt-f.
adprenfaaar
r^-wltfga^nWv'gwcii-f-f-q^miioUo
(pi'tel
pJCR.
minwt^:van.pl>i(pJnfa<wj rpt-pnmu
(onaei-ffia
)<
<rtrro-?ftb
ifnitinoti<*rcndiwt-wt-qnidarncntrnab*
Wmjjbafiir.Va.-|qJi-<'VtiO' Oifftaftqufd.tipfminrtta
pan*nocrapit
nuqatd
drlicvtc.mon-ntJmnTa
w rrfa-.e.ttflb.(ig.$nt.yi. bir.im.-f.tar
(i{Drcdine-i-palntran'<ft.tf)iCofmreanf**p>n
q1fat valct^pcdTun-Dtrrbat
B.i em*poft
.qt>
(irniblani
(ft
olim
raifadtal'
4IjCatfadmUu-faffwit
#
q
r
ponmrmrirrnnrtare
m
m
tpiMa.tbilibf
o
irplTc
paorat
caraiUgiaas
tvdi*m
.^nrrod<t
Jir) .idh<
(ifanneba/'.w
oftcmmmowFauct*.
w<.f-m
.ppriu>;aiTf'ptfropi
a
ajfio 7paao.nt-1.fef
cqmpan^caifjidnlcft
<Ut-qwaAfpr-alibi
a
on>robrtn
m
agm
dennauajrudibt1p.mnofiedfntnsbMarr.in*rrT<lu
mcmaciifrdnli
offi(u
Ttffybrrn-a
protrftchi. -itu
-w#ic-n*
jptrr
rcgi.tn
adapftratM
m
nmu
.tn.itnt.
rudttatvipos
f.\dttr
(KKOtgrnfjir-p^Matnlift
(^fC^nomaR-habmnbtifitwrB'*poofI canfaTnntti-CH
ntia^rW-rihpdupfinctftuMtrV'OYtaojnnriuvbtmRiiir^-q^ipo
tr hit*
nomJti quoloqmtiirJ].njr.f.i-no
mraftirniuiinan<qo
anqo>fK>B
sent
nt.Vndcnaarflanainon
norB**^"***'
1"J '*,;w9 " ft"anonintrlcganpoltfQtpf^tan?
rntdor^arpomoprm.
iTa<)(qBvii^aca;.^mpn.ipr^ftoT(
Br/oli?j.wof-krf-toa
poflant-ai
no fpmat-^m
r.'mDanto
hT
imfHti'
Figure
4:
_1
/i
J
<
*rf lh d*
f*U^ftiW
1
tytd^^"1
"*
fit
h^Arf
-it
potia
fmrD*bfo
4jCrcdtbamf1'ant
4 UwdJUhinoi<^friba/'jiwWWarqi^'rii>wdfcn
t^M^ftro^.^iiKTf.1mnddMWWlcp^fo>fnfc
iad**>pf'* **'.i
pantrta lo qnotrputatu*d>poflW
mcaflr*
refVia*adtK-pfcnnfmiliapwntn*rixmfltomftimaa
in
ri
L/ja
;'mmdi*noabtp^tricjJW-*'Kffnl9'l*tjrt(afc-i|p;
! mr*pjna
.InrrnMj**
uidrVarcaWfaroco
orftiuadiudioujqnc
fvpuirt
malirtofc
nebat.
nrftea.
crcafaig-.tndt
r .1tutuqtf f'caiuditrf
^-^
"Ydabs aliqmdt%'
fed* ap lie*trputi s
rofqucdiInVlnma&rfcofvnupcHidimf-cnque-rem)t{.iHumirnw_|.
tumo toitJ in eo^jucpio
qwcquidfucnrf.it^nj
pdicfAftatutj>
>rr.i
omumvolitate credebaf'
Sarutu-'oqnaturBt
4
mdufta-fifufncpitftuoo;
trct.ilifiia(0UCMM.
cuitfrndrbmoicuturad
ftatm
quemnpiob
at
muB-nCTOrmat
OAIre.
no 0 nA6 ephn quam
mnOf-n".-n-pf*TrtI'
iTTcfta^dbnucroolcnuut
quak>dnnobabnn?
rt CT.B.c-nonnlli.
41ScdeaplieJ-UjT**
ipm*
nn-ucltafU-g-ana
...nn^o<.p>cffcma.o.foprfmoptfr.tcHcr.KCO.-t'lfl
.
B..ff.ficOtp
-fi>rar-taU(a.aliranomj.nuq
dDir^r;
b^val<.v,dc>>fic-^^at^.vfema.haonanaBr0lu
Iww'B**^omcan^rffol^ftabwm*-9,'"""
rtaatnt-4'
cr*XlDWorhta^mipabzn^^tnJr,aflfa.mfi^^
0> Wftaf'ab dloqi
fafncrma(ptnof arnnHo-lidem
Dico crrdo
arf.cu^irrfm.u.quano
Snnnoti^-prrpdi*i
rrr t
*w
(otrf^Vajprrham-af
eninonntafr-t<-C'
tatftafanermwa-ct
mrdivwanda
torrc^o
cWf.occta-1
.ta(
mandamuff-fiudcfYtili=
dcw crprdiat.np
tatrm mdiue bujcimurr
nfctfl-atfrOirtTO?
fcffinat.f;a.Rqwfoim.tndu. ^>3X\AmwS
nojmdi-s
rour-Vndc
igitur -ut nullia mil oigrri:
<if-alia*<adcraaonc
tatr pdmft-aut pjopawm
tne#ni^^wn*
catfvdnaT
obmicnfe feucrddUs^cas
fir .mioioi*
ecoc-ocl
mDi^mtant
phidratiucanomaft-aufc*
nopofnt
-\vlpfonatu
aur>cfratt fcapwi Irga
parenterp*
rvprTli
cdiu cww tr cefowmrtan'
*
*
onkvmo cato"1
farmtintmctaait.oT
fllumOatanCiqeft
abferdu-a ftniriiW
d*c lif
qdnor-naVJ-Bt
rat.^io-y*A^.^n*<>^olmn^a*-irdt^no.Wni^^
batwatak^mftimmcadTpaiali.aimaVonano^(Hr^
**
jwiwijp fpdi arf-hanc
pothymfctf*
fablaaitft.woergo<?
m.ti
pftf*>
locopwmfpro aliqoo-aaitoniqmdiottbi
aiM*n.lBJni-am.jd
n-pmecoliw
fft.i-dTpfinrV*wi
a farwhot
.0(rAflit.-l.i.tRw.irpjoph'*'*'>ia*':"'rrami
pmat>utaprmpio
>_ /mquamotptwDmidoprmapak*
' vr^^d.<mfcp-WjabWavfqjja.<:^fc<*TrtD.mcu.ibmd
in*..InpmaftaM" qmbjpfoma.
vfcp
.quart
J
vfqtjd.^quifq'd
'
lortflcanfe
afelt ap--W ljnn-^ laWg-je*ipm.
Mmqiiit>t
Early proof corrections: Bonifacius VIII, Liber sextus Decretalium (Mainz: Johann Fust
Manchester, John Rylands University Library, 9001.
'For a more detailed discussion of the Durandus (or Duranti) proof, see my article, "Proof
reading in 1459: The Munich Copy of Guillelmus Duranti, Rationale," Ars Impressoria:
Entstehung und Entwicklung des Buchdrucks. Eine Internationale Festgabefur Sever in Corsten
zum65. Geburtstag, ed. Hans Limburg, Hartwig Lohse, Wolfgang Schmitz (1986): 183-202.
VIII, Liber sextus Decretalium, with gloss of Johannes Andreae (Mainz: Johann
'"Bonifacius
Fust and Peter Schoeffer, 17 December 1465). GW 4848. John Rylands University Library 9001.
One leaf was reproduced in Lotte Hellinga, "The Rylands Incunabula: An International
Perspective," Bulletin du bibliophile (1989): 34-52, Plate 3.
137
of
of fixing typographical
material
for the later issue. This process of printing would have been
Gutenberg's final invention. " Recently I have re-interpreted the evidence for
the existence of the book before the year 1470, and have suggested that an
alternative hypothesis could be that the Catholicon was all printed circa 14681469, in one typesetting of movable type, printing divided over three presses
or production units. For safe transfer between presses, the type would have
been secured (in line-pairs, columns, and pages) in a way that was unusual in
normal practice of printing in movable type. I have also suggested that the
book may have been produced by a partnership that came into being in the
aftermath of Gutenberg's death, early in 1468. I2 Controversy apart, we all
agree that the Catholicon is an exceptional book, and there is much to indicate
that we see here an attempt to produce a large number of copies from one
typesetting after it was corrected with unusual thoroughness, whichever way
the type was secured or whatever the timespan in which the book was
produced. Whichever hypothesis about its production and dating we prefer,
we can see here another departure in practice in, apparently, a deliberate
attempt to avoid resetting of text. The aim of the publishers must have been to
make the best possible use of one correct typesetting. It is a curious fact that in
the early years of printing, until the middle of the 1480s, we can cite a number
of instances of double typesetting of complete books or of substantial parts of
books. The labor of composition seems in these cases to play only a minor role
in the cost and effort of producing the book; with every resetting the labor of
proofreading, on the other hand, automatically doubled, as did the risk of
introducing new errors. By the late 1460s printers and editors had gained
ample experience of the multiplication of error as the evil force that will
forever accompany the mechanic multiplication of texts. The great care
lavished on securing the textual correctness of the Catholicon once it was
established in a typographical form may be an attempt to combat this evil,
when through an exceptional set of circumstances it became expedient to
introduce a new printing procedure.
sembled
"
"Paul Needham, "Johann Gutenberg and the Catholicon Press, Papers of the Bibliographical
Society of America 76 (1982): 395-456. See further discussions in Walter J. Partridge, "The Type
setting and Printing of the Mainz Catholicon," The Book Collector 35 (1986): 21-42, and P.
Needham, "The Type-Setting of the Mainz Catholicon: A Reply to W.J. Partridge," The Book
Collector 35 (1986): 293-304. More observations and discussions are available in: Wolfenbiitteler
Notizen zur Buchgeschichte 13 (1988), Proceedings of an Arbeitsgesprach held at the Herzog
August Bibliothek in Wolfenbiittel, 17-18 December 1985.
12Lotte Hellinga, "Analytical Bibliography and the Study of Early Printed Books: With a Casestudy of the Mainz Catholicon," Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1989): 47-96.
138
been studied much more closely than ever before. Martin Boghardt,
Herzog August Bibliothek
see most
of the
in Wolfenbuttel,
76 extant copies
of the book
to
of the
13
He made
and
line-pairs for correction demonstrably took place at a point in time later than the
production
sequence
of production."
If
we
hypothesize printing divided over three units, we may assume that the error as
printed at the first unit was discovered while the page was prepared for printing
at the second unit, and sent back to the compositor (only present at the first unit)
for correction. This could be carried out at any convenient time, even after
printing of the main sequence was finished, for once page-length is established
the sequence of printing can essentially be arbitrary.
It
concern for a correct text when the convenience of working stricdy in textual
sequence is sacrificed to a late correction phase, which is, one must assume,
merely a continuation of the correction procedures that must have been carried
out before printing. The half-sheet containing the error would be replaced in the
section already printed at the first unit (on Bull's Head paper), and could form
part of a full sheet when the corrected type-page was forwarded to the presses
printing on Calliziani and Tower & Crown paper. The alphabetical sequence of
most of the text must have helped to guide isolated cancellantia to the correct
place in the book. Usually this perambulation of formes was therefore carried out
correcdy,
but Boghardt
has
elsewhere
pointed
this
procedure led to the error of including a sheet twice in two parts of a single
copy.
15
confined to copies produced at what we all consider the first production unit (on
of movable
types or of paired-line slugs, I find the sequence of correction here very difficult to
comprehend. "The crux lies obviously in the value attached to the word "concurrent," rather than
in correction procedures.
"Martin Boghardt, Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67 (1985):
Boghardt discusses sheet 63.68 of volume 2 as having been wrongly inserted in the first
volume of the Spencer copy (on Bull's Head paper), but inserted in the correct place in the second
volume where it is printed on Calliziani paper. The error can well be understood if it took place in
561-566.
139
Bull's Head paper and vellum). In the copies produced later in the production
sequence we see only one instance of cancellation of leaves (in the Tower &
Crown unit), and here I am inclined to conjecture that they correct an error of
imposition, of the kind that could easily occur in page-for-page printing.
Boghardt's investigations form an important contribution in showing the
considerable care and labor given to producing a corrected text. The cancels
that he has found are as clear evidence of the care and labor demanded for the
correction of the text as the proof-readers' marks in the Durandus and
Boniface. The text was a lexicon mainly of terms found in the Bible, and
therefore an important text in its time. It had been widely disseminated in
manuscript, and on the basis of the manuscript tradition it was possible to
arrive at an assessment of the value of the version of the text presented in the
Mainz Catholicon. G. Powitz (Frankfurt am Main) distinguished various
branches of the transmission of the Catholicon text and identified the place of
the Mainz Catholicon edition in that tradition.16 He also established that the
Mainz edition was the ancestor of the tradition of the text in print after 1470
22 editions of which are recorded in the fifteenth century. The only
independent edition is printed before that date: the Augsburg edition of 1469,
in which slight but significant textual variants show that it cannot have been
derived from the Mainz Catholicon.
Finally, I should like to take a longer look at yet another text printed in
Mainz, the letters of St. Jerome, completed by Peter Schoeffer in September
1470. This is work in progress, and I can give you only preliminary results, but
I think that it is material that serves well to contribute to the point I hope to
make.17 Peter Schoeffer's Jerome was the fifth edition of this text, which, after
the Vulgate Bible, was of the greatest importance to readers in the fifteenth
century. The Jerome was one of the first, if not the first, book printed in Rome,
produced by the German printer, Sixtus Riessinger, perhaps in collaboration
with Ulrich Han, in or about the year 1468. 18This version of the Letters was
prepared by Teodoro Lelli, Bishop of Treviso, after whose untimely death in
1466 the printed edition was commissioned by a kinsman to commemorate
him. The second edition sought to improve upon the first. Some friends of
Lelli approached Giovanni Andrea Bussi, Bishop of Aleria, who was to
establish a working relation with two printing houses active in Rome, the
leG. Powitz, "Das 'Catholicon' in Buch-und Textgeschichtlicher Sicht," Wolfenbutteler
Notizen zur Buchgeschichte 13 (1988): 125-137.
17H *8553 and H *8554, Goff H- 165. I am undertaking this research with Dr. Eberhard Konig,
complementary to his art-historical investigation into the illumination and distribution of the
copies.
18
140
of
their origin. The first edition contained a preface by Lelli's kinsman Gaspare
de Teramo in praise of the late bishop; Bussi's edition contains two lengthy
prefaces;21 the Strassburg edition is again an exception and has no preface. The
Mainz edition has not only a long and carefully considered preface (in two
versions), but there is also a printed advertisement, which points out that with
200 letters it contains many more than most collections of letters ascribed to
Jerome.22 This is due, the advertisement says, to a diligent investigation in
'"HCR 8551, Goff H-161 (the edition dated 13 December 1468), and HC *8552, Goff H-164
(the edition dated 1470).
"HC *8549, Goff H-162. A copy at the Bibliotheque Nationale is bound in a signed binding
(Johannes Richenbach at Geislingen) with the date 1469 (CIPBN H-96).
"Most recently edited by Massimo Miglio, Giovanni Andrea Bussi: Prefazioni alle edizioni di
Sweynheym e Pannartz prototipografl Romani (Milan: 1978), pp. 3-11.
The prefaces to the two issues of the Mainz edition have not been edited. For the
advertisement see: W. Velke, "Zu den Biicheranzeigen Peter Schoffers," Veroffentlichungen der
Gutenberg-Gesellschaft 5-7 (1908): 231-235, with facsimile. More extensive comment is pre
sented in: Hans Michael Winteroll, Surnmae innumerae: Die Buchanzeigen der Inkunabeheit
und der Wandel lateinischer Gebrauchstexte im Friihen Buchdruck (Stuttgart: Hans-Dieter
Heinz, 1987), pp. 121-167. Two versions of the advertisement are known, one with the
announced date "in proximo festo michaelis" in Einblattdrucke des fiinfzehnten Jahrhunderts
(GW [Einbl] 1297, copies in the British Library, London, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek,
Munchen, and in New York, the Pierpont Morgan Library), and an apparently earlier one with
the indication "anno vertente.
"
141
*The editor of the Epistolae was first identified as Adrianus Brielis by F. Falk, "Der gelehrte
Adrian O.S.B. des Peter Schdfferschen Druckerei zu Mainz," Zentralblatt fur
Korrektor
fibivuftq6mgencfifenpmefl-omie
~>idd
oravtnram fcprrmvmdictasexfotuttf
oi'jrcrSrufvalCr
bona-qujremrregacon'ovtrmudiott hnmudiAaialibuanundatrumrmmundiimcbi(tom'icflVpjITirc mno
uorcO-jmcropjIrvifionemquepsrrofucrat
ofrenfjDiariabfitOiica mrqt?munrn rm
munduniinq-mrronntm00mcuwr tr crlo
ncpnernvnaf
rr(a>ntn't:q6lruBmudjuirni
mcrrrog-aco.
yurtrus(oqtur.id abraba-q*
quarragriatioc
fib]lfrfV rgipro cITcntreucT
fun:ft poltiMntOffcefcnpfir-quira aurj^gr
merarft fitifliraW tr rem egipfl 06 vfl
injiptpnJturviDidTe^rrarai.rnnrirogacoAr abobamfitrifucfifrmiinartuafione
lurcrpi1iwcrn><raa'o,
nri
^krpfjjcvirtumisittrocanjsnoniln
-ooW;fi cutnoJu*trccptu*crroicbnoipr
"V(J ftnfiuaadqoncs
a>
(exud
poftt4.<cp(j
nflrmo ajyoamalb
CTOmmufli OfVq
plain rueloranoarm
i:^reJtrm
acaronorato
ctapcrmipauL^uo
oftiotimfparatoq6
lerJtofy.pinptuniBjii
1.1
crego
rogirarocprrtgeba^nrcrnn
mileararulumourbjmufiai fubiro
ftmguam
>brbixtiemriicmr:MVmnonpjuci'VDlumTj
quett fm flogleiiruflacecpat
. irt ihno.
batre mquitqopjlrulaucrafimeqi
Oubtinet
q'iir"-icrrenelncrrmifafcl>mu^e>:rcrmit:ur
oimb>prcrmifTt
adrn-1bMur1afuot.1rr.Cti
quidufqjmpi'iBfanoT^eruqifcrnourono
ad mennlTourtupuraseplamureq-ofenno
t
tit
a
qfi
St. Jerome and the lion, Hieronymus, Epistolare (Mainz: Peter Schoeffer,
recto. British Library, C.ll.e.13.
September
September
1470.
1470), leafa
Figure
5:
rt
in
(J.
ifi
imicnrctrtthn^o urnfpclcjjcrernpaut
qpfrnbrnrfqueftiuruliean reimfTifttatare
Oifpoiui:noquo a lege notrhus fcvccntm
idunronduno afaoalinrripmgiicfnf.ia>:
quoIn-rornerrufhiafirtire fmbas.^ra
qjqt'nabr/nraMI-ino .id merrrmflongll.if.
bij qs
urna-cpt'iftbaorrcbmfti cjreepne
txremoaltqnDidtaucne<qujfq}toraJuiulrrorollinnirs
trfmpfi:fl
birjrrtcfpjrq.1
tcfumuidnoottiioptb?aliq fivdlcpjfle oi;
are;iitvntcraenpioaboffnvntvq'rogarf
wlui*rarnjnncgjirdj?cqj.wr0ulla puro
\ :
<
'.
jjye
Avif.iuiriiibf.itinimfmiiir.iB*ftjltjn'oanti
j^ofifTimilciiffimi
^lid pcoci bcnonfircnod
fieoiehi*to
;"1nop
plas
u6"]erorrmnatiu
ad
a
DiufoA
Oiurribru
jpmlj
AxTlcTOfiiim
pi
jf
rtanfi
Wiff
u
miido
h>c
irnarla
3n
oufpafttnoitripuiomerm*DiumaVturcpa
ItrjM OOncJf.trpnuturpo epicoaroafianc.
nty
..."
Until now bibliographers had noted only vaguely that there was great deal
of resetting in the volumes without stating quantity or proportion. With the
help of microfilms of the two copies in the British Library, which each
was able to establish the full extent of the
represents one of the issues,
resetting: in volume
only 30 pages are found in double typesetting, out of
total of 198 leaves, with consecutive sections at beginning and end, whereas in
I
issues,
143
volume II 128 leaves (or 256 pages) out of 210 are found in double typesetting,
in one consecutive sequence from what appears an arbitrary spot in the eighth
quire on.85 One may speculate that if the prelims, including the Tabula (all in
double typesetting) were printed last, and if part of the second volume was
produced concurrently with the first, then the decision to set large sections of
the second volume twice must have been taken towards the completion of the
first volume, and must have had something to do with speeding up the
completion of the work. The date for completion announced in one version of
the advertisement is Michaelmas (29 September), and it is remarkable that
the colophon date of 7 September is three weeks earlier. There is detailed
work to be done on the analysis of the typecase in order to put the relative
chronology of the production of the book beyond speculation, but
nonetheless, other features of this book have already revealed themselves. Of
the 83 copies of the Mainz Jerome at present known to be extant, there is an
almost equal division over the two issues, 40 of the one, 43 of the other. Each
has a similar proportion of survivors printed on vellum, 8 of the one, 6 of the
other. All the paper copies of both issues, in so far as examined at this point,
are printed on a homogeneous supply of paper, so there is no scope for theory
based on distinct paper stocks, as in the Catholicon.
I have collated a number of copies against the microfilms made at the British
Library, notably the astonishing concentration in Paris, where the Bibliotheque Nationale and the Bibliotheque de l'Arsenal possess no fewer than eight
between them. What I wanted to know was whether the distribution of the
sheets with double typesetting was random, or whether it was consistent over
the copies. My finding over a total of 19 copies, a sample that I certainly
intend to extend was that the distribution was almost entirely consistent. In
other words, the segregation of the two issues was made in the printing house
from the very beginning of the double typesetting, and was rigorously
maintained.86 The textual relationship of the two issues is extremely close.
One must be a page-for-page reprint of the other, but of such close
"In volume I the resetting comprises the
[t]
pages).
copies),
and
(2
copy on
loan to the British Library (first Doheny sale, Christie's New York, 22 October 1987, lot 9); Trinity
(2
(4
(4
photographic materials.
144
approximation
differences
that one has often to look long and hard to find the small
that betray that the page really was set again. Usually, when
1467.n
The late correction phase in the printing house that is witnessed by the
consistently present throughout parts of the edition,
gives an insight into procedures of unusual immediacy between the printing
house and the corrector. I must admit that I find it difficult to resist the idea of
Adrianus Brielis at work in the printing house, insisting on corrections that
were incorporated in the second setting of the text. We may even imagine an
almost fanatical determination on the part of the old man to have these
corrections inserted in manuscript in all copies of the first issue. (Of course, I
have seen so far only a quarter of the surviving copies, and a much smaller
portion than what was actually produced, but enough to establish a strong
suggestion.) His perfectionism went even beyond this, for we find that in the
sections with single typesetting there are identical manuscript corrections,
albeit in various hands, entered in copies ofboth issues. They tell a tale of care
manuscript annotations,
cr rvtvMiup
lacmis tact* mi
quid vC teqwd
cet
Cibu nbi tcnegras no teuin
b?
ns:n6amoifra."Jerumabzc
f2uUa afa? renpto .que me
co:pe. Tales frulra pbilol
tires.bafcraf jenonem rbeo
IC. 150.
fp
improuida picuh
maioj^bijrrw
et petit: ncc mfi pfl factti er fcelcer
*vuiaquato aiuo? sHcenfusttai
.
^f rottc brrcefii
raru ext
From N3 recto
b
11.
b
1.
IC. 150.
ft
II
recto
49, copy
IC. 150.
:jc pent:
^v
afcenfuarraro
IC. 150.
Figure
Manuscript corrections in the printing house: details of corrections incorporated in
resetting of text in the two copies of the Mainz Jerome at the British Library.
6:
g.
firmiflime &>chisexpictnsern6|
ftaro prrcrradusbicrmtatu afcei
qui tnul to crrauius no brfcend at .
From
I.
14.
C.l I.e.
44, copy
b
11.
49, copy
f.
1.
tefcenfus
ws
recto
C.ll.e.14.
ft
fB
II
e. From
From L6 verso
d.
b
1.
b.
h.
a. From L6 verso
b
11.
j#
b
11.
nu II w rcqtucfnr
fpi
n cm: fup
tJ:
en hn
vmufqj fexu
C.ll.e.13.
:rcnonnosnc
no f poflunt
ccatti:et ah c iuuare ad fa;
juac fbztaftc
expediflet fi m bacvita
g-occarluHentret quatt i
ill
et
C.l I.e.
13.
f.
From h2 recto
nets argumcnsajparenontet.qu
vobis tvftmiomauon
jeptanao
1.
g.
mvicrtes nonvidcnsetaudictcf
From h2 recto
47, copy C.
lie. 13.
(ut.
IC. 150.
ir pi cVa temoftiada
crpichitrmofrrada fill
e. From h2 recto
28, copy
IC.
150.
mvitrtrs nonvklens
From h2 recto
47, copy
Figure
Manuscript corrections in the printing house: corrections found in sections
identical typesetting in both copies of the Mainz/erome at the British Library.
7:
IC. 150.
bl.
h.
a. From p2 verso
guntur autvidui:autccrtep
1.
mai*ia:
b
I.
virgo. virgo
IC. 150.
with
et
audi
and discipline in the printing house, and above all they indicate that no effort
was spared to produce a text which satisfied the editor.
I have made an attempt to assess how these corrections relate to the textual
tradition, in the first place thinking of the four printed editions that preceded
the Mainz edition in such a short space of time. Is it possible that Adrianus,
seeing his life's work taking shape in print, was surprised by the appearance of
the other versions, and hastily cleared his text of glaring errors? Too vulgar a
view, this: my few probes into the textual relation of the five printed editions
show no indication at all that the corrections in the Mainz copies are derived
from its predecessors in print. I have made only a slight attempt so far to test
the extensive manuscript tradition of these texts. Nevertheless, I venture a
guess, based on the nature of the variants, that they are not the result of a
belated collation once the text was in print. I think it is more likely that we see
here the editor aiming, according to the ambitions of his time, to present his
text "as new." In his function of editor he assumed the place of his author, St.
Jerome, whose figure, which is to be seen so often in portrait in the
illuminated initials of contemporary Jerome texts, presides over the book. In
this solemn transition he has the freedom to change a word, to improve
fluency, to introduce some minor amendments. They are only minor changes,
and they must have caught his eye as the text, with which he had been familiar
for so many years, appeared in a fresh guise in its printed form. As a method of
textual emendation it is contrary to every modern principle of textual
criticism. Every modern author, however, is familiar with this phenomenon
of seeing the text through fresh eyes, proof after proof, and if he gets the
chance, through various editions; so is every editor who has to present the
work of authors with this type of temperament.
In none of the examples of texts in the hands of early printers, editors, and
correctors that I have given here the Durandus, the Boniface, the Catholicon and the Jerome are we particularly interested in the development of
the text itself as manifested in its production in print. I have not even
concealed entirely my own struggle in not getting side-tracked by the delights
of detecting evidence for printing house practice. But even if my first
approach to each of these books was strictly bibliographical, I think that the
real interest lies in the relation of the editor, and the printing house, to the
text that was produced, and in the exact moment of change and transition.
They are uniquely creative moments, even if expressed merely in the deletion
of a full stop or the insertion of one tiny word. Their attention to detail, even
fussiness, in particular as evidenced by the manuscript corrections in the
Jerome, is no less than can be associated with the production in print of such
tirelessly inventive authors as Byron and Pound. This leads to the reflection
at a safe distance from modern discussion that when the modern editor is
required to present a text in a singular form, the modern reader may lose a
great deal by being deprived of that moment of transition. The methods of
148
correctors,
to produce
149
Prolusions ;
or,
Poetry
in three Parts ;
containing,
I.
II.
III.
The notbrtnune
duBion ;
Edward
Mayde ;
Mafter
Sackvile'r
and, Ovcrbury'j
Wife :
the third, a Play, thought to he writ
Shakespeare
Ncfcc
Inby
teiffum,
London:
Printed
far J.
and R.
Tonson
1760.
Title page from Edward Capell's Prolusions; or, Select Pieces ofantient Poetry (London: J. and R.
Tonson, 1760). This copy was W. W. Greg's and is inscribed "Walter W. Greg/Trin: Coll. Camb./
1911". The signature on the title page may be Capell's. HRHRC Collections.
By Hans
Walter Gabler
In all fields of knowledge and scholarship, the twentieth century has been a
period of progressive specialization, yet as it draws to its close, there are signs
of a turning of the tides. As my title suggests, I discern a fresh desire for
contact between Textual Studies and Criticism distinct disciplines today,
though the joint foundation of literary studies and philology as they were
understood up until two or three generations ago. If we go back far enough it
doesn't have to be to Alexandria, eighteenth-century Shakespeare studies will
suffice literary study was textual study, and philology, in the vernacular, the
securing (or divination, before, say, Johnson's Dictionary) of readings in
Shakespeare's plays and those of his contemporaries. Towards the end of the
century, the beginnings of a specialized methodology in textual criticism
became evident yet even if the systematic application by Edward Capell of
what might be called proto-bibliography laid the first seeds of a disjunction,
these took over a century to germinate.1 Biblical, classical, and medieval
textual scholarship apart although we are aware of their influence textual
studies in the modern languages came into their own around the turn of the
present century. This was one of several moves in a sub-dividing of the field of
literary studies, parallel to the generating of historical, or biographical, or
formalist, or evaluative
generic literary scholarship, or history-of-ideas,
criticism. Hierarchies were implied or postulated in the demarcation of the
division. Textual studies, specifically, were relegated into subservience. The
disjunction from criticism came to be increasingly marked as a consequence.
His
'Among works edited by Edward Capell (1713-1781) are Mr. William Shakespeare.
Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies, 10 vols. (London: Dryden Leach for J. and R. Tonson in the
Strand, 1768) and Prolusions; or, Select Pieces ofantient Poetry, compitd with great Care from
their Several Originals, and offer d to the Publick as Specimens of the Integrity that Should be
in three Parts (London: Printed for J. and R. Tonson,
found in the Editions of worthy Authors,
1760). See also Notes and Various Readings to Shakespeare; Part the first (London: Printed for
Edw. and Cha. Dilly, 1775), and the later three-volume subscription set of Capell's commentary
which superceded this edition.
(1779-1783)
151
D'Arco S. Avalle, Principt di critica testuale (Padova: Antenore, 1978 [1972]); and C. Segri,
"L'analisi del testo letterario," Awiamento all'analisi del testo letterario (Torino: Einaudi, 1985).
3See several of Greg's position papers in W.W. Greg, Collected Papers, ed. J.C. Maxwell
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966).
152
It
was to the recovery of book texts, after all, that editing was
plays.
Now, the book text goes very well with the poetic drama, the most
Shakespeare in this respect that of the dramatic poet. Textual
criticism indeed responded to New Criticism. In the reconsideration of the
Lear question that Michael Warren initiated in 1976, and which has been such
authentic
'R.B. McKerrow,
Studies
"A Suggestion
Regarding Shakespeare's
11 (1935): 459-465.
153
an exciting
new chapter
in Shakespearean
'Michael J. Warren, "Quarto and Folio King Lear and the Interpretation of Albany and Edgar,"
Pattern of Excelling Nature, ed. David Bevington and Jay L. Halio (Newark, DE:
University of Delaware Press, 1978), pp. 95-107.
Shakespeare,
This is program matically the stance of Steven Urkowitz, Shakespeare's Revision of 'King Lear"
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980). The question is fully developed in The Division of
the Kingdoms, ed. Gary Taylor and Michael Warren (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983).
154
THE
PRELUDE,
(iROWTH OF
MINI);
POETS
\V imOBKOUmCAt
POKM;
WILLIAM WORDSWORTH
RODERICK
HUDSON.
HENRY JAMES,
Jb.
LONDON:
EDWARD
MOXON, DOVER
STREET.
BOSTON:
JAMES
1B76.
Title pages from William Wordsworth's The Prelude (London: Edward Moxon, 1850), and Henry
James's Roderick Hudson (Boston: James R. Osgood and Company, 1876). HRHRC Collections.
distinct works, or versions, under the identical title before textual criticism
and editing are brought to operate upon them separately. The same is of
course true for the two texts of King Lear. In the new Oxford edition of
Shakespeare's Complete Works, as I need not remind you, they have been
separately edited.7 The two Lear plays in the Oxford Complete Works are the
clearest indication of the reorientation in Shakespearean editing that the
Oxford Shakespeare has attempted to put into practice. Not only is it the first
edition ever to offer Shakespeare's plays in chronological order, but it is the
first scholarly edition to review the canon thoroughly with regard to the minor
poetry. It is also the first edition that turns a consciousness of versions of the
dramatic texts into a program of editing the plays, where possible, not in the
most original "Urtext" approximation recoverable, but in the shape they
attained in the theatre.
This raises critical questions before and after the event. First, obviously, all
facts and opinions about the Shakespearean texts and their transmission
need
to be weighed for their critical impact. The editors of the Complete Oxford
Shakespeare could never have attempted what they have undertaken without
full reliance on the Shakespearean bibliographical textual criticism of the
twentieth century. What is remarkable is that they have put the results and
insights of critical bibliographical research to new uses. Helped by bibliogra
phy to distinguish traces of versions, they have not only proceeded editorially
to separate them, but also to accept for the constitution of their edition
elements of text that previous editors rather rejected. Conversely, they have
eliminated again and again, and printed as addenda, lines and passages which
were critically deemed never to have had a version co-existence with their
textual surroundings, but which, by virtue of being a Shakespearean text, had
been left in place by a book-text-oriented editorial approach. After the editing
of the Oxford Complete Works of Shakespeare, questions must arise perhaps
about the authenticity, certainly about the degree of authority, of the theatrerelated versions of Shakespeare's plays editorially prepared, and no doubt also
about how to square edited texts derived from theatrical manuscripts, in
preference over authorial papers, with the postulate of fulfilling authorial
intention in scholarly editing. These implications of the Oxford Shakespeare
have hardly begun to be focused on or explored in their consequences for
Shakespearean textual studies or criticism or, since Shakespearean textual
scholarship has traditionally provided the paradigm for textual studies in the
entire range of the literature, explored in their potential for a shifting of
emphasis, a reorientation, a rethinking in Anglo-American textual scholarship
as a whole.
the editions's
dominant
mode.
It
of textual criticism to
which versional editing is central and there to consider the contexts of theory,
criticism, and editorial practice to which it relates.
In contrasting archetype, or "Urtext'-oriented, and version-oriented tex
tual criticism, I have already pointed to the opposed directional perspective in
the two approaches to the textual materials. In the one mode, textual criticism
endeavors to ascend from the extant textual states to the recovery of a lost,
purer text behind them. In the other, it follows the compositional and
transmissional descent. This means also that the modes focus on different
orders of variance. To recover the purer text requires stripping the transmis
sion of its corruption. Yet where versions are concerned, transmissional
corruption is really only a side issue. The variance that matters here is not
transmissional but revisional (and, hence, generally authorial). Versions may
be distinguished by the revisions which transform them, one into another.
Or perhaps I had better say with a view, for example, to theatre versions
of Shakespeare's plays the variance that distinguishes versions is not
corruptive but text-constitutive. Corruptive variance is what textual criticism
has long traditions of handling. The underlying authentic text is thought of as
stable, merely impaired in isolated spots or areas of textual error, and
restorable to full integrity by spot correction and emendation. While corrup
tions impair an original context, and contextual considerations therefore may
help to define and isolate the textual error, their elimination does not alter but
precisely restores the original context. Revisions, by contrast, are always
alterations of text and modifications of context. Therefore, they can never be
conceived of as confined in isolation to the spots or areas of text they manifestly
interesting,
therefore,
alter.
required to deal adequately with textual corruption, since the business here is
to identify and eliminate textual error. If we observe how this is done
excising and replacing the corrupt element in the edition base text we
cannot fail to notice that this is a pattern of procedure which, in editing as we
157
medieval
scribe
contaminating
is
is
is
a
(It
variance.
sources.
In
so doing,
he obliterates
the
constitutive determinants
sideration."
as
structuralist
is
is
is
it
it
it
is
is
derives
scholarship
158
tion, or for the first-edition version (as in the case of Goethe's Die Leiden des
jungen Werther, regardless of the fact that the author much revised it for
inclusion in his Collected Works; it was the first-edition version that all
Europe read and responded to with a wave of suicides), or for a postpublication authorial revision, or, if a play, a theatre version. Free in his
options, the editor is not constrained by an all-ruling respect for the author's
final intentions. He is not the author's executor, but the historian of the text.
This consideration leads to the second and third consequences, which concern
the treatment of the text and the design of the apparatus. With regard to the
text, the version edited must be left inviolate, emended only in instances of
indubitable textual error. The design of the apparatus must carry the weight of
the history of the text, which in editorial terms now means the body of the
revisional variance, and must be able to relate in a meaningful way (meaning
ful, that is, under the critical premise of the context relationship of variants)
those variances of the edited text.
In editing, the inherited apparatus forms were designed to deal with
corruptive variance. They record the isolable incidence of corruption in
itemized cumulative lists. A reference and a lemma identify the spot or area of
elimination of a textual error. The juxtaposition in the lemmatized entry of
established and rejected readings allows the editorial decisions to be judged
individually. Inherent in the body of the rejected readings is a history of the
text, which, however, under the auspices of the "pure-text" edition, is strictly
a history of its corruption in transmission. In variorum editions, interestingly,
this type of listing becomes a record of the editorial, or the variant printing
history. The emendatorial mode of treating revisional variance in copytext
editing, finally, has also led to adapting the lemmatized list as the apparatus
format for recording authorial text superseded in revision.
It goes without saying that the lemmatized list was inherited also by
German editors. Yet with the awareness of the fundamental difference in
nature between transmissional and revisional variance, and the growing
sensitivity to the contextual relationship of revisions, a record of variants in
by lemmata came to be recognized as unsuited to
rendering revisional variance readable in context. The demand arose instead
fragmentized
isolation
for integrative apparatus forms to fulfill this purpose. The most expansive form
would be the parallel presentation of complete, and individually integral
versions feasible perhaps (and occasionally practiced) for brief lyrics, but
unwieldy (and economically prohibitive) for texts of greater length. The task of
analysis was given over largely to the reader and user of such an edition of
parallel texts, and the synthesizing potential of editing was forgone entirely.
At this juncture, an all-important factor in the versional orientation of
textual studies comes into play which I have hitherto held back from
mentioning. To think in terms of revisional variance and the "version" means
to focus on the genetics of a text, as well as on the genetic relationship of the
159
nevertheless
processes amenable
"Friedrich
Grosse Stuttgarter
Ausgabe, 1943), ff
161
as one
texts.")12
Some interest perhaps may attach to a few aspects of the debate by which
the new understanding was developed.
came under some pressure from the ubiquity, proliferation, and multi-level
occurrence of revisional variance, especially in compositional documents,
reading
text, deemed
a concession
mainly
to the "general
"A stunning example is Paul Eluard's renaming of a love poem as "Liberte. "See Louis Hay,
"Le texte n'existe pas," Poitique 62 (1985): 157-58, and "Does Text Exist?," Studies in
Bibliography 41 (1988): 75-76.
This is the thesis of Gunter Martens, "Textdynamik und Edition," in Texte und Varianten, pp.
165-201.
162
searching,
"),
rials became
lsGunter Martens, "Texte ohne Varianten? Uberlegungen zur Bedeutung der Frankfurter
Holderlin-Ausgabe in der gegenwartigen Situation der Editionsphilologie," Zeitschriji fiir
Deutsche Philologie 101 (1982), Sonderheft "Probleme neugermanistischer Edition," pp. 43-64.
17Gabler, "Synchrony and Diachrony."
Shakespeare.
"For Joyce, see Hans Walter Cabler, "Joyce's Text in Progress," Texte. Revue de Critique et de
Theorie Litteraire
(1988): 227-247.
"Stanley Wells and Gary Taylor, eds. with John Jowett and William Montgomery, William
Textual Companion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987).
163
However, the draft changes and rewritings spring from the nature
of the poem itself, its intellectual and emotional core. A poetic address to Karl
Kraus, satirist and cultural and social critic in post- World- War- 1 Vienna whom
Brecht admired and considered his literary and intellectual ally, it reflects in
its rewritings Brecht's inner turmoil at what he perceived, or thought to
perceive, as Kraus's compromises at the rise to power of German fascism. Yet
in the writing, and as it appears, through the writing, Brecht's attitude and
understanding altered and became transformed in textual processes posses
encoding.
pretative discourse entirely to the critics. This is true even where Hans Zeller
Seidel, "Intentionswandel
Xtje*t)teton*an&*tl)e+cree&+of
SKers+^lougtmtan
netolp
imprintcD
jftwaBPSMkte
Title page from William Langland's The Vision and the Creed of Piers Ploughman (London:
William Pickering, 1842). HRHRC Collections.
By Anne
of
Middleton
about the
'
if
studies,
it
is
it)
it
it
is
'I
April 1988.
167
the very meaning, not merely the practicality, of the editorial desideratum of recovering the
authorial "original," the nominal goal of "classical" textual criticism. While like classical or biblical
"scriptures," Langlands work asks of the textual critic the reconstitution of a lost "original" and
his Athlone editors therefore, and rightly, expressly situate their enterprise within the "classical"
traditions of textual criticism its forms of survival, in this respect like those of more recent works
of "modem scripture," also attest to distinct layers or iterations of authorial production and
intentionality, interlaced almost impenetrably with several kinds and states of scribal practice and
habit. The enterprise of disentangling these is not only practically but theoretically of the most
fundamental difficulty, and the kind of difficulty it involves allies the labors of textual criticism on
this poem with some aspects of those that must be applied to some notable instances of "modern
scriptures." I discuss below some of the ways in which the Athlone editors have conceived, and
represented in the format of their volumes, this interestingly mixed task.
168
work massively both of, and even about, this interesting and provisional
category of "modern scripture" made, I would argue, in the era when the
cultural formation of this category first presented itself to vernacular writers as
a theoretical
Ralph Hanna has argued that annotation is "a socially sanctioned form of
aggression, directed at both the community which sanctions annotation and
the text which inspires it." While this sweeping proposition goes beyond my
own limited experience at the craft, I do find that many annotators' ministra
tions upon vernacular medieval texts resemble some of the more creative
forms of guerrilla warfare. Both activities are, in Michel de Certeau's phrase,
"arts of living in another's space," doing cultural work using somebody else's
materials and time, and constitute, in Certeau's terms, tactical rather than
strategic approaches to meaning.4 In each of its minute iterations, annotation
theorizes the entire text to which it is nominally in service, while in no single
place is it forced out from underground to acknowledge this dimension of its
enterprise, which it presents on each occasion as merely an ordinary practical
activity, a modest attestation that a working public utility is indeed working as
it should for the general benefit. Keyed to a specific word, phrase or line of the
text, the intellectual reach of the note is similarly confined: it can at best
adduce what it considers similar instances, but it cannot well develop the
notion of similarity or relevance that has guided its citation. In its usual form of
display, the systematic annotation of a text is ultimately still bound to the
framework of the discrete single note (as in Notes and Queries) as a scholarly
genre, a genre that has long been for Piers Plowman studies the site of what I
have called a kind of "guerrilla theorizing" of the text to which it is appended.
If an annotated version of Piers Plowman were to be no more than a collection
of such scattered raids upon local meaning, then its corrosive effects would
largely vitiate the nominal objectives of annotation. Such a project would also,
for reasons that will shortly become clearer, largely undo the work of the
Athlone editors. In systematically annotating the whole work (an entity not as
easy to identify as it sounds), we will have to consider whether the "guerrilla
theorizing" latent in the note as a scholarly genre can be deployed so as to
overcome the liabilities inherent in this form of dispersed elucidation. Can
annotation or commentary speak about and theorize its own systematic
objectives, or must these remain marginal considerations if the notes are to do
their work? And what is their work?
The very grammar of annotation is strangely evasive: it is phrasal, not
clausal, eschewing open predication, and largely confined to the appositive
3See Lee Patterson, "Historicism and Its Discontents," in Negotiating the Past: The Historical
Understanding of Medieval Literature (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987), p. 74.
'Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life, trans. Steven F. Rendall (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1984).
169
(or counter-narrative) in
discursive form, tending to occlude the horizontal coherence of the text for the
vertical plenitude of superimposed
endlessly,
but it does not explain itself or, finally, its text. In this way,
while,
'It thereby enacts the essential form of philological production, according to Philip August
Boeckh's famous definition of philology as "the knowledge of the known." Cited in Stephen C.
Nichols, "Introduction: Philology in a Manuscript Culture," in Speculum 65 (1990): 2; the essay
and mediating
representations,
to ours.
It
he treats as elements of a
And it is the absence of such a center
that precludes or undercuts any impulse he might have had to work
up his discourse in the form of a narrative. . . . The presence of those
blank years in the annalist's account permits us to perceive . . . the
extent to which narrative strains for the effect of having filled in all the
gaps, of having put an image of continuity, coherency, and meaning
in place of the fantasies of emptiness, need, and frustrated desire that
inhabit our nightmares about the destructive power of time.6
the annalist
from
ranking
the events
'Hayden White, "The Value of Narrativity in the Representation of Reality," in The Content of
the Form (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987), p. 11.
171
At least
is imagined
order.
as the counterpart
Suppose,
however,
notes are
imagined, and embodied in textual display, in some other way. The medieval
annalist's principle of fullness, White notes, is real, but decentered from the
the principle of possible gratification that the annalist counter
poises to the gaps in his record of worldly events is "the fullness of time itself,
saeculum:
the list [of anni Domini, 'years of the Lord']: There is no scarcity of the years:
they descend regularly from their origin, the year of the Incarnation, and roll
relentlessly on to their potential end, the Last Judgment." But the annalist's
account, which appears in a textual form much like that of early estate
accounts, is merely a list; it "calls up a world in which need is everywhere
present, in which scarcity is the rule of existence, and in which all of the
possible agencies of satisfaction are lacking or absent or exist under imminent
threat of death."
This description of the life-world of the medieval writer of monastic annals,
as realized in the very disposition of his textual space, is also one of the most
accurate descriptions I have ever found of the premises that seem to me to
underwrite the making of Piers Plowman, and it suggests that a means of
rendering that space visible and legible might be considered one reasonable
task for an annotator. That is, if we suppose that Piers Plowman is not, and
never was, conceived, by its maker or its primary users, as itself that ideally
complete artifact that defines the literary text as conceived by new criticism,
or a state narrative of the formation of nature or culture, but rather as a text
that evokes the possibility of these as lying outside itself, then to annotate it as
if that were the condition to which it aspired would be, in a quite strict sense,
to misrepresent it. If the work is, rather, constituted as "modern scripture" by
its second thoughts, gaps, and in a word that has considerable precision and
richness as applied to this poem re-visions, and if its wit and depth, and the
narrative allegory that generates it and sustains its horizontal momentum,
arise in the effort to fill with meaning the gaps in that which the author did not
make, "the fullness of time," then the work of the annotator takes on a
different relation to the work of the author than that imagined by classical
scholarship. In putting a set of notes to a work that the late Morton Bloomfield
described as reading like "a commentary
upon an unknown text," the
annotator might well have second thoughts, not merely about the "classiciz
ing" model of textual presentation, but about the "restoration" model for the
annotator 's as well as the editor's enterprise.
In Piers Plowman scholarship the free-standing note as miniature article has
been in recent decades one of two favored modes of scholarly publication, the
other being the long interpretive essay; yet scarcely ever does the land of
illumination offered in the one scholarly form penetrate the other. In
172
173
well past the stopping point of the earlier version: A's three dream-visions
become eight in B, for example. It is not clear when the C text took its
surviving form, but it is a revision of B, sometimes massive, sometimes
minute, leaving the final two cantos or passus, as they are called, unchanged
from the B state, though throughout the rest of the poem these passus are
redivided, and large passages are transplanted to other parts of the work. A
loose and largely unexamined consensus assigns the C version a date of about
1387, and claims that Langland did not live to see its release in this form.
There can be no question, then, of an edition of "the" poem. Although by all
the evidence it is in intentio a poem, its production apparently co-extensive
with its author's writing life, it survives as three blurry snapshots of something
that was in some sort of motion over about twenty years. The best that can be
done, it seems, is to restore the three snapshots to the best condition that the
material and evidence allow, if we are to have any idea of what that work in
motion was, let alone the "intente" that sustained this motion, and the
circumstances in which these snapshots came to be made. Yet implicit in this
act of restoration is the premise that it is not these snapshots, but what they
record, that "is" the work of art, and one object or level of our interest. It is at
once "a work," and irresolvable into "a text," much like Wordsworth's Prelude.
This distinction between text and work, invoked by Michel Foucault as a
useful one for literary history, is also a necessary and problematic one for the
annotator of this poem.8 It renders doubtful, both practically and theoreti
cally, the possibility of sustaining a distinction, familiar in student editions,
between "textual" and "explanatory" notes. But it also suggests a desideratum,
however elusive, for our enterprise: can this work (or any medieval literary
work, though for several reasons I shall consider, Piers is an exemplary
nature
by Michel Foucault, "What is an Author?," in The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow
nature of their edition, and the possibility of our "tagging their verses."
curiously
at odds
one hand the plethora of brackets and the thick band of variants at the
foot of the page continually remind the reader that he is dealing with
an edited text: the false security of unmarred print, such as we find in
any edition of Chaucer, for instance, is here denied us. On the other
hand, the data on which the text is based is resolutely hidden away in
an introduction that is arranged not as a scientific exposition but as an
elegantly written narrative [emphasis mine]. The editors' purpose, I
think, is not to protect themselves from scrutiny but to accommodate
two finally irreconcilable imperatives: to offer, on the one hand, a text
that is marked as a reconstruction
"Lee Patterson, "The Logic of Textual Criticism and the Way of Genius: The Kane- Donaldson
Piers Plowman in Historical Perspective," in his Negotiating the Past: The Historical Understand
ing of Medieval Literature (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987), p. 108. This essay
appeared earlier in a slightly different form in Textual Criticism and Literary Interpretation, ed.
Jerome McCann (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985).
175
&itut laiotematMotoe
tljefecon&etvmf tatpjfmeb
aaiibctbece.
(*;
CCumpjuUtefitoab tmpifmenbum
foium.
Title page from William Langland's The Vision of Pierce Plowman (London: Robert Crowley,
1550). HRHRC Pforzheimer Collection.
Hill and
argument to make about the ground and background of Langland's work and
methods, and those of medieval writers generally, that in fact corresponds
loosely to the view of the poem that I earlier suggested is virtually produced
"
by, rather than simply registered in, annotation as "ordinary science. That is,
177
I do
I venture
textual evidence theorized as this has been simply did not lend itself to any of
the models of annotation
of medieval literary
texts and they left it to others to propose new ones. I have reluctantly come
to the conclusion that they may have been right to decline to represent that
theory disjunctively in the form of discrete rationales for specific readings
and to present it instead, and only, in that "elegantly written narrative" that is
nowhere cross-referenced at the point of occurrence of any emendation.
is
it
is
is
is
it
If,
Astonishingly, every user of this text must do that by hand, for herself, if she
expects to use this edition. As annotators, would we give page-numbers to the
is discussed in the 220-page
place where each reading or emendation
narrative?
We
would
save
those
in pursuit of "current critical
introductory
interests" a lot of work. Should we? Or should we endorse the Athlone editors'
apparent view that only that reader who is forced to come to terms with their
entire theory of the production of the work in its succession of surviving forms
would be qualified to judge their emendations in any particular instance?
as Patterson argues,
may be not merely the form of presentation of
selftheir knowledge, but the Athlone editors' theory of this text that
divided, that its singular strength rather than weakness. 10In their editorial
narrative, as well as by their choice of mode of textual presentation, the
Athlone editors manage to keep in mind two distinct and equally necessary
foci of scholarly and critical inquiry: the three states of the text, and also that
elusive thing, the work, to which each state somewhat arbitrarily witnesses.
While the latter
never an object of their direct and synoptic attention,
nevertheless always visible, not as an ideal or immanent form, but as specific
and minutely-realized practical process. These two conceptual levels, the text
and the work, exist in
kind of dialogic contraposition,
the one entity
stabilizing and giving specificity to the other. The versions are not sealed off
from each other ontologically in their treatment. For example, Kane and
version, the reviser was using
Donaldson argue that in making the
scribal
that was better than any surviving
readings
copy of
manuscript; hence
text. On the other hand, they do
occasionally figure in the establishing of the
is
produced by and guides these judgments. find less conflict in practice in the editors' operations
than Patterson seems to here, and certainly do not find, as Charlotte Brewer has recently
that these vitiate the integrity of the editorial project throughout its course though
her account of differences between the edition of and that of
in the treatment of the three
suggested,
is
Baker notes that many variorum editions do not find it necessary to produce
their own text to hang the notes on, but key them to an edition already
considered standard and authoritative (he cites the Milton Variorum). But
"Many critics of the B Version have accused
grateful to him for allowing me to see a typescript of this paper. A recent critique of some Athlone
readings
demonstration.
aA Facsimile and Transcription of the Hengwrt Manuscript with Variants from Ellesmere, ed.
Paul G. Ruggiers, intro. Donald Baker, in Variorum Edition of the Works of Geoffrey Chaucer,
vol. 1 (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1979), p. xvii. See also Ralph I lamia's review
"
essay, "The Chaucer Variorum, Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography 8 (1984): 184-97.
systematic
179
variorum commentary,
in turn, is not attentive primarily to authorial
production but to reception history; here I cite Baker again on the common
aim of the several Variorum editors: "In short, we hope to provide both what
Chaucer wrote and what, for centuries, it was assumed that he wrote" (xviii).
At this, one can almost hear the Athlone editors muttering darkly in concert: a
man cannot serve two masters. The primal act that renders the Athlone
edition possible is the premise that scribal and authorial usus are distinguish
able. In practice, it is the record of reception rather than production that has a
firm upper hand in the Variorum Chaucer; this primacy of a record of
reception over one of production is probably inevitable in the variorum model
of commentary,
perhaps especially of a vernacular author. A corollary
assumption of any variorum project is that its subject is an already canonical
author, one continuously read, and "part of the language" of literary cultiva
tion. Yet in the case of Langland it is the authorial reception and transforma
tion of the language, and not primarily the disrupted and uneven after-life of
the work its effects upon the language and thought of his successors that it
is the goal of the Athlone edition to render visible, as its central premise is that
the difference between the two is determinable, and qualitatively absolute.
At this point one begins to see the full dimensions of what the Athlone
editors have wrought. The format of their edition has presented Langland's
work, not primarily as a canonical text, requiring an annotation regimen
emphasizing reception-history, but as a classical text, a text of antiquity that
is to say a text in a (socially) dead language which demands of the annotator a
focus on authorial production and on reconstructing those circumstances that
impinged upon the realization of an authorial project. To this mode of textual
presentation, the evidence of reception is by definition contamination. Yet
while the logic of the editorial project has been monumentally rationalized, its
sociologic remains unfinished business. Those aspects of the work that, as I
have suggested, make it at least proleptic of the vernacular "modem
scriptures" in the form of its realization and survival have not as yet found their
full rationale. The problematic middle ground almost necessarily constituted
by any work surviving in multiple versions, in which the authors labors as
maker also situate the author himself within its reception history as reviser,
may be the most promising territory for the annotator 's mediations.
The Athlone editors have made some projects possible, but they have also
in effect foreclosed others: they have, I think, made it not merely awkward but
quite impossible either to append variorum annotation or to build a student
edition onto the Athlone texts. For most of the projects that might assimilate
this work to "the institutions of literary consumption" as they are now
constituted, they have not cleared the ground; they have sown it with salt. But
because this monumental experiment in textual study seems so immediately
unpromising to developers, who in literary studies as in real life like to see
immediate returns on their investments, the editors have also paradoxically
180
LA
N G
LAND
LANGLEY)
by the Aithor
about a. d. 1377
EDITED
BY THE
D.C.L.,
I.I..H.,
I'H.D.
OXFORD
AT THE CLARENDON
PRESS
Title page from William Langland's The Vision of William Concerning Piers the Plowman, ed.
Rev. Walter W. Skeat (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1928). This copy is from the library of Harry
Huntt Ransom. HRHRC Collections.
assured that those who do return to the site with the right resolve and right
tools and a willingness to bring to it the most fundamental
thinking that
which
a state from
u
something important can be learned.
narratives
that in
effect theorize the production of the work may be the single most userfriendly feature of the Athlone Piers Plowman. They explain the fertility of the
premises they have marked out as the ground of the most interesting
questions we might ask of these texts about the nature and process of
Langland's work. And yet again paradoxically, they do this by making visible
and imaginable the ways in which Langland's work resembled in its material
and intellectual exigencies that of other producers of texts a perspective
quite other than the one of which their detractors accuse them. To move,
then, from the immediately serviceable and mediatory to the more visionary
possibilities of our quixotic enterprise to ask what annotation might do to
make deeply legible what the Athlone editors have made knowable and
imaginable we need to return in conclusion to some models of modern
textual representation.
Strangely, the first is the indefatigable W.W. Skeat, who identified and
edited all three texts, publishing his editions of each almost exacdy five
hundred years after each of Langland's attained its transmitted state. Until
Athlone, his has been the citation text of this poem in all its versions. What
makes it a model in this connection is not only its admirably practical notes
manifestly generated in the course of arriving at readings, though his textual
inquiry was not by any means as deep as that of the Athlone editors but the
second form of the issue of his editions of the three texts, namely in one
volume in parallel texts (with his apparatus, notes, and glossary in the second
volume). This is a very serviceable and long-standard way to represent a work
surviving in more than one version, and one can still hardly get on without it.
Were the Athlone edition to be reissued in this fashion, with the full panoply
of lections similarly displayed in forms that made possible visual access to
comparison across versions, it could only further enable what the editors have
severally made possible.
On a far grander and more fully reasoned scale, this is the kind of access to
"Jerome McGann, in "The Monks and the Giants: Textual and Bibliographical Studies and the
"
Interpretation of Literary Works, Textual Criticism and Literary Interpretation, p. 194, calls the
Athlone edition "a model of an experimental critical edition."
182
as model,
but to
the obvious: that both are deep and complex forms of representa
"D.F. McKenzie,
"To the extent that Charlotte Brewer has successfully demonstrated that such cross-version
comparison was not consistently part of Kane's method in establishing the Athlone A-Text, while
they are part of the editors' method in B, her findings suggest that such retroactive comparison
should be included in users' assessment of A readings in future.
"Times Literary Supplement 16-22 (December 1988): 1401-02.
183
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Larry Carver,
international
in the fifteenth
sixteenth
centuries.
Donald F. McKenzie
Criticism
at
Randall McLeod,
184
Associate
Professor
of English
at
the University of
185
Department and
Cataloging Dept.
Ernestine Potter
Collection
Laura Gutierrez- Witt
Chemistry
(Mallet) Library
Christine Johnston
Collection Heads
Classics Library
Bonny Keyes
Engineering (McKinney)
Library
Susan Ardis
Fleming Collection
Don Carleton
Music Librarian
David Hunter
Physics, Mathematics &
Astronomy (Kuehne) Library
Karen Croneis
an)
Olive Forbes
Undergraduate Library
Suzanne Chaney (Acting)
Recent Publications
of
The
Authors' Libraries
James Joyce's Trieste Library, a catalogue of materials at the HRHRC by
Michael Patrick Gillespie, with the assistance of Erik Bradford Stocker.
$30.00 in cloth.
at the
HRHRC.
$18.95.
HRHRC.
$16.95.
Perspectives
WCW
if Others,
1990:
Finnegans Wake.
Narrative Gifts: "Cyclops" and the Economy of
Excess.
Goodwin, Annual James Joyce Checklist: 1989.
Mark Osteon,
Will
annually in June.
Subscriptions:
* Individuals
$35/year
$35/year
* $25 special price for JSA 1990 to individuals who subscribe before
October 30, 1990.
Institutions
tfThe
Library
CMJROWICLE
OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
inaiana university
NOV
The
Library
.***#**
********************
ROWIC1LE
Library
OF THE UNIVERSITY
0 9 1990
OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
ISSN
0024-2241
The
Library Chronicle
is published by
The
Library Chronicle
Editorial Board
Thomas F. Staley
Carlton Lake
Sally Leach
Cathy Henderson
Harold Billings
William B. Todd
The Library Chronicle is issued quarterly at a subscription rate of $30.00 for four issues. The
purpose of the Chronicle is to present information on available materials in the special collections
at The University of Texas at Austin, to publish scholarly articles based on these materials, and to
record matters of interest concerning new acquisitions, exhibitions, and other events related to
the University's special collections. Writers should query first before submitting articles for
publication. All correspondence should be addressed to the Editors, P.O. Box 7219, Austin,
Texas 78713.
Contents
Collections
at Texas
17
Robert D. King
49
Bute:
65
Philip C. Kolin
75
94
Judi Hoffman
Special Effects
of Cinematic
97
119
122
Stuart
Gilbert, James Joyce, and Nora Joyce, in Torquay during the summer of 1929. HRHRC
Collections.
COLLECTIONS
AT TEXAS
Collection
of Stuart Gilbert's Paris diary will appear in the HRHRC's Imprint Series, also
to be issued in conjunction with UT Press.
Other recent HRHRC acquisitions include an unpublished manuscript
fragment by Djuna Barnes describing James Joyce and the world of Parisian
expatriates during the early 1920s; a Joyce letter in Italian dated 5.24.39; 38
autograph letters (1934-1938) by the French novelist Louis-Ferdinand
Celine; 36 pieces of correspondence dated between 1932 and 1981 from the
Australian-born novelist Christina Stead; 37 letters from Lillian Hellman to
John Melby written between 1953 and 1978; 185 pieces of correspondence
from the French novelist Rachilde (1860-1953), host to a celebrated literary
salon, wife of Alfred Vallette (founder of the Paris literary review, Mercure de
France), and author of a book on Alfred Jarry, one of the more prominent
members of Rachilde's salon; and 35 letters and cables from American novelist
Nathanael West written in early 1930 at the time of the publication of what is
The HRHRC is also the
considered his finest work, Miss Lonelyhearts.
Martin, including the
Steve
of
the
of
actor-writer-producer
papers
recipient
treatments, original first drafts, and final drafts of Martin films, among them
his highly acclaimed Roxanne, produced in 1987, for which he won the Best
Actor Award from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the Best
Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium Award from the Writers
Guild of America.
Another addition to the Center's manuscript holdings is a corrected
typescript version of Amos Tutuola's Pauper, Brawler and Slanderer (1987),
as well as materials relating to publication of this Nigerian novelist's early
work from 1948, The Wild Hunter in the Bush of the Ghosts. These
acquisitions join a holograph leaf already at the HRHRC from Tutuola's bestknown work, The Palm-Wine Drinkard (1952). Bernth Lindfors of the
University's Department of English, who has edited many of Tutuola's later
works, has also given to the HRHRC materials related to the publication of his
Critical Perspectives on Amos Tutuola, along with his interviews of other
contemporary African writers.
"Bearer of Burdens," a Conte crayola drawing by Edgar Dorsey Taylor, dated 11-44. Barker Texas
History Center.
Above: "The Barber Shop," dated 3-23-44; below: "Family Group," dated 1-1-45. Cont6 crayola
drawings by Edgar Dorsey Taylor. Barker Texas History Center.
jHWJts
Above: "Old Snowball Man #3," dated 8-20-44; below: "Grain Warehouse," dated 2-8-44. Conte
crayola drawings by Edgar Dorsey Taylor. Barker Texas History Center.
Lomax Room and the gallery of the Barker Center beginning June 8 and was
scheduled to remain on view through September 8. Although best known for
his woodcuts and paintings, Taylor was a versatile artist who also designed
jewelry, ceramic ware, tapestries, mosaics, and stained glass. For the Pacific
House at the 1939 Golden Gate International Exposition, Taylor created an
illuminated map in 6,740 pieces of colored glass showing
electronically
modern trade routes of the Pacific area. The Barker Center exhibit, prepared
by Lynn Bell, John Slate, John Wheat, and Lotte Stavenhagen, includes
examples of the various media in which Taylor worked, as well as some of the
crayons and pastels he used and some of his wood-carving tools. Taylor's art is
present in more than 100 private and public collections in the United States,
including the Library of Congress and the National Collection of Fine Arts in
Washington, D.C.
"Blighted Area,' a Cont crayola drawing by Edgar Dorsey Taylor, dated 2-29-44. Barker Texas
History Center.
12
Austin is melancholy, but animated. His streets are filled with motion and the
people in them are working, resting, playing, carrying on with the business of
life." This collection of drawings provides not only an historical record from
the mid- 1940s but offers the moving images of a former University professor
who registered them firsthand on his afternoon sketching trips to the eastern
section of the state's capital city.
archive
of manuscripts
13
papers,
publications,
recordings,
and manuscripts,
this
from associa
throughout
the hemisphere.
Over time, the law, which derived in large part from Islam, also became an
intrinsic part of the various literatures of the Middle East. Religious, legal,
and literary texts from the HRHRC's collections will provide examples of the
ways in which these three areas of thought and expression have entertwined in
the history of the Middle East.
Items from five different periods will trace the basic forces at work in this
interrelationship of religion, law, and literature. Included will be manuscripts
of Middle Eastern origins as well as writings by Western travelers. Examples
of the Koran, featuring manuscript copies done in different styles of callig
raphy and illumination, will be displayed along with commentaries on this
holy book. Original Persian texts of twelfth-century poet Omar Khayyam's
Rubaiyat will be exhibited beside nineteenth-century printed editions of
Edward Fitzgerald's English translation of the poem. Texts from seventeenth-,
eighteenth-, and nineteenth-century Morocco will focus on Islamic jurispru
dence. Rare volumes of and by the eighteenth-century
English linguist Sir
William Jones will provide examples of the work of this early translator of
Arabic and Persian materials. (For more on the career of this fascinating
figure, see the article in this issue of The Library Chronicle, entitled "West
From India: The Odyssey of Sir William Jones," by Robert D. King.) Finally,
from the twentieth century, a subscriber's edition of T.E. Lawrence's The
Seven Pillars of Wisdom, published privately by Lawrence in 1926, will be
accompanied by Eric Kennington's illustrations and William Roberts's photo
graphs. (For more on "Lawrence of Arabia," see the first article in this issue of
the Chronicle, by David H. Patrick, which is devoted to the HRHRC's T.E.
Lawrence Collection. In addition, an earlier issue of the Chronicle, number
38/39 from 1987, contains an article on Lawrence's
15
T. E. Lawrence, in full Arab regalia, poses amid the ruins of Akaba. This picture was taken in 1921
when Lawrence was serving in the Colonial office and coincides with his trip to the Middle East in
conjunction with the Cairo Conference. HRHRC Photography Collection.
By David H.
Patrick
Introduction
One of this century's more fascinating figures is T. E. Lawrence, "Lawrence of
"
Arabia. Although the events that first won him renown are now seventy years
in the past, and his death more than fifty, interest in Lawrence has not
diminished with time. On the contrary, the past decade has witnessed the
appearance of a dozen scholarly books as well as scores of articles and
essays on aspects of his life and personality. In addition the recent re-release
of the 1962 epic film Lawrence of Arabia has revived popular interest in his
exploits in the Arab Revolt.
Lawrence's multifaceted life is one factor in his continuing appeal. At
various times he pursued careers as an archeologist, intelligence agent,
guerrilla leader, military strategist, diplomat, writer, and common airman.
But an even greater attraction focuses on his enigmatic personality.
Lawrence's many biographers differ greatly in their assessment of the man;
the reader finds portraits that vary from self-effacing Great Captain and
literary genius to self-promoting charlatan, from an "enabler" who evoked the
best from those around him to troubled misogynist who was a homosexual,
sadist, and/or "guilt-scarred flagellant,"1 as well as a stalwart promoter of Arab
nationalism, or British imperialism, or Zionism. In truth, at one time or
another, Lawrence was most of these things. Furthermore, scholars agree
that,
despite
manifold
attempts,
biographers
have never
his
untangled
'Jeremy Wilson, "Sense and Nonsense in the Biography of T. E. Lawrence," in T.E. Lawrence
Studies 1, no. 1 (1976): 2-10.
The author
is grateful
at Austin, for his guidance and encouragement in the preparation of this article. Appreciation
must
also be expressed
to the
and
Hart for
as he was those
periods that violate the normal use of such signs in quotations. It was felt an accurate reproduction
was more appropriate than editing his style.
5Lowell Thomas, With Lawrence in Arabia (London: Hutchinson, 1924); Robert Graves,
Lawrence and the Arabs (London: Cape, 1927); and Basil Liddell Hart, "T.E. Lawrence": In
Arabia and After (London: Cape, 1934).
18
attended
advisor,
wrote articles championing the Arab cause, and received a fellowship from All
Souls College, Oxford,
Colonial Office, where
to
he assisted
as to his activities,
a practice
1935,
T. E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom: A Triumph (privately printed, 1926; public edition,
New York: Doubleday, 1935); Revolt in the Desert (New York: Doran, 1927).
T.E. Lawrence, The Mint (expurgated edition, London: Cape, 1955; full edition, London:
Cape, 1973).
19
accident,
was
Searching
contemporaries
questioned the verity of the Legend, but the
of
Lawrence's
friends
and biographers, and his immense popular
prestige
acclaim, postponed serious scrutiny for decades. Not until 1955, when
Richard Aldington's acerbic work challenged the Legend, were its premises
subjected to scholarly debate." Aldington asserted that, since Lawrence was
the principal source for previous biographers, the Legend depended unduly
on his own narrative accounts of his life and exploits, many of which were
conflicting, even contradictory. The author concluded that Lawrence was a
liar and the Legend a total fraud, perpetrated and perpetuated by a circle of
influential British imperialists who used his fame to further their own political
Several
agenda.
"Phillip Knightley and Colin Simpson, The Secret Lives of Lawrence of Arabia (London:
Nelson, 1969).
20
Richard Aldington, Lawrence's most critical biographer, is pictured here in a snapshot taken by
Montague Cooper. HRHRC Photography Collection.
biographers
mentary evidence more closely than had previously been the case.
revelation
latter's emotional
challenge
Mack's professional
personality,
"Stanley Weintraub, Private Shaw and Public Shaw (New York: Braziller, 1963); Stanley and
Rodelle Weintraub, Lawrence of Arabia: The Literary Impulse (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State
University Press, 1975): Jeffrey Meyers, The Wounded Spirit: A Study of "Seven Pillars of
Wisdom" (London: Martin Brian and O'Keefe, 1973); and Stephen Tabachnik, T.E. Lawrence
Twayne, 1978).
H. Montgomery Hyde, Solitary in the Ranks: Lawrence of Arabia as Airman and Private
Soldier (London: Constable. 1977).
(Boston:
15
Lawrences letters, still principal sources for his biographers.18 Despite these
efforts, as previously noted, no definitive interpretive biography of Lawrence
has yet emerged.
The HRHRC
and Bowden's
by later
of Lawrence.
"For recent Lawrence works utilizing the HRHRC Lawrence Collection, see Ellen S. Dunlap,
Cathy Henderson, and Sally Leach, The Finest Adventure: Scholars at Work (Austin: The
Humanities Research Center, 1983).
2IH. Montgomery Hyde, p. 274. Notice that the author's figure is lower than the actual number
of items (856) contained in the Collection as noted immediately below.
23
Above: T. E. Lawrence (extreme right) and Prince Feisal (third from right) pose outside of Feisal's
house in Aqaba with members of Feisal's cabinet. Below: T. E. Lawrence took this photograph of a
group of Arab troops on the outskirts of Aqaba as the city fell in July 1917. HRHRC Photography
Collection.
Lawrence's
Letters
Lawrence was
around
prolific correspondent
10,000 letters.
HRHRC
a large
aSee Sarah Maline, "The Arabian Sketches of T. E. Lawrence," The Library Chronicle of The
University of Texas at Austin, n. s. 38/39(1987): 17-39.
"It is interesting to note that Christopher Matheson and Stephen Tabachnik's Images of
Lawrence (London: Cape, 1988) suggests that the Collection's photographs of the Hejaz Railway
were related to Lawrence's prewar intelligence activities. Yet both the Collection's purchasing
file and the checklist previously mentioned specifically state that these pictures were given to
Lawrence after the war by "Meissner Pasha,'' the German engineer and general officer who
supervised the railroad's construction.
"See this article's "Conclusions" for the author's comments on secondary
source acquisitions.
25
and 8 typed pages of excerpts from other letters to Charlotte Francis (Mrs.
Bernard) Shaw, whom biographers regard as his most confidential and
important correspondent.
Celibacy is un-natural,
. . . and such friendship may easily turn into sexperversion. If I have missed all these things, as I hope and you seem
to suggest well then, I'm barrenly lucky. It has not been easy: and it
affection within
correspondence.
letter
to
[My
makes contact
why
then
that
it
it)
write no
of
of
J5There are four large collected editions of Lawrence letters: David Garnett, ed. The Letters
T.E. Lawrence (London: Cape, 1938); M.R. Lawrence, ed.. The Home Letters
T.E. Lawrence
(Oxford: Blackwell, 1954); Robert Graves and Basil Liddell Hart, eds., T.E. Lawrence to His
Biographers (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1963); and Malcolm Brown, ed., T.E. Lawrence:
The Selected Letters (New York: WW. Norton, 1989). In addition there are also several smaller
editions of letters to specific recipients: Letters from T.E. Shaw to Bruce Rogers (New Fairfield,
CT: Press of William Edwin Rudge, 1933); More Letters from T.E. Shaw to Bruce Rogers (New
Fairfield, CT. 1936); Letters from T.E. Shaw to Viscount Carlow (London: Corvinus Press,
1936); and Shaw-Ede. T.E.
Press,
26
1942).
absorption,
....
is not a home.
used to bathe in
if it
it,
14 Barton Street, as
have not
if
It
is
...
his dreams.
is
....
it
is
whom
dissatisfaction.
of
rMalcolm Brown, pp. vii and xx. Brown notes three letters that support the argument that
Lawrence was well aware his letters were historically and monetarily valuable and that many were
being held for publication: Lawrence to Flight Sergeant H.A. Ford, 18 April 1929; to K.W.
Marshall,
September 1932; and to Charlotte Shaw, 19 January 1930.
27
H.C.
are
examples:
....
a bad old
knave,
overpaid by us for our brief use of his name in 1916. Since that year
his activities had been against our interests,
. . .
was
...
And
M.[ustafa] K.femal] is one of our great-missed opportunities.
Feisal had been in touch with him, secretly, in the last stages of the
. . .
it)
These two letters point out one of the difficulties Lawrence's writings present
to his biographer:
proclivity for exaggeration or distortion, seen in his letters
and books alike, which undermines their reliability as historical sources. There
are few reasons to believe Lawrence was as content with Ibn Saud's success in
the Hejaz in 1924-25 as he claims here, nor as prophetic concerning
Mustafa
it
is
HRHRC
Collection.
....
it
is
28
Lawrence was not the only British officer in the Arab Revolt to don Arab regalia. This photograph,
taken by Lawrence in February 1917, shows Captain Stewart F. Newcombe, a longtime friend
the recipient of more than thirty letters held by the HRHRC, in conversation with
Mohammed ibn Shafia, an Arab chieftain. HRHRC Photography Collection.
and
One copy
what your father is like. Your Mother is not to have a copy. She knows
more than that already.
And
Life,
as
top gear.
...
....
RAF
1928,
life:
...
to deny categorically
that
I have
2The first of these letters to Stewart L. Newcombe is previously published in Garnett, p. 494;
the second is found in Brown, pp. 326-27.
30
RAF
assignment
1933:
have said
above. "I will not go on at Batten, doing routine work. I would like to
do more boats," or, best of all, to do a long flying-boat voyage and
write
a log
of it.30
evident in his
"literary" correspondence. A large number of these letters were written to
fellow rankers or their families; for examples see his letters to Private H.G.
Hayter (9 items), W.E. Jeffrey (7), Arthur Russell (10), and Russell's mother
they not only show
representative;
(2). Those to Jeffrey are especially
Lawrence in this often neglected light, but also demonstrate that he kept up
with many former Tank Corps and RAF comrades. The final letter to Jeffrey,
an unpublished item dated 20 July 1934, possesses not only the chatty style
Lawrence employed in such letters, but serves to introduce yet another of
Lawrence's many facets: a willingness to aid, within his limited means, many
who asked for his assistance. Although he answers Jeffrey's plea for help in
finding a job outside the service, he admits he has little influence in that
in contrast
to the
self-absorbed,
contestable
elements
so
regard:
Harnett,
p. 421.
"The last paragraph refers to Sassoon 's flying-boat trip to Asia which inspired The Third Route,
a journal of that adventure which was published in 1929 by W. Heinemann.
31
Marshall Hugh Trenchard's private secretary, dated 29 July 1927 and 27 June
1929. The second,
unpublished Marson letter combines this aspect of
Lawrence with his "literary" style and tone:
It
it,
I'm sorry your life has not of late flowed as a navigable river should.
Tiresome things circumstances: and money the worst of them. Not
and desire something
having it is the devil; and when you have
particular, then you find that the beastly stuff lets you down.
suddenly becomes perfectly useless.
is
it
.
.
.
is
It
is
Here an advance copy of the last notes upon RAF 200 [designation
of the new boat type Lawrence helped create]. see that in all have
written almost
book upon the boat and her engines.
has been
interesting and difficult, and therefore
am very grateful to you for
giving me the chance of doing it. This the third good job have had
in the R. A. F.
feel particularly pleased about the whole affair,
because
has meant our getting so good
boat so quickly.
Another unpublished letter, dated 20 January 1932, further supports
Lawrence's mechanical competence as well as the influence he had on the
boat program:
32
...
we
[Boat] 202 has now done 15 hours with the Hyland gears.
have passed the day trying to invent some means of protecting the
from too sudden engagement
Wing Commander
Watkins "bumped" the reverse eight times, stalling the engine one
time in two . . . [although he] admitted outright that he had not
mastered their operation perfectly.
It is clear to me that the
instructional boat, at least, must have some spring preventors to save
the reverses from becoming scrap iron in a month. After training
there will be no need for it. His First Sergeant bumped once, his first
try, and after that did 68 changes, beautifully, and said that there was
no difficulty whatever in it.
reverse
...
Yet another example of this theme Lawrence's influence on the RAF boat
program despite his lack of rank is seen in a letter to Norrington dated 29
May 1931:
I have made up
the cruiser. It makes rather dismal reading. That bit of wadding in the
pipes has cost Mr. Scott-Paine (contractor) about 150, I think. The
engines are now running very well, but fail to reach their 3000 rev.
peak by at least 250 revs. Two sets of smaller propellers are being got
ready against Sunday, when 200 (series) take the water again in full
service trim. There should be at least a day's full trial of her with these
new props. Then she should be ready for taking away.
Regardless of their views on his achievements, current biographers agree
that Lawrence often misled or baldly lied to others, although they differ as to
his motives for doing so. This aspect of Lawrence will be amplified later in the
discussion
The
Vertical File
The Collection's vertical file, although not listed in the Center's main
catalogue, contains a potpourri of articles from a diverse group of periodicals
published between 1919 and 1968.31 Previous researchers have generally
"Articles in the file come from such periodicals as The Times (London), The Sunday Express
(London), The New York Times Magazine, The New York Herald Tribune, Time, Newsweek, The
Star (London), The Evening Standard (London), John O'London's Weekly, The Outline, T.E.
Lawrence Studies.
their contents; little or nothing from the file has made its way into
overlooked
the major works on Lawrence, despite a variety of materials that are often
significant. Further, many of these publications have been discontinued, and
access to them in such concentrated
has been made to catalog or index these materials, most of which were
acquired as adjuncts to manuscript collections. Instead they are stored in clasp
envelopes
to date of acquisition
according
in this file.
enigmatic personality.
Lawrence's
It is not astonishing that [Arab] patience has broken down after two
years. The Government we have set up is English in fashion, and is
...
...
It
as
well
...
...
...
oil!
1931:
That is one reason why I refused decorations and other honors offered
me.
By refusing them I was able to speak my mind. After a long
struggle with Cabinet Ministers and others, I got the government,
thanks to Winston Churchill, to fulfill as many promises made to the
Arabs during the war as it was humanly possible and practicable to
fulfill.
...
This same article, meanwhile, offers one insight into another of the
Lawrence controversies: why did he surrender his post as an important
diplomatic officer to enter the RAF as an enlisted man? Lawrence provided
numerous, often conflicting explanations; one of these is recorded in the
Russell interview:
They say I entered the RAF because of bad health! Some say I was
"riddled with bullets"; others say I was verging on a nervous
breakdown following my experiences in the desert. You can't become
a member of the RAF if you are physically or mentally unfit. I joined
the RAF simply because I was sick and tired of politics and I wanted a
job at which I could work with my hands, as I used to when I
conducted excavations.
Lawrence's
written to Graves on
February
1935.
In contrast
to
stated
If you
I did
settlement
. . .
am. Almost
I could
be an artist,
but there is some sort of core in me that puts on the brake. If I knew
what it was I would tell you or become one of the real ones. Only I
can't.
When I made this discovery I changed direction, right, and went into
the RAF after straightening out that Eastern tangle with Winston, a
duty that fell to me, I having been partly the cause of the tangle.
These examples are typical of the accounts or quotes which permeate the file's
articles and reviews until the 1950s. Three exceptions are noted below,
beginning with an unattributed article from The Star, 11 May 1934, which
notes a darker side of Lawrence, whose name was legally changed to Shaw in
1923:
Aircraftsman
great unfathomable
lingers behind the cynical smile that is so often on his lips. Yet he
denies that he is unhappy: "there is no mystery about me. I am just an
ordinary man trying to earn his living in the way that he likes. The
mystery is fictitious."
a character
complex."
mad
I am,
and
if a madhouse would
not
Chew concludes that the extreme contrast between the youthful exuberance
evident in Lawrence's prewar letters and the glaring egoism of his later
correspondence indicates a chronic emotional disturbance, creating such a
focus on self that
we are not surprised to find that the tremendous events of these years
passed by him without evoking comment; the letters contain no
allusions to the growth of the totalitarian states.
Another item in this file is a booklet by Ronald Storrs derived from a revised
chapter of his memoirs.35 Storrs, an old if somewhat equivocal friend, relates
one example of Lawrence's reasons for becoming and remaining an enlis
tee:
asked him point blank why he was doing what he was doing and
not more. He answered that there was only one thing in the world
"Carnett, p. 352.
"Ronald Storrs, Lawrence of Arabia, Zionism, and Palestine (New York: Penguin Books, 1943).
The original book from which this work was taken and revised is Storrs, Orientations (London:
Nicolson and Watson, 1937).
37
Sherif Hussein, the leader of the Arab Revolt and future King of the Hejaz, posed for this
photographic portrait by Surgion Cock in 1916. HRHRC Photography Collection.
worth being, and that was a creative artist. . . . He said: "I know I
can write a good sentence, a good paragraph, even a good chapter,
but I have proved I cannot write a good book." I suggested that there
were many high offices which rendered service preferable to this
utter renunciation of any meaningful post. He responded that, since
he could not be what he would, he would be nothing: the minimum
existence, work without thought.36
Storrs concludes,
. .
of dismay
at the standard
."
Hussein, formerly King of the Hejaz, Sherif of Mecca, and leader of The
Arab Revolt, wrote an official reply to Lawrence's memoirs that appeared in
both
the Daily
statement,
of
1927.
The
version of the
Revolt in several respects: Hussein's motives for the Arab Revolt; a rebuttal of
Lawrence's assessment of his own role in the Revolt in comparison to the
contributions of Hussein's sons Ali, Feisal, Abdullah, and Zeid, all of whom
were criticized in varying degrees by Lawrence's account; the Sherif s
perspective
persecuting
inde
pendence.]
We do not deny that Great Britain came to our rescue by way of war
material, money, provisions, arms etc. supplied to Arabia from the
beginning to the end of the War. We are grateful for such assistance.
"Storrs, Lawrence, p. 18.
rIbid.,
p. 19.
39
But to be accurate, did such help amount to much more than say one
cost for each of the armies sent along the coasts of the
Dardanelles and the Baltic Sea? Yet from the very British standpoint,
week's
agree:
Bolt's screenplay
describe
of
Take a man born a bastard, and unable to speak of it. Let him be
clever, imaginative and vain, loving to play harsh jokes on others but
chillingly resentful of
courage,
physical
toughness
and above
. . .
all a capacity
for stoic
five-foot illegitimate
and history
....
. . .
arranged
a saga
around him.
....
Admiration
...
Lawrence's
is no substitute
one of
intimate contact with fellows (inferiors who could not challenge his
claim to being a superior being) along with the advantages of being
admired from
a distance.38
Despite its paucity of current materials, the vertical file offers assistance to
the biographer seeking a more thorough explanation of the Lawrence enigma.
Its contents include contemporary perceptions of him as well as valuable
secondary resources which reflect later, more considered appraisals.
Miscellaneous File
In 1962 the Center purchased the Liddell Hart Papers, which include
manuscripts from two of the renowned military historian's works: his
Lawrence biography, noted above, and a later study of guerrilla warfare, The
Strategy of the Indirect Approach as well as many pages of notes for both
books, including numerous interviews with Lawrence. The Liddell Hart
Papers also contain over 1,100 letters, either Hart's own or copies of those of
his associates, written during the Aldington controversy. These documents
comprise the bulk of the seven boxes of materials in the Miscellaneous File of
the T. E. Lawrence Collection.
'"Dennis Boak, "Malraux and T.E. Lawrence," in T.E. Lawrence Studies 1, no. 1 (1976): 15-16.
Basil Liddell Hart, The Strategy of the Indirect Approach (London: Constable, 1941).
41
I not infrequently
...
Liddell Hart argues, however, that Lawrence's faults were trivial compared to
his achievements, and thus were omitted from the book. He concludes that
[Lawrence] had a public attention beyond his deserts, especially
when [compared to] that accorded others who fell not far short of him
in stature, were perhaps better proportioned, and . . . exceeded
him in influence on the course of history. . . . Yet if the [publicity]
was out of all proportion, it is yet true that in combination
of
intellect,
and
reflection,
of action and
he was bigger than
personality
any man
I have
met.
A month after these notes were written Liddell Hart had occasion to discuss
Lawrence with (Lord) Hugh Trenchard, a friend and admirer of Lawrence
"Basil Liddell Hart,
T. E.
42
T. E. Lawrence (left) and B. H . Liddell Hart at the British Power Boat Co. yard in Hythe on 2 June
1934. The original photograph is in the Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives at King's
College London and is reproduced here by permission.
who
as
Air Marshall
in his enlistment
in the
RAF. The
...
I am
was so articulate
and self-analytical
that every
mood
has been
interpreted
44
. . .
article.
Denham's
[Your comments] have left me with the feeling that nothing less than
a Royal Commission could give us the "truth" about Lawrence and
that even then the minority report would occupy more space than the
I found Aldington's book apt to be tedious and repeti
majority.
tive, and had the impression that he had killed what might have been
a case by the virulence of its presentation. But at least it has had the
effect of producing a great deal more extremely interesting first-hand
information about Lawrence in letters to the newspapers.
...
Conclusion
This essay does not pretend to exhaust the potential of the HRHRC's T.E.
Lawrence Collection, rather it suggests some possibilities for further re
search. Considering that the Centers primary focus is on literary research,
the Collection contains a surprising quantity of biographical material. This
writer, however, has some suggestions which would assist the Lawrence
scholar:
1.
Speculation
serials holdings.
2.
is in
a more organized
the acquisition
permanent policy.
"
A popular television series suggests that space is man's "final frontier. This
is a debatable assertion, for at least one other unconquered sphere remains:
the human psyche. Lawrence's story epitomizes the limits of modern
psychology; his capacity for achievement in the face of serious emotional
disorders remains a puzzle to his biographers. Efforts to understand how he
did so continue to fascinate scholarly and general audiences alike.
Lawrence's psyche is not the lone source of interest, of course. The most
romantic episode of his life, the Desert Revolt, still presents historical
problems, even though the HRHRC Collection contains little from that
period of his life other than Lawrence's own accounts, which have proven
unreliable in many ways. But analysis of his literary achievements and
questions concerning his impact on Middle Eastern politics and his service life
remain topics of interest from precisely the span of time the Collection covers.
46
A few of the questions Lawrence biographers still debate include the motives
that inspired the various versions of Seven Pillars; an objective reappraisal of
his role in the formulation and implementation of British policy in the Middle
East; the extent to which he was responsible for the development of new types
of air-sea rescue boats; his reasons for enlisting and, as noted above, his true
feelings toward the RAF: was he happy as he wrote many of his friends,
including Trenchard or was his letter to Montagu Norman more revealing of
his true feelings? These are but a few of the issues research in the HRHRC
might help clarify.
It is safe to predict that fascination with the Lawrence phenomenon will not
end for the foreseeable future. Nor will research into Lawrence's life, his
works, and his personality.
In the quest for a definitive explanation of
T.E.Lawrence, the HRHRC is an indispensable resource, one whose full
potential
47
.,".,//,//:>/,<'/,/,,
/,:.,
/y.'/,\ j,/
-/;,
,/,./,/
I r/MM*w./iMvm*vA<
Engraved portrait of Sir William Jones from a drawing by Sir Joshua Reynolds, published on 20
April 1799 as the frontispiece to Volume 1 of The Works of Sir William Jones, in six volumes.
HRHRC Collections.
By
Robert D. King
We take for granted today the influence of India on the West. Martin Luther
King, Jr. drew on Gandhi for the moral underpinning of passive resistance,
absorbing concepts such as ahimsa "non-violence" and satyagraha
"campaign for truth." Yehudi Menuhin and Ravi Shankar composed and
played music together, and the Beatles took on a distinctly Indian sound in
their later songs. The "bliss" that Joseph Campbell would have us follow is the
Vedantic dnanda, or all desires fulfilled. Indian philosophy influenced Ralph
Waldo Emerson, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche, and the most famous poem of
the twentieth century closes on a Sanskrit benediction:
Datta. Dayadhvam.
Shantih
shantih
Damyata.
shantih
Prior to the nineteenth century, however, there was little knowledge of India
in Europe. The traffic of ideas from East to West owes more to the efforts of
one man than any other, Sir William Jones (1746-1794), whose collected works
were acquired in 1989 by the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center.
49
and by Goethe.
extraordinary
man! He understands
scholarly
only his major works but his usually inaccessible essays in Asiatick Re
searches, allows us to deepen our understanding of the works of the man who
played the pivotal role in bringing the language and literature of India and
2Ibid..p. 9.
'S.N. Mukherjee, Sir William Jones, 2nd edition (Bombay: Orient Longman, 1987), p. 129.
'Henry Roscoe, Lives of Eminent British Lawyers (London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown,
and Creen, 1830), p. 306.
'Edward Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. J. B. Bury, 4th edition (London:
Methuen&Co., Ltd.,
Sir William Jones, Janardan Prasad Singh, Sir William Jones: His Mind and
Art (New Delhi: S. Chand, 1982); Md. A.T. Mojumder, SirWilliamJones: The Romantics and the
Victorians (Dacca: University Press, 1976).
Cf. Mukherjee,
50
Persia
William Jones was born in 1746, the son of William Jones, F.R.S., a
of some distinction whose scientific talent carried him from a
in
Wales
to the friendship of Sir Isaac Newton and the vice-presidency
village
of the Royal Society. It was evident early that the younger William Jones had a
mathematician
and by the
time he left Harrow he knew Latin and Greek well and had taught himself
French, Italian, Spanish, Hebrew, and the rudiments of the Arabic writing
system. His teacher of Greek cheerfully admitted that his pupil knew more
Greek than he did." The headmaster said of him: "So active was the mind of
Jones, that if he were left, naked and friendless, on Salisbury Plain, he would,
nevertheless, find the road to fame and riches."'' It was also clear early on that
the boy was gifted with a literary sensibility well beyond the common
endowment. His ode, "Saul and David," composed when he was fourteen,
was thought so remarkable by Samuel Johnson's friend Mrs. Thrale that she
transcribed it in her diary. Bookish as Jones was, he was nevertheless popular
among his Harrovian classmates, his popularity owing in part no doubt to the
fact that the school announced a holiday each time Jones brought off a
particularly brilliant literary composition.
In 1764 Jones was admitted to University College, Oxford, where in
addition to the usual studies he deepened his knowledge of Arabic and applied
himself intensively to learning Persian and later Turkish. His reputation as an
Oriental scholar continued to grow, and he became a celebrity in Oxford and
even in London. Money, however, was a problem. His father had died when
Jones was three, and the cost of a university education was a burden for his
mother (though a burden she was more than content to bear: mother and son
were very close). In 1766 Jones took a position as tutor to Lord Althorp, the
son and heir of Earl Spencer, the Spencers being among the most distin
guished families of England. The first Earl Spencer was both very wealthy and
cultured, possessing one of the finest libraries in Europe at the time. 10His son,
George John, Viscount Althorp Jones's pupil later became First Lord of
For many years Jones scholarship was impeded by the unavailability of most of his
correspondence, the originals of which are widely dispersed in British and American holdings.
The letters were published in 1970 in two invaluable and carefully edited volumes. The Letters of
Sir William Jones, ed. Garland Cannon (London: Oxford University Press, 1970), hereafter
Letters.
"For the details of Jones's life I rely on Arberry, Asiatic Jones, and Garland Cannon, Oriental
Junes (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1964). Cannon's is the standard biographical work; its
comprehensive bibliography is complete through 1962.
"Roscoe, Lives, p. 308.
'"Many of the items in the Sir William Jones Collection of the Harry Ransom Humanities
Center are marked as having originally belonged to the Spencer/Althorp Library.
Research
51
the Admiralty; he was the man who placed Nelson at the head of the forces that
in the Battle of the Nile. At the present time the most
prominent member of the family is Lady Diana, Princess of Wales. In those
days diligence and constant application were not thought essential to a
defeated Napoleon
university education, and Jones was able to combine his general scholarship
and maturing passion for language study with the agreeable social life of the
British leisure class. That life proceeded according to season as if it were a slow
this connection
stood him in
his life.
Jones's facility in Persian, Arabic, Hebrew, and Turkish brought him to the
attention of the government, and in 1766, when he was only twenty, he was
offered an official position as interpreter of Eastern languages. Though he
52
kjUo^Jj'
If
Hufhjti Oi*.
14
&
fi
in
tu comst
Srntire mens poflet
Ouz lit voluptns vinculis,
tun
Vinciri lYeret quisque lapientum
rurens catenas fumeret.
oTj*
face
- j.v^-*
ultra polo'
ODE
'
^jfj
&
JjiJi
It
yij^ kila.
Jj
^f-
46
HRHRC Collections.
is
Sir William Jones"s handwritten annotations appear in this first edition of Divan (1771), the
on the left-hand page with Latin version on the right.
poetical works ofHafiz. The Persian text
mention
. . . ;
some detest
poetry
alien references:
Boy! let yon liquid ruby flow,
Jones Collection.
"Preface to A Grammar of the Persian Language, in Lord Teignmouth (John Shore), The
Works of Sir William Jones (London. John Stockdale, 1807), 5:165.
"William Jones, Poems, Consisting Chiefly of Translations From the Asiatick Languages. To
Which Are Added Two Essays (London: W. Bowyerand J. Nichols, 1777), p. 60.
54
Or:
The "wordiness" is conventional of the period, but the language and the
delicious and slightly erotic Eastern world it conjures up were new. The
unfamiliar syllables ("Rocnabad," "Samarcand") fell on Western ears like the
beats of a new kind of music. These poetic landscapes were unknown in the
West before Jones undertook his virgin labors. His translations and original
creations conveyed mysteries and misty visions of heights not reached in
Western poetry, and the European public loved it. His "A Persian Song of
Hafiz" (1771), from which these stanzas are taken, became a classic before
Jones was thirty.
In "A Hymn to Surya" (1786) Surya is the sun god Jones writes of himself
and his journey to the East:
He came; and, lisping, our celestial tongue,
Though not from Brahma sprung,
Draws orient knowledge from its fountains pure,
Through caves obstructed long, and paths too long obscure.'7
Now established as the leading "Orientalist" a scholar of the Eastern
languages in England, and as a man of rare literary sensibility, Jones was
elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1772 (when he was twenty-six), and in
1773 he became a member of Samuel Johnson's Club "four weeks before
Boswell was accorded that honor."18 No additional credentials would hence
forth be required to certify his wit and talent.
Jones had left the Spencer household amicably when his charge, Lord
Althorp, entered Harrow in 1769. He returned to Oxford uncertain what he
wanted to do. Languages were his love, poetry his passion, the East his source
of inspiration, but there was not much advancement in any of these, still less
money, and so he turned to the law. With his absorbent mind and his severely
disciplined study habits, reading for the Bar was no great chore, and he was
called in January 1774 (worried the while that his fortunes as a lawyer would
be adversely affected by his reputation as a poet19).
"Ibid.,
p. 59.
This figure of the seated Brahma is an illustration printed in Volume 1 of Asiatick Researches: Or.
Transactions of the Society, Instituted in Bengal, For Inquiring into the History and Antiquities,
the Arts, Sciences, and Literature, of Asia (Calcutta, 1788). HRHRC Collections.
on the Indians.
But the English could not always remain aloof. Who would adjudicate
disputes between Indian parties in the areas under English rule if not the
Company? If Anand's cattle trampled Bakha's mustard crop, Indian tradition
would have the two peasants take the dispute to the local representative of the
government, whatever that government might be Mughal, Hindu, English.
In British India it was the Company man who had to determine guilt and
assess damages. It takes but little imagination to see what a mare's nest that
would have been. There were, to begin with, two kinds of law in the country:
Hindu law and Muslim law. Knowing one was not an advantage in under
standing the other. The codes of Hindu law were in Sanskrit, the codes of
"Percival Spear, India (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1961), p. 162.
57
Muslim law in Persian and Arabic. The pleadings themselves would be in the
vernaculars such as Bengali, Tamil, and other languages of this many-tongued
country,
to rely on native interpreters, who were not always impartial in the dispute.
As
if this
widespread.
such as Governor-General
Warren
Hastings knew that they were in deep waters and must move very carefully:
"Himself
of Persian, he
labored constantly to convince the Directors [of the East India Company] that
the people of India were not savages, that they had laws of their own, that their
customs should be respected."21 Men of the disposition of William Jones were
drawn to Hastings' India as guardians, in Plato's sense of a class of men called
to principled and responsible stewardship over the many: "[A] corps of men
specially selected . . . , trained by cold baths, cricket, and the history of
Greece and Rome . . . , aloof, superior to bribery."22 Britain was fortunate.
No Englishman was ever better prepared by his education, his proclivities,
his qualities of personality, and his experience to become a "guardian" than
William Jones. He had a strong sense of responsibility to the subject races that
had come under England's dominion. Later, more cynical generations would
sneer at this as the "White Man's Burden" or "Orientalism as imperialism,"
but cynicism cannot void Jones's humanitarian motives in wanting to improve
a good
Orientalist with
a considerable
knowledge
a dynamo
creation of a society, rather along the lines of the Royal Society, "for Inquiring
into the History, Civil and Natural, the Antiquities, Arts, Sciences, and
Literature, of Asia. "a Governor-General Hastings was enthusiastic, and so the
Asiatick Society came into existence, with Jones unanimously elected its first
president. The publication of the Society, Asiatick Researches, soon over
flowed with the most diverse offerings. Nothing about India was too esoteric
to be of interest: "On the Astronomical Computations of the Hindus";
"Observations on the Seeks [Sikhs] and their College"; "An Account of the
Sculptures and Ruins at Mavalipuram"; "Of the Method of Distilling as
Practised by the Natives at Chatra in Ramgur"; "A Proof that the Hindoos had
the Binomial Theorem." Governor-General Hastings himself volunteered a
translation from the Persian of a treatise "On the Trial by Ordeal, among the
"Philip Woodruff, The Men Who Ruled India: The Founders (New York:
1954), p. 124.
"Ibid., p. 15.
"He made his
is a field that some consider Jones to have founded (of. Cannon, Oriental Jones, p. 157),
of his lengthy treatise "On the Gods of Greece, Italy, and India," Asiatick
on the strength
Researches: or. Transactions of the Society Instituted in Bengal, for Inquiry into the History and
Antiquities, the Arts, Sciences, and Literatures of Asia (Calcutta: Manuel Cantopher, 1788),
1:221-275. A copy of this pioneering effort is included in the HRHRC's Sir William Jones
Collection and contains, among much else of interest, the first representations of Hindu gods seen
in the West. This work deserves
more attention
aAlan Moorehead, The White Nile (New York: Harper & Row, 1971), p. 28.
*Cannon, Oriental Jones, p. 117.
^Jones's major works on Indian law were unfinished when he died. They are not a part of the Sir
William Jones Collection.
59
initially slow because all the teaching materials were themselves in Sanskrit.*
But facility came quickly to someone as versed in languages as Jones.
It was because of Sanskrit that Sir William Jones became one of the most
famous figures in the history of linguistics, for the language notions of the
eighteenth century were primitive by our standards. Modern languages such
as German, English, French, and Italian were commonly
regarded as
"corrupt," flawed, base; they were thought of as a falling away from the
perfection of Greek and Latin (though for some sublime purists even Latin
was nothing more than a kind of depraved Greek). It was altogether foreign to
the Zeitgeist to consider the possibility that Greek might be related to Latin or
Old English, not as "good" is to "bad" but as sister is to brother or cousin is to
niece; in other words,
descended from
related
That this is in fact the true situation had begun to dawn gradually on the
linguistically percipient, among them William Jones. In 1779 he had written
the Polish diplomat Prince Adam Czartoryski:
Many learned investigators of antiquity are fully persuaded,
very old and almost primaeval
that a
country
seats
of Western civilization,
so far from
holiness, this language a member of the same family tree as the sainted Greek
or Latin? Rubbish.
It
was not until Jones had acquired Sanskrit that his dazzling insight
matured. He announced in his "Third Anniversary Discourse" before the
Asiatick Society on 2 February 1786:
...
pp. 131-132. The Sir William Jones Collection contains one of Jones's notebooks
Eastern
Manuscript 48), with Sanskrit words spelled out in labored Devanagari script,
(HRHRC
suggesting how tedious the early going was. Unfortunately, the relatively small number of entries
in this notebook reduces
its usefulness
*****
~l
^^r*
CO
.a
11
. *
ft
-+
as
fl fttff*
*"/>.;*
<i,
o23#Ma
$^
*HF-^
'
H"*I*V*
it
r*oa * -'^-*
7 tuMrti>*A a_^_
q*4t
*=
fa-ntt?
m,
tsrtvl.A-
/}*,****.
v.
JroA-
ft
l-
o
!
C
I
1 1.
..
n
,
strong indeed,
...
same family.30
This is the most famous statement in all the history of linguistics.31 The
"common source" Jones referred to is now known as the Indo-European
language. Jones's audacious observation opened the way for one of the glories
of nineteenth-century intellectual history: Indo-European historical and
comparative linguistics, the envy of historians for its precision and exactness.
It is this statement the fundamental postulate of Indo-European grammar
for which Sir William Jones is honored today as the founding father of modern
linguistics.
His work in India was not done. He continued to translate from the Oriental
languages he loved so well, Sanskrit now first among them. His discovery and
translation of the Sanskrit drama Sakuntald by the fifth-century court poetplaywright Kalidasa, the "Shakespeare of India," arrived sensationally in
Europe, where it influenced the literary romantics.32 In Germany Goethe was
so taken with Sakuntald and India that he modeled the Vorspiel to Faust on
the prologue to the translation and was stimulated to write his Westostlicher
Diwan.
Jones loved all these things passionately: words, poetry, India, and Indian
minutiae. But the "guardian" in him never allowed him to so lose himself in his
passions as to forget his mission: the perfection of the administration ofjustice
in India. His next project was a translation of the major codification of Hindu
law regarding caste, the Manava-Dharma-Sdstra, the "Laws of Manu," to be
followed by the creation of a digest of all native law for the use of British
magistrates. This was a massive undertaking, costly and requiring thousands
of hours of man-labor under Jones's supervision, and it was only partially
completed, for Jones died unexpectedly in 1794 when deteriorating health
had forced him to close his affairs in India. He was forty-seven years old,
driven to an early death by overwork and a hostile climate.
What is left today of the legacy of Sir William Jones? Not as much as one
might expect, given the encomiums that accompanied him during his lifetime
"Asiatick Researches
1 (1788): 422-423.
"Jones was the first to make it in print, though the odd scholar here and there Fillippo
Sassetti (1585), Benjamin Schultze (1725), and Father Coeurdoux (1767) had intuited that
something of the sort might be true. Their conjectures did not attract wide attention, cf. Cannon,
Oriental Jones, p. 139.
"Of. Janardan Prasad Singh, Sir William Jones, ch. 4. A first edition of Sakuntala is in the Sir
William Jones Collection.
62
and followed him after death. His poetry was a large part of his being, and it
would sadden this modest man that he is remembered today for accomplish
ments other than his verse. On the other hand, it would no doubt appeal to his
sense of irony and confirm his positive view of Indian capabilities that his
poetry is studied today not in his home country but primarily in India,
Pakistan, and Bangladesh. His translations of poetry are interesting today
chiefly for their influence on later English poetic traditions. But they reflect
English sensibility in its first confrontation with Indian civilization and
culture, and scholars of the intellectual history of the British raj have
neglected the evidence of this aspect of Jones's work.
His last years were devoted to the improvement of justice in India and for
Indians the "guardian" streak went very deep in William Jones and I
rather imagine that he himself would like best to be remembered above all for
the groundwork he laid for jurisprudence in India. His judicial legacy was
decency, honesty, fair play, and fairness for the ruled no less than the rulers. It
is no mean legacy, even if there had been nothing else. But there was much
else, of course, and his contribution to the history of linguistics anchors his
reputation. Sir William Jones's place in the pantheon of linguistic heroes is
secure. Scholarly interest in Jones has attached itself primarily, understand
His translations and his poetry have
ably, to his linguistic accomplishments.
attention,
come a close second in scholarly
and his work on comparative
mythology has been largely overlooked.
The Sir William Jones Collection makes it possible to study the entirety of
the Jones oeuvre not just Jones in the big things like linguistics and
literature but Jones in the little things: Jones on chess, Jones on the zodiac,
Jones on the flora and fauna of India. And not just Jones, but the other
03
liKNJAM IN FRANKLIN
o
'Lim.>inr
ft/.tufotifi/imrt >a /a
iwi
This 1780 French engraving emblematically depicts Franklin as the honest man sought by
Diogenes with his lantern. The cap (top) symbolizes liberty, the vegetables (foreground left)
represent frugality, and the broken yoke (foreground right) allegorizes the emancipation of
America (the eagle). From Bernard Fay's Franklin, The Apostle of Modern Times (Boston: Little,
Brown, and Company, 1929). HRHRC Collections.
By
William J. Scheick
In the American colonies, 1764 to 1765 were bad years politically. In April
1764, the British Parliament passed the American Revenue Act (also known as
the Sugar Act), which in part imposed new or higher duties on imports. In the
same month Parliament passed the Currency Act, which prohibited the
colonies from printing legal tender paper money and which, as a result,
destabilized the colonial economy. These and other related laws irritated
Americans, but the Stamp Act in March 1765 became a rallying point. This tax
on all printed material was so odious to the agitated colonists that Parliament
reconsidered
its position.
In February
military coercion to enforce the Stamp Act might lead to open revolution. The
Stamp Act would be repealed, but ten years later a war would eventuate
anyway. And within a mere ten years after this war, legends would readily
mushroom on the facts now lying in the dust of time and in the mist of human
memory.
Legends are representations.
If they
reveal some large truths about the people who revere them. The American
citizens of the New Republic needed legends for a number of reasons,
including the desire for simple images whereby the inchoate condition of the
new nation might be psychologically mediated. Some of the myths contempo
rary Americans would inherit from this formative time present an image of the
founders and the citizenry of the New Republic as completely resolute in their
thinking and actions. The historical facts, of course, suggest otherwise. Late
eighteenth-century Americans, even egalitarian Thomas Jefferson, worried
over whether the new country would succeed in constructing political order
out of its seemingly dangerous flirtation with mobocracy. The post- War years
were, in short, a time of anxiety about the political, economic, and cultural
stability of the new nation.2
So the early national Americans craved legends, mythic patterns which
would translate the turmoil of their present condition into a prophecy of a
perfected future, a prophecy based on images (representations) of the past.
This process was no doubt facilitated by the nature of elite eighteenth-century
English society, with its emphasis on external display. Also, this process was
no doubt facilitated by the willingness of some of the leaders of the
Revolutionary period to inscribe themselves as representational icons. Benja
min Franklin, for example, self-consciously fashioned his own image in his
autobiography (1790), which is not only highly selective in what it omits and
what it admits, but also well-managed in its presentation of voice.3 Franklin
would become a legend, a representational role he at once earned and self
consciously contrived. As he subtly tells the readers of his autobiography, "I
took care not only to be in Reality Industrious & frugal, but to avoid all
Appearances of the Contrary. "4 Franklin's autobiography ends with a discus
sion of taxation on the eve of the Stamp Act. His role in the repeal of this act,
dramatized in the popular The Examination of Doctor Benjamin Franklin,
had apparently
first appeared.
2See, for example, Emory Elliott, Revolutionary Writers: Literature and Authority in the New
Republic, 1725-1810 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982).
'See, most recently, Mark R. Patterson, Authority, Autonomy, and Representation in
American Literature,
included
holdings from this period are items by Charles Brockden Brown and
Washington Irving. The Brown collection, much of it composed in the 1790s,
includes an untitled poem, a thirty-two page fragment from Don Manuel, a
twenty-two page journal, several letters, and architectural drawings. The
Irving collection features a manuscript copy of the Life of George Washington,
notes on a tour of Europe, a short work entitled "The Seven Sons of Lara," a
manuscript copy of A Tour of the Prairies, and various correspondence.5
Walker's letter to Thomas Paine concerns a plan to construct a single-arch,
segmented bridge designed by Paine, who to his subsequent financial loss
entered into a contract with the Walker brothers' ironworks near Sheffield."
Folded inside this letter is an undated manuscript in a careful hand different
from Thomas Walker's. Measuring 22.5 mm by 17.5 mm, this enclosure fits
neatly within the folds of the letter by Walker and gives every appearance of
having been originally included with it.
This sheet contains a dialogue, an exchange similar to a brief scene in a play.
Its two speakers are designated as Lord Bute (1713-1792) and cabinet, and Dr.
Franklin (1706-1790) and company. But in effect, as the subsequent abbrevia
tions for the speakers suggest, the encounter is between Franklin and Bute.
That the dialogue between them in this manuscript is not based on fact is
revealed by a comparison of it with the record presented (with some
representational
management, no doubt) in The Examination of Doctor
Benjamin Franklin, a work which circulated in England as well as in America.
In this imagined dialogue Bute and Franklin serve as legendary representa
tives offerees which post- War sympathizers with the colonial rebellion readily
in Manichean
terms. This manuscript dialogue, which is
mythologized
printed here in its entirety, is valuable as one more piece of evidence of this
post- War mentality.
The dialogue stresses the issue of taxation. Although its setting recalls
Franklin's appearance before Parliament on the subject of the Stamp Act, in
J. Seheick, "The Seven Sons of Lara: A Washington Irving Manuscript,"
for American Literary Study 2 (Autumn 1972): 208-17.
'Alfred O. Aldridge, in his Man of Reason: The Life of Thomas Paine (Philadelphia: Lippincott,
'See William
Resources
67
about compliance,
submission,
Things we want & will have." In fact, however, Lord Bute had resigned from
the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1763 and was not present during
Franklin's presentation to Parliament in 1766. The role of Lord Bute in this
dialogue is a refinement of a somewhat older legend. During his brief term of
office (1762-1763) Lord Bute had the misfortune of irritating many around
him. Contemporary assessments of his personality and character observe his
limitations, and particularly note his thin-skinned sensitivity." As a Scot, he
was heartily slandered by his British peers, and he resigned in anguish over
his poor public image. He had always been a close confidant of King George
III, however, and the King consulted with him, even in retirement, on
This expression, friends and brothers, is not characteristic of American political, propagandistic, and satiric writings during the Revolutionary period, when the metaphor of the parent and
the child was favored in describing the relationship between England and America.
"Lewis Namier, England in the Age of the American Revolution (London: Macmillan. 1962),
pp. 131-33.
68
MA GNA
r 4fcfo
/,
^w* RK DU i
^^r,^taS^
Franklin's Stamp Act cartoon represents Britain as dismembered by her foes, wounded by herself
and deserted by her friends. The commerce ships in the background are for sale.
From The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. 13 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969).
(the spear),
General Libraries.
important
matters.
to the 1780s
caricatures
indicate,
by both
English citizens and American colonists.9 This low estimation of Lord Bute,
which was doubtlessly not only reflected in but rigidified by these cartoon
representations, is evident in the manuscript dialogue, which is written from a
point of view sympathetic with the American cause. But this dialogue
completely distorts Franklin's personal admiration of Lord Bute.
Franklin ordered in 1763 and again in 1764 two prints of a portrait of Lord
Bute painted by William Wynne Byland, one of which hung in his home by 25
October 1765.' Furthermore, he specifically told his correspondents that
Lord Bute had nothing to do with the Stamp Act. On 6 April 1766, months
after his appearance before Parliament
Franklin told his wife: "Lord Bute . . . had nothing to do with the Stamp Act.
But it is the Fashion here to abuse that Nobleman as the Author of all
'See, for example, Mary Dorothy George, Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires, Vol. 5
(London: British Museum, 1935).
'The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Leonard W. Labaree (New Haven: Yale University
Press,
69
This etching from the Oxford Magazine ( 1 October 177 1) shows King George wearing clothing of
Scottish influence and using a telescope invertedly, as if he were a monkey (like the one in the
chair). Lord Bute (in the portrait on the wall) rests his right hand on a table with a crown, which
implies that he is the actual ruler of the country. From M, Dorothy George's England in
Transition (London: George Routledge and Sons, Ltd., 1931). General Libraries.
Mischief."" That casting aspersions on Lord Bute was even more the custom
in America is evident in a letter Franklin had received a year earlier (18 July
1765) from Joseph Galloway, who notes that the "worthy Nobleman Lord Bute
I2
is openly cursed whenever his Name is mentioned" in the colonies.
Franklin knew that Lord Bute had resigned from his office in 1763, and he
had urged the publication of a report about this resignation, with a vindication
of the man, that eventually appeared in the Pennsylvania Gazette (30 June
13
Three years later he was still defending Lord Bute. While Franklin
1763).
may have liked some of the better personal qualities of this well-educated,
widely-read man, loyalty may well have been equally a factor in his attitude
toward the Earl. Lord Bute had been instrumental in having Franklin's friend
John Bartram, the Pennsylvania naturalist and fellow American Philosophical
Society member, appointed as the King's botanist in 1765, and he had been
instrumental in securing an appointment for Franklin's son as governor of
New Jersey in 1763. Whatever the reason for Franklin's vindication of Lord
Bute, even to the point of hanging a portrait of the Earl in his home at the very
time that the inflamed colonists were blaming him for the Stamp Act,
Franklin did not see Bute as his antagonist and he did not debate him before
Parliament in 1766. Beflecting the legend-making
capacity of the early
national Americans and their sympathizers, the scene in the manuscript
dialogue elaborates upon a pre-War image of Lord Bute which, in Franklin's
opinion at least, had no basis in reality.
That reality eludes us today. Lord Bute had indeed resigned his public
office, but he had not relinquished a role for himself behind the scenes.
Evidence suggests that King George III consulted him on major matters
throughout 1765 and 1766, the key years of the implementation and the repeal
of the Stamp Act. And this evidence indicates that his political faction was a
considerable one14 and that from behind the scenes he prompted Parliament
to take a more imperious tone with the colonies. 15Was Lord Bute an unfairly
maligned victim, as Franklin saw him, or was he a prince of mischief, as the
colonists and their English sympathizers saw him, especially in the matter of
the Stamp Act?
Whatever the answer, in some factual sense, and despite Franklin's
personal attitude toward the Earl, the mythic configuration evident in the
manuscript dialogue indicates that in 1790 Lord Bute continued to represent
the villainous forces of evil opposed by the heroic forces of good (represented
"Papers, 13:234.
"Papers, 12:218.
"Papers, 10:293.
"James Lee McKelvey, George 111 and Lord Bute: The Leicester House Years (Durham, NC:
Duke University Press, 1973). p. 127.
"J. Steven Watson, The Reign of George 111. 1760-1815 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960), pp.
116, 120.
71
sympathizers;
historical
16
A Dialogue
Lord Bute and cabinet. We are to desire you, Gentlemen of America, to
submit patiently and lovingly to a few Taxes, which our Country will do itself
the Honor to lay upon yours, as times and occasions will offer.
Dr. Franklin & cfompany]. We must beg the favor of you to permit us to tax
ourselves, as the people of your good Country are accustomed to do , whom we
are fond of imitating and of calling our Friends and Brothers on all occasions.
B. To tax yourselves will not answer our purpose; for how can You be Judges
of what we want.
F. At least as well as you can be of what we are able to pay.
B. If you give us no more than you like, that will probably be very little.
F. If you take from us what you please, that will probably be very much.
B. We have laid a heavy Load on ourselves for your Emolument: Gratitude
ought to induce you to submit to our Demands.
F. Honestly now, did you do this for our sakes, or your own? But be it for
ours: We are making your people a Large Return by working for them with all
our Might. The greatest part of the whole Profit of our Industry has been
always yours. Permit it to continue so. Turn all our Trade into your
Harbours, as you are wont. Tax in your own Country the Commodities you
make us buy. But let us be favored with the privilege your people so justly
boast as their greatest Safeguard. Let us give and grant our own Money.
B. As to the Benefit of your Trade, it may be something to our people in
general: but what is it to the Necessities of Government? We want a Benefit
flowing full and fast into the Exchequer. We don't understand your round
about way of sending it through the body of the People.
F. We believe it: otherwise you would certainly be content with receiving it, as
you do now, in the best manner possible for the good of the whole.
B. What we have already, we have no occasion to demand. More, Gentleman,
more: and by a strait forward Road.
F. We cannot consent to it.
B. Then by G-d we will dragoon you, till you do.
72
caricatures
of Lord Bute.
advice
This engraving from the Westminster Magazine (February 1773) features Lord Bute as a Scot
playing a bagpipe while King Ceorge listens with amusement behind a door and the King's men
dance upon state papers. From Ellen Chase's The Beginnings of the American Revolution, Vol. 1
(New York: The Baker and Taylor Company, 1910). General Libraries.
F. Pray, Gentlemen, consider. Let us beg you to hear what we have to say, for
Both oursakes, Gentlemen.
B. Implicit Compliance, unconditional Submission and your Money are the
Things we want i? will have.
F. Win them and wear them.
N.B. So this wise, this righteous set of Ministers sent out Fleets and Armies
and spent 100 millions of money and destroyed the Lives of 100,000 men and
at the end of five years were no nearer gaining that unconditional Submission,
they had insolently demanded, than when they commenced this wicked,
unnatural, civil War! The Estimate of Lives lost is not too high, as all who
perished on the side of the Americans as well as on that of the English must be
charged to the Account of the English Cabinet. O Cives, Cives, qua vos
Dementia cepit!'"
"This altered quotation is drawn from
Virgil's Eclogues:
"Ah, Corydon,
Corydon,
what
madness has caught you" (2:69). As cited in the manuscript, the proper name in the quotation
been replaced with "subjects" (cives). The lament,
subjects
has
HI suffered a
breakdown in 1765 (the year of the Stamp Act) and also in 1788-89 (the years preceding
the inclusion of "A Dialogue" in Walker s letter). Probably a victim of the hereditary disease
known as porphyria, Ceorge III was suspected of being insane during his reign and in fact became
nervous
1963.
HRHRC
By
It
playwrights
Philip C. Kolin
country:
by a theatre and a
G.K. Hall,
'Bigsby, p. 9.
75
Mr. Albee."'
Comparing Albee's play with Samuel Beckett's Krapp's Last Tape with which
it shared the bill, Henry Hewes found that The Zoo Story was "equally
exciting, not only because it is compelling theatre, but also because it
introduces Edward Albee, a young (circa thirty) playwright of considerable
potentiality."4 On the negative side, Tom F. Driver remarked that "the only
sense I could draw from it is the conviction that one shouldn't talk to strangers
in Central Park."5 A more serious assault on Albee came from Brooks Atkinson
who dismissed the play as "conventional melodrama. "h In a fine overview of
the critical response up to 1969, William Force characterized "the diversity of
judgment and analysis elicited" by The Zoo Story in this way: "The question
that inevitably arises, of course, is whether the play is so enriched by multiple
metaphor that it possesses several levels of meaning, or whether such an
enrichment is more apparent than real, resulting in a play that is less clear
""
than confusing, and inclined to be pretentious where it seeks to be profound.
Force concluded that "the diversity of response to The Zoo Story does suggest
that interpretation of the play, like the presence of beauty, may reside in the
""
The early differing critical reactions to and interpreta
eye of the beholder.
tions of The Zoo Story, following its production in America, foreshadow both
the favorable and negative press Albee would receive elsewhere, and indeed
one is encouraged
to expect
his controversial
career.
examination
violence, or the despair of the outcast? Is it, in fact, both a realistic and a symbolic account of
everyman's need for love, or perhaps on an even more ambitious level, is it an expanded allusion
to the person and the crucifixion of Jesus Christ?"
76
July 20.
Dear Harry Joe:
Thank you for your letter, and for all the checks you and your people
have been sending across the ocean.
before rehearsals
start on
I will
can, perhaps,
combine notes; on the one hand, your theories on the play how it
should be done, what has been wrong with the way it has been done
in New York, etc. and, on the other hand, my practical experience
having actually directed the play for the Catskill tour. I have one or
two "musts" to give you.
. . .
things that
I have
discovered as a result
Theatre, and
All
my best.
'Among the HRHRC's large collections of papers by a number of American playwrights are
those of Maxwell Anderson, Elmer Rice, Lillian Hellman, Arthur Miller, and, most significant of
77
The recipient of this Albee letter was Harry Joe Brown, the son of the
famous film producer and actor Joe E. Brown (who starred for so long and so
successfully in Harvey) and of Mollie Parnis, who designed clothes for Mamie
Eisenhower. 10Twenty-six at the time, and six years Albee s junior, Harry Joe
Brown, one of the co-producers of the London Zoo Story, had been
associated, if indirectly, with Albee 's play before it came to London. In 1959
Brown had acquired the American rights to Samuel Beckett's Krapp's Last
Tape, the play whose American theatre history was inextricably bound with
The Zoo Story as the other half of the double bill at the Provincetown
Playhouse in New York. Harry Joe was deeply involved in negotiations with
Richard Barr, who held the rights to Albee's play for its American production.
Alan Schneider, who directed Krapp's Last Tape but not to his consterna
tion The Zoo Story, recalled in his autobiography the emerging producer
Harry Joe: he was "a seductively attractive post-adolescent with curly hair, a
disarming smile, and presumably money. He knew very little about the
theatre but was anxious to learn. '"
Albee could not have wished for a more propitious place to have his Zoo
Story open in England than the Arts Theatre Club, a highly influential and
successful theatre founded in 1927 and located at 6-7 Great Newport in
London's West End. During the 1950s the Royal Shakespeare Company
staged its productions at the Arts, and in August 1955 one of the most
important theatrical events of the decade was held there when Peter Hall
directed the English premiere of Wait ingfor Godot. During the mid to late
1950s, the Arts Theatre Club premiered some of Britain's most important new
plays, including works by Harold Pinter and John Osborne.12 Under Hall's
guidance, the Arts achieved a well-deserved reputation for doing "contempo
rary plays . . . often noted for their 'good' [verbal] writing, their literary
"I3
A rather severe J. W. Lambert noted in a 1960 review that the Arts
qualities.
Theatre also "performed a small public service
by letting us see two
Ionesco plays.
"u
...
The advance information that Harry Joe sent to Albee about the London
opening of The Zoo Story was fairly accurate "between August 21 and
September 6." The play opened at the Arts on Thursday, August 25, and ran
of the H RHBC's Williams Collection, see
Deborah Burks, "Treatment Is Everything': The Creation and Casting of Blanche and Stanley in
Tennessee Williams' 'Streetcar'," The Library Chronicle n.s. 41 (1987): 17-39.
all, Tennessee Williams. For information on one aspect
'"John Moynihan, "It's That Man Tennessee . . . Luring the Blue Bloods" and "London and
Edinburgh Last Night," Evening Standard [London], 25 August 1969. 4.
"Alan Schneider, Entrances: An American Director's Journey (New York: Viking-Penguin,
1986), p. 270.
THE ARTS
THEATRE CLUB
*:
Campbell
Directors
Williams,
G. E. A.
Williams,
Toby
Rowland
5K
3K
8
5K
in association with
J*
8 THIS PROPERTY IS
by
TENNESSEE
CONDEMNED
WILLIAMS
and
First Performance
PROGRAMME
EDWARD ALBEE
Cover of program for The Arts Theatre Club's 1960 production of Tennessee Williams's This
Property Is Condemned and Edward Albee's The Zoo Story. HRHRC Theatre Arts Collection.
p. 4.
Muller, "That's What I Don't Like About the South," Daily Mail, 26 August 1960, 3.
"Bernard Levin, "A Talk at the Zoo . . . Too Late," Daily Express, 26 August 1960, 7.
l6Robert
18See Albee's comments on directors and directing in Conversations with Edward Albee, ed.
Philip C. Kolin (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1988), pp. 32, 48, 64, 86, 88, 95, 115,
124, 125, 132, 137, 147, 166-167,
"I
199, 206-207,
212.
have been unable to track down the exact dates and places for this tour.
"Quoted in Mark Anderson and Earl Ingersoll. "Living on the Precipice: A Conversation with
Edward Albee," in Kolin, Conversations, p. 166.
2,Clive Barnes, "Stage: Double Bill by Albee," New York Times, 4 February 1977, C:4.
"Mark Boyer, "Premiere Albee: Irresistible Rhythms, Unnatural Acts," Hartford Advocate , 9
February 1977, 26.
SO
and he also has enjoyed directing the work of others: in a 1986 interview with
Joe Pollack,
directing teacher, having offered classes in the art at such institutions as Johns
Hopkins, University of Houston, and the University of Washington.
Over the years Albee has jealously guarded his privilege of selecting actors
and his right in having a definite, final say in how his work is to be staged." The
to Harry Joe clearly documents this early concern and prefigures
Albee's later involvement in the production process. Unfortunately, the
letter
"musts" that Albee wanted to impart to the Arts co-producer are not spelled
out.
It is likely,
however,
long speech and how it was to be delivered, the pacing of the play, and the
exact responses the actors needed to evoke from the audience without risking
laughter. Harry Joe had seen The Zoo Story in New York and,
recognizing that fact, Albee may have wanted him to revise and correct certain
features of the New York production. It is curious that Albee did not mention
the director of the Arts Zoo Story Henry Kaplan by name; perhaps when
Albee wrote on July 20 he was under the impression that Harry Joe would
both co-produce and direct. Or perhaps a director had not yet been named,
and Albee was sharing his concern with the one individual he knew would be
actively involved in the selection of a director.
In the third paragraph we hear an anxious young author eager to know when
he should arrive in London. With characteristic wit and confidence, Albee
stresses his popularity in Europe. The reference to Berlin may point to
revisiting his old friend Boleslaw Barlog at the Schiller Theater; as Albee
explains, he was very popular in Vienna, too. His comparison with John
Wayne is a typical Albee joke, filled with puckish irony as well as a touch of
prophecy. It is highly ironic that the shy and slender Edward Albee could ever
resemble the rugged, blunt, and outspoken John Wayne. The comparison
would have surely amused someone like Harry Joe who knew the young Albee
well. Yet Albee's growing popularity in Europe as one of America's most
promising playwrights might have encouraged him to compare himself with
one of the exemplars of American film culture. Perhaps in his wildest dreams,
Albee coveted the same recognition for himself through his plays that John
Wayne had earned through his films.
unwanted
Quoted in Joe Pollack, "Outrageous Edward Albee," St. Louis Post Dispatch, 2 May 1986,
G:l.
"In a 1980 interview with Patricia De La Fuente, Albee commented on his "say-so" in
productions of his work: "It's in the playwright's contract. Now you can't exert much authority
over a production you are not going to be at. Though I do try to control all productions of my plays,
and any productions within seventy-five miles of a whole list of about twenty cities in this country
I get approval of cast." Edward Albee: Planned Wilderness, Living Authors Series, No. 3, ed.
Patricia De La Fuente (Edinburgh, TX: Pan American University, 1980), pp. 10-11.
81
Not one to limit his fame to his first produced play, Albee reveals plans for
what would prove his second success, The American Dream, to be produced
by Richard (Dick) Barr, with whom Harry Joe, as we saw, had financial
dealings concerning the American production of Krapp's Last Tape. How
ever, it would be more than a year and three months before this second Albee
play would come to London. Above all else, Albee 's letter of
July
20th to
the years.
Albee's second letter about the London premiere of The Zoo Story was
written almost two weeks after the play closed.
Edward Albee
345 West 12th St.
New York
September
N.Y.
U.S.A.
14,
19, 1960
reviews
imaginings.
Edward
Albee25
Bob Livingston, the co-producer of The Zoo Story with Harry Joe Brown,
was also Harry Joe's half-brother, and at 28 the elder of the two.* Kenneth and
Peter, to whom Albee sends his "regards" in the last paragraph, were the
British actors Kenneth Haigh and Peter Sallis, who performed the two-man
play in its Arts production, Haigh taking the part of Jerry and Sallis that of
Peter. Toby Rowland, along with Campbell Williams and G.E.A. Williams,
was the director of the Arts Theatre Club; these three men were theatre
executives affiliated with the Hugh "Binkie" Beaumont producing group. The
PROPERTY/ZOO
Wil
BI am grateful to Edward Albee for kindly granting permission to print this letter and the one to
Harry Joe Brown housed in the HRHRC.
"See Moynihan, p. 4.
"The HRHRC has several items related to This Property Is Condemned: three mimeo versions
of a TV script for the play, a one-page undated version of the play bearing another title, and a 14page manuscript of the play bearing still another title. The three mimeo copies, all from 1958, pre
date the London production.
The first
performance of This Property Is Condemned was given at the New School for Social
in May 1942. It was next staged in Dallas in 1948 by Margo Jones, who also gave the
world premiere of Williams's Summer and Smoke. On 28 October 1957 This Property was
Research
included in three premieres at the Cherry Lane Theatre in New York. Of Williams's play, Lewis
Funke (New York Times, 29 October 1956) wrote that it "is little more than a monologue a
haunted monologue in the Williams tradition." Like Albee's The Zoo Story, Williams's This
Property also enjoyed a German run at Congress Hall in Berlin before going to London. Prior
to the August 1960 Arts Theatre Club performance, This Property appeared on the Kraft
Television Theatre and at the Theatre Champs Elysees in Paris.
83
A scene from the 1966 Warner Brothers film version of Edward Albee's Who s Afraid of Virginia
Woolf, starring Richard Burton, Elizabeth Taylor, George Segal, and Sandy Dennis. HRHRC
Photography Collection.
London first nights. They storm the premieres of his films."29 As we shall see,
Albee's fears about the "probable fate of that unfortunate combo" should have
more properly redounded to Williams.
Albee wittily chides Livingston for not sending reviews and again demon
strates his satiric touch, an Albee hallmark that is clearly imbedded even in his
correspondence. Albee's references to his being "the crushed, the defeated,"
to his "dream girl scrapbook," and to his desire to know about "foggy
happenings" obviously date from the playwright's early period that produced
The American Dream, a work saturated with such outlandish, cliched phrases.
Apparently, Albee had not seen the reviews at this point and, since he had not
heard from his producer, may have felt abandoned. Perhaps for the young
playwright no news was bad news and so he was making a strong (rhetorically
inflated) plea for some communication from Livingston. The phrases "ren
dered noteless" and "other ventures" seem to be tossed out in this spirit. The
fact that Albee had heard nothing from his producer doubtless gave rise to the
worst premonitions ("imaginings") on his part. The inclusion of "otherwise"
before "dream girl scrapbook" is another example of Albee's fearing the worst
from this London production. Albee was obviously disturbed by the "probable
fate of that unfortunate combo"; probability might easily bring bad reviews.
How seriously Livingston was to take Albee's assertion that he was "well on
my way to the Pulitzer Prize" we may never know.
tasted success and fame from his first play, Albee seriously harbored thoughts
of one day walking away with such a trophy. The idea for his masterpiece
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? may have already taken root in Albee's fertile
subconscious, but undoubtedly in 1960 he never could have predicted the
cruel fate that would await him over the Pulitzer prize.30 Two years later, in
1962, Albee was sabotaged by the prejudice of the Pulitzer committee that
rejected the recommendation of their own jury, which wanted desperately to
give the prize to Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" The playwright had to wait
until 1966 when A Delicate Balance did win for him the Pulitzer prize.
Even so, Albee's correspondence
both to Harry Joe Brown and Bob
on
his
to
rising
international
Livingston points early
reputation. As he notes in
paragraph three of the September 19th letter, the two plays that would be his
next big hits The Death of Bessie Smith and The American Dream were
already being sought for production overseas, doubtless the result of the
^Moynihan, p. 4.
"Albee discusses the importance of the subconscious in his creative work in Kolin, Conversa
tions, especially pp. 63-64,
''The story of refusing Albee the Pulitzer is widely known, but the following articles offer
crucial facts: Claudia Cassidy, "On the Aisle: Afraid of Virginia Woolf Pulitzer Snubs the Stage
Despite Equity's Golden Jubilee," Chicago Tribune, 7 May 1963, 2.1; John Chapman, "Show
Business:
News,
Virginia Woolf DOESN'T Win a Pulitzer Prize; No Drama Cited," New York Daily
7 May 1963, 53; Fern Marja Eckman, "A Split Vote Cost Albee That Pulitzer," New York
85
success of The Zoo Story in Berlin and New York. The Death
of Bessie
Smith
and The American Dream were being readied for their American debut when
Albee wrote to Livingston; recall, too, that Albee had referred to the
forthcoming production of The American Dream in his letter to Harry Joe. The
American Dream opened at the York Playhouse on 24 January 1961 in New
York and was performed 360 times; The Death of Bessie Smith joined The
American Dream in New York in April 1961. Albee presented these plays with
the help of his two faithful producers, Barr and Clinton Wilder. As Richard
Amacher rightly points out, "Albee's good fortune in early associating
himself" with these two young men who were "willing to gamble on a change
in the climate of the American theater, cannot be too much stressed. "* The
American debut of these two plays is fairly well known, though their
European premieres are less so.
The American Dream and The Death of Bessie Smith did not go directly to
London from New York. In early October of 1961 , Boleslaw Barlog directed "a
translation of Edward Albee's The American Dream ('Der Amerikanische
Traum), a European premiere several weeks before the original version was
shown at London's Royal Court Theatre."33 Once again the Schiller Theatre
Werkstatt had the honor of eclipsing any other European theatre in premiering Albee's work. The two Albee plays subsequently opened in London on 24
October 1961 with fanfare. Roger Gellert in the New Statesman announced:
"Last week's most eagerly awaited event was the Royal Court double bill of
plays by Edward Albee, author of The Zoo Story, that compelling eruption of
violence on a quiet park bench. The success of the double bill (The Death of
Bessie Smith and The American Dream) in New York can be attributed to the
traditional American love of self chastisement. . . ."M An article in the London
Times noted that Albee was "almost as inventive of absurd ideas as M. Ionesco,
but they all dipped into his own tub which seems to well with bitter
"* Less sanguine, however, was the review of the British premiere of
laughter.
The American Dream and Bessie Smith by Alfred Unger for Theatre World.
For Unger, Barlog's "skillful casting and extremely pointed direction made
the play appear more hilarious and better acccentuated satire than the later
London production it was a real success." Unger ominously added: "Still,
the majority of critics and audiences would have wished Barlog a worthier
subject for his talent than this overrated tame joke on American domes
ticity."*
MAmacher,
p. 5.
40.
Times,
(December 1961):
Realizing that productions of these plays were still somewhat far off, Albee
with how the London critics received his first play.
The fact that Albee asked Livingston to send him The Zoo Story "collected
reviews" suggests that the playwright was not in London much after opening
night. Most of the "collected reviews" of the Arts Zoo Story appeared in the
August 26th editions of the British newspapers, the day after opening night, or
in the late August or fall issues of British periodicals. As Albee told Harry Joe,
he had hoped to visit Berlin, Vienna, and possibly Paris, "fitting" his time
"around ZOO rehearsals." Albee must have been in these and other European
cities from the 26th or 27th of August until he returned to America on
September 2, which was 17 days before he wrote the letter to Livingston.37
Albee s curiosity about the reviews must have been piqued not only by what
they said but by the potential number his first play could have received.38
As with the American reviews, the British were mixed and, as would
invariably happen with later Albee plays, the critics' opinions were sharply
divided about the same points, and even the same reviewer could hold
contradictory positions. While J.W. Lambert reported in his Times review
that The Zoo Story was "an agreeably if not excitingly" played part of an "off
beat double bill,"39 he later noted in his review for Drama that The Zoo Story
was a "macabre one-act exercise that held me riveted."40 John Rosselli of The
Guardian admitted that "As a piece of theatre the play works: it is often funny,
though to my mind seldom moving."41 Elizabeth Frank exalted in the News
Chronicle that The Zoo Story "moves relentlessly to a horrific conclusion an
extraordinary tour de force in the creation of atmosphere."42 On the other
hand, Bernard Levin of the Daily Express protested that "the trouble is that
there is nothing but atmosphere" and added that The Zoo Story "is not
basically interesting. There is nothing beneath the play but more surface and
that is not enough."43 While Irving Wardle, in the London Observer, praised
Albee for his "uncommon ability to make drama of directly explicit material,"44
Robert Muller in the Daily Mail branded Albee's work for following the "Skidrow school of dramatic art."4* In his review in the Financial Times, Richard
was naturally concerned
"Albee cannot recall the exact dates of his late August-early September 1969 European
sojourn. Personal letter, 10 December 1988.
"Richard Tyce's Edward Albee: A Bibliography (Metuchen, NT: Scarecrow, 1986) lists 14
reviews for the British premiere (pp. 186-94). Many of these reviews are not available at libraries
in the United States and Canada. The only library I know that has microfilms of London dailies
from the early 1960s is the British Library Newspaper Library on Colindale Avenue in London.
MJ. W. Lambert, "Theatre: A Man Apart," London Times, 28 August 1960, 33.
27 August 1960, 3.
Frank, "The Critics: Touching, Terrifying and Brilliant," News Chronicle,
August 1960, 3.
87
26
Findlater was equally glib; Albee's play was like "a marathon session on an
American psychoanalyst's couch
an unmistakable New Yorker mixture of
sour cynicism and solemn uplift. . . ."* Though Bill Lester's Plays and
Players review decried the "play's length" (especially Jerry's 17-minute
speech), a problem which "inevitably" led to "boredom," he nonetheless
conceded that it was a pity, because the play has much that is witty and wise
about the problems of the lonely and the dispossessed.47 B. A. Young of Punch
offered no such concession, complaining that "I couldn't, I confess, grasp the
basic theme of the piece, which seemd to be now one thing, now
another. . . ."*
Albee's language, always his forte, was noticed early by the British critics;
but again opinion was markedly diverse. Flatteringly, Irving Wardle stated
that The Zoo Story "has intense linear continuity and its language is exactly
responsive to the weight of feeling behind it. Under great emotional stress it
breaks the prose barrier and soars into full-throated arias." John Rosselli
...
kind of play." Ronald Hastings, in his review for the Daily Telegraph and
Morning Post, believed that Albee's dialogue was "often very funny" but was
disappointed because "no real relationship between the characters is at
tempted and we were left with a rather literary monologue of the type in
vogue with several American short-story writers."48 Damning Albee with
minimal praise, Robert Muller concluded that "the play is fluently written,
..."
away from
slickness.
"Richard Findlater, "This Property Is Condemned; The Zoo Story," Financial Times, 26
August 1960, 9.
"Bill Lester, "This Property Is Condemned and The Zoo Story," Plays and Players, 7 October
1960, 13.
1960, 318.
"
Findlater argued that the play should be "described as Pinter gone wrong.
Seeing similarities between Albee and Pinter without recording exact indebt
edness to the British playwright by the American one, Muller wittily
observed, "We are clearly in Pinter-land (American branch), though it is only
fair to add that Mr. Albee had probably not ever heard of Mr. Pinter when he
wrote his play." John Rosselli boldly argued that The Zoo Story, like Pinter's
Caretaker, is "about an acute failure to communicate," but concluded that
because Albee's characters speak with the "fluency of whole men" he "raises
more doubts than Mr. Pinter's rigorous method of making the language wear
characters' mental crutches throughout." Bernard Levin remarked that Albee
came to Britain "too late," for while his work was developing in the United
States, "we have seen Mr. Pinter established, M. Ionesco carrying all before
him, and Mr. N.F. Simpson rolling em in the aisles." Levin did admit that
Albee's "talent is not exactly the same as theirs, though if it comes to that they
are not exactly the same as one another." Perhaps the most insightful
observation about Albee and avant-gardism came from Wardle who asserted
that "Mr. Albee is not really competing" with British playwrights.
Only a few of the British reviewers attempted to make critical connections
between The Zoo Story and the Williams play with which it shared the bill at
the Arts. Approving of the evening immensely, Elizabeth Frank linked The
Zoo Story and This Property as "two disquieting and complementary move
ments in a symphony on the theme of loneliness." For Richard Findlater the
two short plays revealed "a special kind of American attitude towards
innocence and experience." Robert Muller labeled these one-acters as "two
tragic plays" which offered "two unlovely brief encounters." While a fair
number of the reviewers found problems with both The Zoo Story and This
Property, Albee definitely came off the winner of the evening. Irving Wardle,
for example, much preferred The Zoo Story which was "coupled with an over
ripe fragment of Tennessee Williams's This Property Is Condemned." Simi
larly, Bill Lester found The Zoo Story "a much more satisfying work," and the
unnamed reviewer for the Times revealed that the audience at the Arts was
"positively grateful for the opportunity at the end of the second play, Mr.
Albee's The Zoo Story, which had by contrast gone very well." Jeremy Brooks
brutally dismissed Williams's play as "no more than a curtain raiser, an
oppressive and largely meaningless exercise in the manner, but without the
matter, of Streetcar."*' While Albee took his lumps, too, from the London
reviewers, what they said of This Property was even more cruel. B.A. Young
attacked This Property in the Financial Times as a "twenty minute scrap from
Tennessee Williams' ragbag," and Levin proclaimed that Williams, the great
playwright-hero of British theatregoers, gave them only an "early slight and
faded sketch." Whenever Bob Livingston sent the young playwright the
"Jeremy Brooks, "Flowering Bolt," New Statesman 60 (3 September 1960): 304-305.
London reviews, Albee must have been elated that his first work was received
than Williams's and perhaps relieved too
For most British reviewers the actors playing Peter and Jerry carried the
show. Kenneth Haigh, perhaps the better known of the pair, brought to the
role of Jerry a background ideally suited to Albee's beatnik character. As
Michael Sanderson points out: "It is no coincidence that . . . Kenneth Haigh
was a former builder's laborer. It is a piquant paradox that Mr. Haigh is also a
"a
Haigh's Jerry and Sallis's Peter elicited rave reviews from
professor at Yale.
Elizabeth Frank, who described their acting as "brilliant," and from Jeremy
Brooks, who declared that "Edward Albee's Zoo Story is worth seeing, if for no
other reason, for the truly remarkable performances by Kenneth Haigh and
"
"
Peter Sallis. Seeing The Zoo Story as a "wonderful gymnasium for the actors,
Richard Findlater showered praise on Haigh and Sallis. While Irving Wardle
thought that the roles of Jerry and Peter were "daemonically played" by Haigh
and Sallis, J. W. Lambert in the Times lauded the two for turning the play into
"
"a hypnotic little sonata. For B. A. Young the actors "kept my interest in these
two characters going long after lesser actors would have let it dwindle to a
pinpoint." Part of the actors' success may be that they looked right for the
parts. As Robert Muller observed, Peter wore "a lounge suite and smoke[d] a
pipe" while Jerry was "dressed in a sweatshirt and jeans." Allusively, Young
"
referred to Haigh's Jerry as a "Juvenile Mariner in a white sloppy joe.
The fact that these British actors delivered their lines with an American
accent did not disturb most of the London critics. Bill Lester believed that
Haigh and Sallis performed Albee's play "extremely competently in American
accents." Contrasting the speech of American actress Marcia Stillman, which
was "very difficult for us to follow" in Williams's Property, the critic for the
Times patriotically declared that in The Zoo Story "we had the advantage of
knowing already both the actors we were now listening to. Mr. Kenneth
Haigh played the very long principal part in it with an American accent, but
we were tuned in to his wavelength; we could interpret each word that he or
Mr. Sallis uttered." No doubt Mr. Haigh did not acquire any bad speaking
habits at Yale. In contrast to the Times reviewer's acceptance of Haigh's and
Sallis's American accents, Bernard Levin exclaimed: "how I wish English
actors would not attempt American accents."
A few critics did use Haigh's and Sallis's acting talents to lambast Albee's
play. John Rosselli announced that "the climax is startling but, on reflection,
inappropriate. Kenneth Haigh, an actor of uncommon strength and grace, is
perhaps too strong and graceful for his part; but then so is the dialogue he must
speak. Peter Sallis makes an excellent foil." More ascerbic,
concluded
Milton Shulman
with this assessment: "Kenneth Haigh and Peter Sallis are the
"Sanderson, p. 288.
90
It
is
Sallis for the major portion of the evening and no mean feature of Mr. Sallis's
skill
is his
over-heated
Robert Redford and Natalie Wood in the 1966 Paramount Pictures film version of Tennessee
Williams's This Property Is Condemned. HRHRC Photography Collection.
91
William Daniels (left) as Peter and Mark Richman as Jerry in Edward Albee's The Zoo Story
premiere performance of 14 January 1960 at the Provincetown Playhouse, Massachusetts.
Photograph by Eberstadt. HRHRC Theatre Arts Collection.
92
America non-communication
is almost heresy.
offered
insights
into Albee's early effort while others engaged in off-the-mark wrangling, the
type of wrangling that has embroiled Albee in all sorts of battles and
controversies.
been both encouraged and dejected; he may have, we can only surmise, felt
the need to be less disdainful of society or to be even more daringly avantgarde. As the contours of Albee's career show, it was the latter course that
would result in worldwide fame for his achievements in contemporary
theatre.
"The British premiere of A Streetcar Named Desire took place on 27 September 1949 in
Manchester before going to the Aldwych Theatre in London on 12 October 1949. Sir Laurence
Olivier directed the play, making a number of changes (cuts) in the text; the incomparable Vivien
Leigh, Mrs. Olivier, played Blanche. The British loved the play, which caused no small amount of
furor in the British press, with the Censor, and in the House of Commons which objected to tax
money being used to finance the production. For a brief discussion of Vivien Leigh as the London
Blanche, see Milly S. Barranger's "Three Women Called Blanche," Tennessee Williams Literary
Journall,
no. 1(1989): 15-30. Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Wooip premiered in Britain at the
Piccadilly Theatre, London, on 7 February 1964. The play "opened in triumph" and the "67 cuts
demanded by the Censor were restored after consideration." Further, "Not a dissenting voice
marred the praise from the London critics, both for the play and the performances" (New York
8 February 1976, 15). The reviewer for the London Times (7 February 1964, 15b) offered
these comments which show how, in the few short years since Zoo Story, the admiration by
Times,
British critics for Albee's talent would swell: "The play consists of a prolonged drinking session
from 2 a.m. until dawn, during which a pair of married couples tear each other apart, beginning
with flesh wounds and proceeding through the vital organs until they get down to the bone and
finally to the marrow. (These images are the author's. ) It is hard to imagine an English play being
written to this formula without falling into sickening monotony. But it works brilliantly for Mr.
Albee, as the American language comes to his aid a flexible and sophisticated instrument which
serves both as a source of athletic dialogue and as a basis of the play's construction."
93
1960.
Mimeo scripts by Albee for Box and Quotations from Chairman Mao Tsetung; filmscript of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
1963.
TDS [lp],
12
May
1964.
1962,
30 June 1963,
13
ALS
reply by Gassner.
Carson
July
1962.
McCullers Collection:
1963
[ActI]Tms[58pp]n.d.
Act I [narration] Tms [10 pp] n.d.
[lyrics] T and Teems with A emendations
[4 pp] n.d.
Purdy Collection:
TLS, 1 TccLS, 1 AN/draft,
James
1
December
ANS, A invitation
S from
7 telegrams/A
October
Albee to Purdy.
1965, 22
1967, 8
and/or
n.d.
December
12
drafts to Albee. 31
1967,
19
December
1967.
Malcolm, adapted by Albee from the novel by Purdy. Mimeo playscript with
extensive A marginal notes and comments by Purdy (189pp). 18
August 1965 (Montauk, L.J.). Bound.
95
By
Judi Hoffman
movie reviews,
explanatory
advertisements,
and other
autobiography.
Although Norman Dawn never claimed to have been "first" in the use of
certain processes, and dates of technical invention have proven difficult to
determine because of widespread and largely undocumented experimenta
'
Raymond Fielding's "Norman O. Dawn: Pioneer Worker in Special-Effects Cinematog
raphy," Journal of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers 72, no. 1 (January
1963): 15-23, remains the definitive work on Dawn's contributions to the field. Dawn is also
credited as a special effects trailblazer in such histories as George E. Turner's "The Evolution of
Special Visual Effects," The ASC Treasury of Visual Effects (Hollywood: ASC Holding Co.,
1983); John Brosnan's Movie Magic: The Story of Special Effects in the Cinema (New York: St.
Martin's Press, 1976); Jeff Rovin's Movie Special Effects (New York: A.S. Barnes and Co., Inc.,
1977); Christopher Finch's Special Effects: Creating Movie Magic (New York: Abbeville Press,
1984); David Hutchison's Film Magic: The Art and Science of Special Effects (New York: Prentice
Hall Press, 1987); Kenneth Macgowan's Behind the Screen: The History and Technique of the
Motion Picture (New York: Delacorte Press, 1965); Barry Salt's Film Style and Technology:
History and Analysis (London: Starword, 1983); and sections of Raymond Fielding's The
tion, technological
if not
the
impossible,
and
even he suggested that "from my nearly 70 years of association with this kind of
thing, I do not know of any [other] combination ARTIST-CAMERAMAN who
did anything like this" (card 12).
Dawn's career also illuminates differing modes of production. While most
film pioneers represented in archival collections were specialists of one sort or
another producer, director, writer, cinematographer,
or special effects
cinematographer Dawn served the motion picture field in all these posi
tions.
Starting
as a cameraman
director and writer both for his own independent films and for "R" films made
at studios like Universal and Keystone, where he also created special effects
for motion pictures by such legendary figures as Erich von Stroheim and Mack
Sennett. In addition, Dawn played an important role in the fledgling
Australian film market when in 1926 he was brought in to infuse that industry
with the Hollywood style as producer, writer, director, and special effects
cinematographer of For the Term of His Natural Life. Thus, while any one of
these aspects of Dawn's career is fascinating by itself, the mixture of early film
history, innovation, and experience documented in the Norman O. Dawn
Collection is unique and offers to the film scholar a multiple perspective on
early American film history which is typically unavailable in other archival
collections.
159), while Raymond Fielding ("Norman O. Dawn," pp. 15 and 19. and The Technique of Special
Effects Cinematography, p. 48), David Hutchison (p. 54), and Kenneth Maegowan (p. 428) are
more cautious in stating that Dawn was one of the first to employ the glass shot in moving pictures.
Dawn's rear-screen projection in the 1913 The Drifter is considered a pioneering experiment by
Jack Imes, Jr., Special Visual Effects: A Guide to Special Effects Cinematography (New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. Inc., 1984), p. 121, as well as by Brosnan (p. 23), Fielding ("Norman
O. Dawn," p. 22, and Technique, p. 277), Finch (p. 32). Hutchison (p. 62), Maegowan (p. 426),
Norman O. Dawn's card 75 illustrating a matte shot for Universalis The Girl in the Dark (1918).
While shooting this scene in a Los Angeles park, Dawn matted out the upper half of the frame.
During a second exposure, the matte was reversed and a pastel drawing of background buildings
by Dawn was photographed in the upper frame. Included on the card are Dawn's original oil
sketch, the cardboard matte placed inside the camera during the second exposure, a test frame
enlargement, simple sketches of the matte method, Dawn's sketch of his Universal workshop, a
camera record of the effect, and film clips. HRHRC Film Collection.
was encouraged
other interest,
discovered
one sketch a discovery that would prove central to his future development
a cinematographic
of
matte process:
[The camera obscura] was a small tent of black canvas with a small
sketching table and a camp chair inside. At the top of this tent was a
lens that could be rotated around and it reflected an image of the
scenery down on the sketching tablet. The student could sketch what
he liked, or move the tent some other place and add on some other
scene. To me it was really the beginning of what I did in cinematog
raphy, that is, combining two or more real scenes into a composite to
enhance the original scene. As time went on, for some reason they
became matte shots, (card K)
In-the-camera matte shots applied the principles of the camera obscura to the
medium. Part of a scene being recorded by the camera
would be obscured or "blacked out" by a matte, which was conventionally a
card or plate placed either in an external matte box or in front of the lens of the
camera. A counter-matte was then created to protect the already-recorded
portions of the frame, the film was rewound, and the previously matted-out
sections of the scene were added during a second (and sometimes third)
had to be careful to match the
exposure.4 Although the cinematographer
matte lines and exposures exactly, the matte shot thus allowed filmmakers like
Dawn to combine two or more different locations or actors (even the same
actor in dual roles), in order to enhance a scene or create on film an otherwise
cinematographic
impossible situation. Dawn also used matte shots to place actors in painted
sets or backgrounds which, in reality, existed only as drawings.
saw his first show of "illusions," the Cabaret de la Morte (Death). He later met
a Lumiere cinematographer
by the name of Saudleigh in San Francisco and
was allowed to sketch his camera setup for a mermaid illusion using mirrors
over twenty years before the similar Schufftan process would be patented. * Of
this experience, Dawn said it was, "I believe, one of the things that turned my
life away from Art and into the Cinema" (card 2A).
This recounting of Dawn's formative years is indebted to Raymond Fielding's "Norman O.
"
Dawn: Pioneer Worker in Special- Effects Cinematography. Biographical information which was
not present in the Dawn Collection comes from Dr. Fielding's article and his interview with
Dawn.
'Fielding, p. 20, and Brosnan, pp. 24 and 25.
'Dawn discusses the experiences which influenced his turn towards image manipulation in a
narrative, entitled "The Seeds of Manipulation," on the back of card K. Mr. Saudleigh 's
illusion utilized a large piece of reflective plate glass set in front of and at a 45 degree angle to live
typed
100
between the camera and the desired set, then an area of the silvering was removed. The miniature
set or artwork was shot through that clear portion of the mirror, while live action set at a 90 degree
angle to the camera was reflected in the still-silvered area, creating a composite of the two images
(the setup
tures
could be reversed as well live action combined with reflected artwork or minia
depending
use in
(1927).
6Dawn also describes the pinhole camera in 'The Seeds of Manipulation" on the back of card K:
"The pinhole camera was a box with a plate holder at one end and a piece of brass with a pin hole in
the other end. There were no lens [or] no focus arrangement.
It did not need such things. Just set
up your box on the tripod, put in a plateholder with a plate in it and go away and leave it. In an
"
hour come close the plate holder and later develop the picture [sic].
TFor further reading on Melies, see Paul Hammond's Marvellous MMies (New York: St.
Martin's Press, 1975), Erik Barnouw's The Magician and the Cinema (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1981), and the chapter "George M61ies: Artificially Arranged Scenes'" in Lewis
Jacobs' The Rise of the American Film: A Critical History (New York: Harcourt, Brace or Co.,
1939), pp. 22-32.
101
in a two reel
ter of the
if
?red
I was
Ld Topanga
3 I Bade idea
ahead
nen all stick
NE FILM CLIP
EXPOSURE
erse matte
sed -- and a
drawing of
talian type
nqs were put
the
hill
p piece of
and I do not
n, Sid Smith
THE READER
must be
an illusion
They were
compromise
It
"Vest-pocket" watercolor box and sketch pad which Norman O. Dawn acquired in 1906 while
studying art in Paris. Also present are representative thumbnail sketches. The photograph visible
on the left side is Dawn at age 16 (card 12). HRHRC Film Collection.
'Dawn does not identify the poem by name, but gives one verse in a typed portion entitled "The
Heart" on the back of card 86A which appears to be part of an unpublished
Homing
autobiography:
'Twill all come back - the wasted splendor the heart's lost youth - like a budding flower the dauntless
This closely matches the 22nd verse of Markham s "The Crowning Hour," originally titled "The
Homing Heart ":
It will all come back - the wasted splendor.
The heart's lost youth like a breaking flower.
The dauntless dare, and the wistful, tender.
Touch of the April hour.
See Edwin Markham, The Shoes
103
apparently
placed a small cardboard matte in front of the camera lens while shooting a
miniature hourglass set against a painted planetary background. On a second
exposure, the matte was reversed and an actress was matted into the shot near
the now-towering hourglass.
During Dawn's return trip to California late in 1907, Arthur Lee requested
that he stop in Kansas City, Missouri, to meet George C. Hale of the new
amusement park attraction, "Hale's Tours of the World." "Hale's Tours"
simulated a train ride through foreign and famous locales by showing motion
pictures, which had been shot from a moving train, in a theatre constructed as
a railway car interior, complete with swaying seats and other effects. Dawn
was quickly hired by Hale and, after a short stop in California, was sent to
Mexico to shoot Hale's features, where Dawn utilized glass shots to add scenic
From
1907 to 1910,
as a director/cameraman
unit
for travel and scenic shorts. On one such trip to Australia in 1908, which
v*^
Triple exposure matte shot for Norman O. Dawn's film. The Adorable Savage (1920). Note how
closely his original oil sketch (top) matches the final effect (bottom). A painted background of palm
trees and the location foreground of water and canoe were added to the hut and natives, shot on a
Universal studio set (card 136). HRHRC Film Collection.
/
-fc~
Vlt
'
'
"*
<^V
-^J^P'
must
say
fact,
months
later,
that no
...
on the picture.
understanding
age
32).
'"Fielding, p. 20.
"Fielding, p. 17.
KIT
In
1913
glass screen, onto which a still transparency was projected from the rear by a
stereoptican. The results were so poor, however, that Dawn abandoned the
process after this film. The
which combined
Drifter also
a background
a glass
Aitken. The other two production units were headed by Sennett (Keystone) and D.W. Griffith
(Fine Arts). Triangle began to dissolve in 1917 with the departure of first Sennett and then Ince
and Griffith, and stopped production in 1918.
"Fielding, p. 17.
108
Above: Test shot of a matte for Western Skies (1913). The horse and
trench, but when Dawn matted in his drawing of a deep gorge, the
pictured above a bottomless canyon. The matte line is just below the
Below: Katie Madden, the future Mrs. Norman O. Dawn, clowning
Calamity Sue in April 1912 (card 24). HRHRC Film Collection.
L/srr
WFXIMIKARTCIUSKETCH
ABOVEWASF*OREFFECT102
Both of theae fwb shots
xfTf real foregrounds with
drawings for backgrounds.
I do not have place of
file, of this shot as It
has faded away.
THE LEAP FROMA PATENT i
13 SHQWJLTPLEFT;
__~
After good"aany years
of doing thia kind of
work-- and while I vai at
Cyatone--soaeof the peo
ple advised > that I sh
ould patent the effect*.
I had never believed In
that, so I never did
and ao I applied and got
patent.
Aa tlse went on, aoaeone
aaongthe producers saw
In this patent a threat-thouoh I had never at any
t lee ever thouoht of us
ing such an idea.
After a numberof years
whenMr. Thalbera becasie
president of the Producera Assn., and while I was
working for Mat end Mr.
Kayert--a friendly settle
mentwas aade and the
whole thing forgotten.
1,269,061.
rff/f
iv
JU
Alxjve: Patent for Dawn's matte process grantee! 11 June 1918, illustrating a matte shot from
Keystone's 1917 Oriental Love (card 65A). Below: Some of Norman (). Dawn's Universal studio
coworkers and bosses, at a January 1920 birthday party for Universal founder and president Carl
Laemmle. From left to right: (front) studio head Isadora Bernstein, actress Edith Roberts,
Laemmle, actress Priscilla Dean, actor Eddie Polo; (back) auditor Lee Rohhn.tr. actor Hoot
Gibson, Dawn, actor Frank Mayo, director John Ford, and actor Lee Moran (card 146). HRHRC
Film Collection.
special effects, most notably matte shots which added elaborate and exotic
temples, via pastel drawings by Dawn, to the background of live action scenes
shot in a California park or studio lot. The 2 June 1917 issue of Triangle
Magazine reported that the film bestowed upon Dawn the title of "cinalumin-
...
(1942).
In
15
1917
to Universal, working there until 1921. He created special effects for other
The Kaiser,
Beast
"Triangle Magazine is not readily available to scholars; the Museum of Modern Art in New
York is, so far as I know, the only film archive or library which holds copies of this company
publication. The article included in the Dawn Collection has no further identification, such as
page numbers.
I5I have been unable so far to find secondary
Collection and a somewhat oblique reference by Raymond Fielding: "Many years later, [Oriental
Love] was used by the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association in court suits
brought against it and its members. The film provided evidence of prior use of effects techniques
claimed by various inventors" (p. 17). According to Fielding, Dawn had been asked to sell his
patent to the MPPDA by Irving Thalberg, his employer at Universal and, later, what would
become
MGM
(p. 22).
it,
KBlind Husbands was the film that, as The Motion Picture Guide phrases
"not only marked
the beginning of brilliant and controversial directorial career, but also the birth of The Man You
a
Love to Hate!'" (See Volume 10, p. 32.) Actually, Erich von Stroheim had already earned that
characterization by being typecast as
vicious Prussian officer in several films. For Blind
Husbands, von Stroheim not only directed but also wrote the screenplay, based on his own story
it
"The Pinnacle," served as art director, and played the lead role. Dawn discusses at length on card
114 his association with this disputed genius and the film that "took so long to make and cost so
'BLIND LAEMMLE."
Ill
When his contract with Universal ran out and was not renewed, Dawn
moved to Robertson-Cole, where he directed the popular Japanese actor
Sessue Hayakawa in Five Days to Live and The Vermilion Pencil (1922). In the
latter, Dawn used a hanging miniature ceiling, placed between the camera
and the live set in the proper perspective much like a glass shot, to create the
effect of a closed room (a trick he said he learned from Georges Melies in
Paris). Then in 1923 Dawn rejoined his old Universal boss, Irving Thalberg,
who was now head of production with Louis B. Mayer in what would the
following year become Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. Dawn was promptly dis
patched to Edmonton and the Great Slave Lake area of Canada to conduct
photographic research on the native customs and lifestyle for an upcoming
feature, Master of Women. The special effects he produced were never used,
and the importance of his trip seemed to him limited to a check of "the
interiors, some dog team shots, a native dance or two. However, it settled the
minds of the producers, that they were making an authentic bit of atmos
phere" (card 167). The fate of the film is unclear, because there is no record of
such a title produced by MGM and directed by Reginald Barker, as is stated in
the Dawn Collection.17
In October 1923, Dawn returned to the filmic setting of frozen tundra, this
time in Alaska, for a series of arctic adventures and travel features, beginning
with The Lure of the Yukon (1924). Acting as producer, writer, director, and
Dawn spent approximately $52,000 on the
special effects cinematographer,
film. Katie, who by then had become Mrs. Norman Dawn, starred in the
series of pictures, and their newborn son Forest made a cameo appearance in
the 1925 Justice of the Far North. 1S
In 1926, after a trip to the south seas for Typhoon Love, the Dawn family
was brought to Australia by Australasian Films Ltd. and Union Theatres.
Wishing to produce a lavish epic that would boost the fledgling Australian film
industry and make it competitive with Hollywood in both markets, the
companies chose to import an American director to replace local director
Raymond Longford on production of For the Term of His Natural Life. Based
on the novel by Marcus Clarke, For the Term was envisioned as a spectacular
and dramatic look at early convict life in Tasmania, and Dawn's background
special effects and large-scale adventure
in
17Reginald Barker did direct a movie entitled The Eternal Struggle, which was released in
October 1923 and set, as was Master of Women, in Canada, so the name of the film may have been
changed.
"The series apparently consisted of The Lure of the Yukon (1924-cards 182, 183A and B, and
D), The Eskimo (1924-cards 184 and 193), The Valley of 10,000 Smokes (1924-cards 188 and E),
and/iASiice of the Far North (1925-card 189). The titles and years of Eskimo and Valley are only
given according to Dawn, for no other reference to the films could be found.
''Graham Shirley and Brian Adams, Australian Cinema: The First Eighty Years (New York: St.
Martin's Press, 1985), pp. 90-94.
112
'FOR E 1IRM
<J\
JiLms Ltd,
His
Australasian
of
NATURE LlFf
Mormon Daiuri
stf
"Production
r*>^
of
His Natural
Publicity still from Norman O. Dawn's 1927 Australian blockbuster, For the Term
Vickers,
Frere,
Eva
Novak
as
Sylvia
From
left
to
Dunstan
Webb
as
Lieutenant
right:
Life.
Catherine Dawn as Mrs. Vickers, and George Fisher as Rufus Dawes (card 209). HRHRC Film
Collection.
cast
it
is
is
of
billed under the pseudonym "Susan Denis." For the Term had perhaps the
highest budget of any Australian film up to that time, was more successful than
any Australian film before it, and featured numerous by-now-common Dawn
"
effects such as the glass shot and hanging miniature ceiling.
For the Term His Natural Life (1927)
represented more completely in
total of ten
the Norman O. Dawn Collection than any other film, with
Besides
the
to
this
silent
writing
screenplay,
cards
devoted
epic.21
existing
also
created
effects
for the
twenty special
producing, and directing, Dawn
film, including an ambitious combination dolly shot (where the camera
to be physically moved
wheeled truck or dolly, allowing
mounted on
towards or away from the subject or to either side), glass shot, and double
sawmill. (See page 114.) "Dolly shots of course were
exposure matte through
B
is
"Shirley and Adams, pp. 91-94; Fielding, p. 18; and Turner, p. 39.
designated
21Cards lOAand 11A are entitled "For the Term of His Natural Life," and card
"Start of the Term," but these cards are somewhat confused collections of various materials, not all
of which deal directly with the film. Cards 206, 208, 209, 211, 212B, 214A, and 214B are more
coherently devoted to For the Term.
113
jj^U
g^k^flE^
Hr 4JM rk ^bv
jft
the tebm
>'
ts9 _Vcb
'*
err.
-:TH
^Sygt^R"
Above: Norman O. Dawn's illustration of an elaborate,
of
His Natural Life. The camera dollied (tracked) across large mill set, following the action and
Dawn matted in location shot of logs floating on
pausing as needed. At the end of the movement.
River so that the river appeared to be just outside the mill (card 211). Below:
Doom, taking
Norman O. Dawn and his company from flanges
break from shooting in
February 1927. From left to right: rodeo champion Russ Madison, actor George Fisher, Forest
Dawn (Norman and Katherine's son), lead actress Katherine Dawn, rodeo champion and lead
actor Roy Dow, actor Bob Webster (by horse), and Dawn (card G).
of
the Parramatta
nothing new," said Dawn, "and some very fine ones appeared in the films. But
none with effects as I used them" (card 211). Dawn made approximately 22
trucking or dolly shots of one kind or another, several in combination with
special effects as in the above example (dolly shots in themselves not being
"effects") and others which simply followed characters as they
moved, even from room to room in the set of a house cut in half (like a
considered
dollhouse
panning
repeatedly stress
was the type of effect that
I liked
Through such mattes, Dawn placed studio sets and actors in striking
Australian locations efficiently and economically, giving Australasian Films
the greatest possible visual impact for their money.
The following year Dawn produced and directed another movie "Down
Under," TheAdorable Outcast (1928), then returned to the U.S. foraseriesof
inexpensive silent Westerns made for small theaters which had not yet
converted to sound.22 It was back in Australia, however, that Dawn directed
his first sound film, which was also the first Australian talkie, Show Girl's Luck
(1931). Dawn had purchased sound-on-disk equipment which he brought
with him to Australia in 1929, forming Australian Talkies Ltd. with local
investors and building a small sound studio in the Blue Mountains. Although
the film was generally considered a success, the sound-on-disk system (in
which sound recorded on a separate phonographic record had to be syn
chronized with the movie action) proved less advantageous than a local soundon-film process (where sound was optically recorded directly on the film
itself) with which he finished Show Girfs Luck. Unable to raise funds for
other features, Dawn once more returned to Hollywood."
After producing effects for several films and serials, including Douglas
Fairbanks's last American movie, Mr. Robinson Crusoe (1932), and a science
fiction serial, The Lost City (1933), Dawn undertook his first U.S. sound film,
Tundra, in 1935. Originally planned for release through Universal, Tundra
was sold to Edgar Rice Burroughs of Tarzan fame who started the short-lived
"The series apparently consisted of Ranges of Doom (1927), Black Hills (1928), and Girl of the
GoldenNorth
(1928).
Burroughs-Tarzan film company with this feature. This movie marked Dawn's
return to the desolate, arctic North, where he served not only as director but
with the script
also co-photographer
and special effects cinematographer,
based on his own story. "Tundra was (in my own opinion) the best motion
picture that I made," said Dawn, "in that I thought it was closest to what a
picture was a mirror of life" (card 274). However, most of Dawn's effects for
this film, as represented in the HRHRC Collection, create rather unnatural
situations rather than reflecting "reality.
"
"Fielding,
116
p. 23.
Dawn's
experience
an alternate reality one which has only rarely and recently survived
selection decisions to that of the famous director or movie star,
David
directors,
Norman O. Dawn working on his color drawing of a Boeing bomber in 1943 (card 31 1). HRHRC
Film Collection.
117
ical change.
On a broader level, the Norman O. Dawn Collection is, to the extent of this
writer's knowledge, the only discrete collection of materials on a special
effects pioneer in any U.S. film archive. It appears that Norman Dawn was a
special effects specialist before such a career was recognized as historically
valuable, and through his foresight and desire to leave behind a record of his
innovations
118
Dates given are for the year of release: for those marked with an asterisk (*),
the release date was not available, so the year of Dawn's participation is listed
instead. Dawn created special effects for all the titles listed, as well as
directing and producing those films noted. Features planned but never
produced or released are listed in parentheses. Those films in which Dawn's
work is not represented or referenced in his Collection are preceded by a
bullet ().
co-editor
The Drifter (1913*) director/cameraman,
Western Skies (1913*) director/cameraman
The Spoilers (1914)
Two Men of Tinted Butte (1914*, released
1919)
director, writer
119
Civilization (1916)
The Eye of the Night (1916)
The Devil's Double (1916)
The Sin Ye Do (1916)
Oriental Love (1917)
Sinbad, the Sailor (1917*, released 1919) director, co-writer
The Girl in the Dark (1918)
The Kaiser, Beast of Berlin (1918)
The Lion's Claw (serial, 1918)
The Lure of the Circus (serial, 1918)
Danger, Go Slow (1918)
Blind Husbands (1919)
The Right to Happiness (1919)
The Eternal Triangle (1919) director
Lasca (1919) director
The Line Runners (1920) director
A Tokio Siren (1920) director
The Adorable Savage (1920) director
White Youth (1920) director
Under Crimson Skies (1920)
The Fire Cat (1921) producer, director, story
Wolves of the North (1921) producer, director, story
Thunder Island (1921) producer, director, story
Five Days to Live (1922) director
The Vermilion Pencil (1922) director
The Son of the Wo//(1922) director
Master of Women (released as The Eternal Struggle, 1923)
("Liamo," 1923*)
After Marriage (1923*, released 1925) director, writer
The Lure of the Yukon (1924) director, writer
The Eskimo (1924*, overseas release by Wardour) director
The Valley of 10,000 Smokes (travel documentary, 1924*) director
Justice of the Far North (1925) director, writer
Typhoon Love (1926) director
For the Term of His Natural Life (Australia 1927) producer, director,
writer
The Adorable Outcast (Australia 1928) producer, director
Ranges of Doom (1927*) producer, director
Black Hills (1928*) producer, director
Girl of the Golden North (1928*) director
Show Girl's Luck (Australia 1931) producer, director
Mr. Robinson Crusoe (1932)
120
The Romance
The Harvey
'
of Rosy Ridge
Girls (1946)
(1950)
director
WATCH
FOR THESE
And Hundreds
THRILLS.
of Others!
-.
Advertisement for Norman O. Dawn's 1940 action/adventure film, Orphans of the North (card
292). HRHRC Film Collection.
121
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Judi Hoffman,
Philip C. Kolin
David H. Patrick received his M.A. in History from The University of Texas
at Austin and is presently pursuing a doctorate in Middle Eastern and United
States diplomatic histories, with research interests in modern Iran, IranoAmerican relations, and historical biography.
William J. Scheick
Department and
Cataloging Dept.
Ernestine Potter
Collection
Laura Gutierrez- Witt
Chemistry
(Mallet) Library
Christine Johnston
Classics Library
Bonny Keyes
Collection Heads
East Asian Studies Librarian
Kevin Lin
Engineering (McKinney)
Library
Susan Ardis
Mexican-American
Studies
Librarian
Margo Gutierrez
Music Librarian
David Hunter
Physics, Mathematics &
Astronomy (Kuehne) Library
Karen Croneis
Undergraduate Library
Suzanne Chaney (Acting)
Recent Publications
of
The
Authors' Libraries
James Joyce's Trieste Library, a catalogue of materials at the HRHRC by
Michael Patrick Gillespie, with the assistance of Erik Bradford Stocker.
$30.00 in cloth.
at the
HRHRC.
$18.95.
HRHRC.
$16.95.
Perspectives
WCW ir Others,
1990:
Finnegans Wake.
Narrative Gifts: "Cyclops" and the Economy of
Excess.
Goodwin, Annual James Joyce Checklist: 1989.
Mark Osteen,
Will
Subscriptions:
* Individuals
$35/year
Institutions
$35/year
JSA
The
Library
CHRONICLE
OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
APR*
1991
Liorary
The
Library
CHJROOTCILE
OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
ISSN
0024-2241
Cover illustration: Ink wash storyboard for the 1933 film The Story of Temple Drake, adapted
Faulkner's 1931 novel Sanctuary by screenwriters Maurine Watkins and Oliver
H . P. Garrett. A 1961 film version of the novel, entitled Sanctuary, starred Lee Remick as Temple
from William
HRHRC Collections.
The
Library Chronicle
Editorial Board
Thomas F. Staley
Carlton Lake
Sally Leach
Cathy Henderson
Harold Billings
William B. Todd
The Library Chronicle is issued quarterly at a subscription rate of $30.00 for four issues. The
purpose of the Chronicle is to present information on available materials in the special collections
at The University of Texas at Austin, to publish scholarly articles based on these materials, and to
record matters of interest concerning new acquisitions, exhibitions, and other events related to
the University's special collections. Writers should query first before submitting articles for
publication. All correspondence should be addressed to the Editors, P.O. Box 7219, Austin,
Texas 78713.
Contents
Collections
at Texas
The Status
of Graham
Greene Studies
17
37
69
89
of Mr. Crump"
in Perspective
99
Notes on Contributors
136
1989
137
Paul Bowles's novel The Sheltering Sky (London: John Lehmann, 1949). HRHRC Collections.
COLLECTIONS
AT TEXAS
A Birthday Exhibition
"
travel book, Their Heads Are Green and Their Hands Are Blue: Scenes From
the Non-Christian
World
of his autobiography,
Without
Stopping (1972); and publicity shots of Bernardo Bertolucci's film version of
The Sheltering Sky from Happy Valley Films. A dust jacket blurb from the
travel book, which takes its title from a poem by Edward Lear, likens Bowles
to the nineteenth-century Englishman who "thrives when the traveling is
hardest, the food ghastly or infrequent, water scarce, heat intolerable, or
'
mosquitoes abundant." In defining the nature of the "kif story as found in
Bowles's A Hundred Camels in the Courtyard (1962), translations by him of
stories by his two Moroccan writer-friends, the following passage serves to
indicate something about Bowles's own fiction: "an endless, proliferated tale
of intrigue and fantasy in which the unexpected turns of the narrative play a
much more important part than the development of the character and plot."
The contents of the Bowles Collection at the HRHRC comprise materials
from all aspects of the writer-composer's career: his music manuscripts, which
are often consulted for performances of his compositions; his literary manu
scripts, which include published and unpublished writings; his correspond
ence with writers and composers; juvenilia; and photographs and sound
recordings. Articles based on the Bowles's Collection have appeared in a
previous issue of The Library Chronicle, new series number 30 for 1985, and
in Perspectives on Music: Essays on Collections at the Humanities Research
Center, also from 1985. Along with Richard F. Patteson's "Paul Bowles: Two
Unfinished Projects," the Chronicle issue printed for the first time the
fragment of a Bowles novel. Bennett Lerner's article in Perspectives on Music
is entitled "Paul Bowles: Lost and Found" and traces the provenance of the
composer's music manuscripts now preserved at the HRHRC.
(1963); copies
BRIGHTON ROCK
THE POWER AND THE GLORY
Thepublir.itn.ilofBrightonHockin 193*broughtGreeneerfileal
acclaim.Thebookwassetfniheviolentunderworldofa seaside
townandcontained
a strongCatholicelement.
Throughtheevil
characterof Pinkie,bornaCatholicandgloryingInhisown
damnation,
Greenebroughta dimension
uf m>thtoihr romemporaryEnglishnovel.Theftitrrr andtheGloryemerged
fromhis
travelsInMexicoandis thoughtbymanytobeGreene's
finest
work Bothworks,althoughsoverydifferentInsetting,question
Ihenatureofman'ssalvation
#o
From a Graham Greene poster series chronicling Greene's life and career, organized by the
British Council. This poster features a page from an early manuscript draft of Greene's novel The
Power and the Glory, which forms part of the Graham Greene Collection at the HRHRC.
of Ballet
Alicia Markova, Erik Bruhn, and Lupe Serrano in the American Ballet Theatre production of Les
Sylphides (ca. 1963). Photograph by Fred Fehl. HRHRC Theatre Arts Collection.
10
Among the family members recalled by Michael Yeats were the poet's
younger brother, Jack Butler Yeats, the finest painter Ireland has produced,
and the poet's two sisters: Lily, the family archivist whose memoirs and letters
are in a clear and elegant style and whose embroidery is highly prized by the
family; and Lolly, who is known for her hand-colored prints and hand-printed
books. Of his own relationship with his father, Michael Yeats recalled that the
poet was rarely involved by his wife, Georgie, in helping to enforce the
mother's wishes, but that when he was, his father made a strong impression on
him and his sister Anne. Michael Yeats was seventeen when the poet died in
11
of seventy-four,
Nonetheless,
Carlo Coccioli, a novelist born in 1920 in Livorno, Italy, and since about
1975 a resident of Mexico City, visited the HRHRC on 24 October 1990 and
presented a talk under the general title "Experiences of a Trilingual Writer
About Literary Vocation, Books, Love, Animals, and God," which was later
printed in his regular column in the Mexico City newspaper Excelsior. The
author of some thirty books written in Italian, French, or Spanish and
translated into many languages, Coccioli characterized himself as "a prophet
with no message." Dr. Thomas F. Staley, director of the HRHRC, has written
one of the few critical studies in English of Coccioli's work, an article collected
in The Shapeless God (1968) and entitled "Faith and the Absurd: The PostExistential Vision of Carlo Coccioli," his discussion of an early novel, The
White Stone (1960), which Dr. Staley places in the existentialist tradition. On
the occasion of his visit to the HRHRC, the novelist donated to the Center the
original typescript of one of his novels in Spanish, Pequeno Karma. More
recently, Mr. Coccioli has generously added to his earlier gift by donating the
heavily revised typescripts and proofs of the following books: La Ville et le
Sang, Fabrizio Lupo, Le Tourment de Dieu, II Cielo e la Terra, Hommes en
Fuite, and Uomini in Fuga. Also included in the recent donation are fourteen
of the novelist's printed books in Italian, French, Portuguese, and Mexican
editions.
suffragettes, historians,
musicians, politicians, athletes, scholars, community workers, and governors,
12
"Carrie Nation and Students at U.T." (ca. 1904), gelatin silver print. Fisher Papers, Barker Texas
History Center, The University of Texas at Austin.
all have found a place in the "mosaic" of Texas women's history. Some items on
display rang with familiarity, such as the 1853 diary of Lizzie Scott Neblett
opened to an entry made five days before the delivery of her first child: "I
I do
have
so many, many fears, that my poor little Babe, will die
...
I could
...
ever, love
. . .
."Other
materials revealed how greatly women's lives have changed, such as Julien S.
Devereux's record book containing a list of female slaves in his ownership in
1853 (listed by Christian name and numbering 35), and the stained and manytimes folded free papers of Sylvia Green, "Colored Woman," from the
A pervading theme of the exhibition was the success with which women
have applied skills honed in traditional "women's work" to bring about social
and political change be it joining national sweater-knitting campaigns for
World War II soldiers or the petitioning of women's church and social clubs
for prison reform, educational improvements, and the preservation of Texas
heritage. The 1917 yearly report of the Houston chapter of the Texas Woman's
Christian Temperance Union noted under the insuppressibly enthusiastic
category "Do everything": "Mrs. Soule found that stores in Houston were
selling spiked ice cream, that is ice cream with wine or liquor as its flavoring,
she reported it to the district attorney and the stores were forced to give up at
least temporarily the use of alcohol flavoring" (from the James Rockwell
Papers). The 27-28 June 1919 diary entries of Austin suffrage worker Jane Y.
McCallum, written upon the Texas legislature's approval of the federal
suffrage amendment, memorialize her personal and public success: "'Oh joy,
oh boy' . . . It's all over I cannot realize that this thing we've been waging
such a terrific fight for is now actually a matter of history."
In addition to visual and written documents, oral histories also formed part
of the exhibit, such as that of sixties pop musician Janis Joplin, born and raised
in Port Arthur. "I was singing in this hillbilly group called the Waller Creek
"
Boys," Joplin recalls of her early days on the Austin music scene, Waller
Creek runs right through Austin . . . singing at this bar called Threadgill's," a
local restaurant/bar still known for its home-cooking and home-grown music.
She remembers Mr. Threadgill himself as "old, a great big man with a big
belly and white hair combed back on the top of his head. And he was back
there dishing out Polish sausage and hard-boiled eggs and Grand Prizes and
Lone Star" (transcript of recorded interview, ca. 1969, from the Claude
Matthews Collection). The exhibition, with its wide range of historical mate
rials relating to women's lives and activities, revealed the wealth of resources
available at the Barker, especially for scholars working in non-traditional
fields.
A recent addition to the Barker Texas History Center is the library of Sam
Rayburn, long-time speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. The
14
library, which houses books, papers, and mementos from Rayburn's 48 years
in the House, will remain in Bonham, Rayburn's hometown about 80 miles
northeast of Dallas, but will be administered by the University's Barker Texas
History Center in Austin. The Sam Rayburn Library Foundation, which has
operated the library since it opened in 1957, will transfer to the University an
endowment valued at approximately $2.5 million for operation of the library
under an agreement with the University's Board of Regents. Some materials
from the library will be brought to the Barker Center for use by scholars, but
copies of the papers will always be kept in Bonham. The library's importance
lies in its value as a resource for the study of the history of the House of
with original documentation of legislation passed during
Representatives,
Rayburn's speakership, correspondence from several Presidents, including
many papers relating to Lyndon B. Johnson, who was Rayburn's protege, and
a rich collection of artifacts associated with Rayburn's life and career. The
Rayburn Library will complement the Barker's other extensive collections of
congressional and political papers relating to Texas.
15
Carvel Collins transcribing notes on Faulkner, 10 July 1986. Photo by Don Bartletti, Los Angeles
Times, provided by Mrs. Ann Collins.
Carvel Collins
By James G.
Watson
The Carvel Collins Faulkner Collection came to the Harry Ransom Humani
ties Research Center in late 1964 in two parts, both locked in sealed metal
military boxes and encumbered with a variety of restrictions that could have
guaranteed their remaining sealed well into the twenty-first century. Eleven
boxes came to the Center by sale, restricted for twenty-five years; seven were
stored there in 1964 and given as gifts over the succeeding five years. These
came to be known to the HRHRC staff by their color codings as the grey boxes
and the red boxes respectively, the latter consisting of "sensitive materials"
Collins stripped from the whole collection prior to its sale. A third group of
locked green boxes was stored for Collins in 1969. At the time of the original
acquisition, it was agreed that all Faulkner materials Collins might subse
quently collect would come to the HRHRC at his death, and the terms of his
will indicate that this will be the case. The twenty-five year restriction having
been met in 1989, the grey boxes were opened and part of the treasure longrumored in Faulkner studies was brought to light. In the months before he
died, in March 1989, Collins came twice to Austin to consult about lifting
certain of the remaining restrictions on the red boxes and keeping in place
others central to his work. With his death all of the restrictions on materials
bought by the HRHRC or received as gifts have been removed and these can
now be catalogued. The remainder of the collection willed to the Center is
scheduled to be delivered in 1991.
For years, the name Carvel Collins has had legendary connotations for
Faulkner scholars. Collins taught the first Faulkner seminar in the United
States, at Harvard in the 1940s. He was among the first to treat Faulkner as a
modernist writer in the tradition of Joyce and Eliot, bringing myth and
psychology to bear in seminal essays like the 1952 English Institute paper on
"The Interior Monologues of The Sound and the Fury."1 At the same time, his
essays and his critical introductions to editions and collections announced the
biographical interest that marked his work early and late. In this, his first
'See Carvel Collins, "The Interior Monologues of The Sound and the Fury," in Publications in
the Humanities 6 (Boston:
concern always was with facts; his obsession was factual accuracy.
It
must be
said, too, that he sometimes was obsessed with keeping the facts he uncovered
IS
In
Faulkneriana in
a van.
Reading Room, he told me of a similar chair he had designed to carry with him
that unfolded into a bed at night. He carried camera equipment, too,
photographing documents
he uncovered
paper.
findings
Ry 1963 he could
write HRHRC Director Warren Roberts that his collection filled "fourteen
large fire-proof file drawers, and I am considering buying another extra-large
two-drawer fire-proof banking-house file because the stuff is piling up as a
result of all this wild and far-flung interviewing along with several phenome
nally lucky breaks beginning last winter."6
His problem was not with collecting information but with writing what he
knew. As early as 1952 Faulkner's friend and sometime agent Ben Wasson was
urging, "I look forward to the Collins opus. Yep, go ahead and write it. You're
going to get constipated with material if you don't get at it soon. So,
"7
Collins could not; at least he could not
scatalogically speaking, eliminate!
until he knew everything to be known. Initially, he had conceived writing a
small critical book. It never appeared. By stages, plans for the critical book
expanded to two volumes, then to a biography. In 1962, he told a number of
correspondents that he had promised Faulkner "no full-scale biography in his
lifetime" and spoke of a biographical-critical study "which his death now leads
"*
In 1964, negotiating
me to bring to publication by Atlantic, Little Brown.
with HRHRC the restrictions to be placed on his collection, Collins described
to Warren Roberts a two-volume biography, the second volume of which,
sensitive materials, might not be publishable in his own lifetime.9
Following the sale of the collection, he moved the project to Farrar, Straus
containing
and Giroux, where its imminent publication was announced in 1974, a month
authorized biography was published by Random
House. The book still was unpublished at Collins's death when, by his own
estimate, the collection in California had grown to three times the size of grey
Marvel Collins to Warren Roberts, 9-11-63 (HRHRC Director's Correspondence).
'Ben Wasson to Carvel Collins, 6-18-52 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Wasson, Ben").
"It was Collins's practice to announce his intentions to a number of correspondents in what was
essentially the same letter. Examples exist throughout the Collins Collection.
Carvel Collins to Warren Roberts, 9-11-63 (HRHRC Director's Correspondence).
19
at the
HRHRC
quarter of
century earlier. No
What exactly the University of Texas bought in 1964, and stored as later
gifts, was measured until recently by Collins's own account. He already had
made several "phenomenal" finds for the University by the time he intro
duced the possibility of selling his own collection among them one copy of
the illustrated verse play The Marionettes (1920) and a group of 287 fragments
of poems damaged when Phil Stone's house burned.10 His reputation as a
prominent Faulkner scholar was at its height, and his collection storied. He
wrote to Warren Roberts late in 1963:
The materials include: Typed transcriptions of tape recordings of
information from interviews with scores of Faulkner's relatives,
friends, and associates, some of the most significant of whom have
died (several of them without having talked to any other Faulknerizer). Their accounts as well as those by people who still live (also
often without having talked to anyone else interested in Faulkner) are
indispensible to any real study of the man's life; for he left neither
diaries nor journals, and his letters are scarcer than those of any
famous writer I ever heard of. In addition to these records of lengthy
and often sequential interviews, the materials include a large number
of photographs, many of them at present entirely unknown to others;
voluminous clippings from out-of-the-way sources as well as from the
more conventional;
documents linking his fiction with his life
characters, events, geography; prolonged correspondence with in
numerable people who knew him; photostats or copies of many
letters by Faulkner and some others, including a batch of letters by
his mother which concern him; a page or two of manuscript by him;
photostats of some destroyed or permanently unavailable sheets of
drafts of novels, including the only preliminary work-sheet I've ever
heard of it is about The Sound and the Fury; and notes of my own
in short, all the sorts of things, and in quantity, which would have
been gathered by one who for fifteen years has been trying to get
together facts to write a biography of a modern author, about whom
there is afloat more false information
have heard
So
if I
upon date."
Absalom!,
1989.
They
place ("Hollywood"),
subject ("Integration," "Movies"), or book title (Pylon) relating to the life and
work of William Faulkner. The red boxes of "sensitive" materials were opened
according to Collins's instructions on 11 November 1989. They contained
another 196 sealed envelopes, similarly labeled and some with new titles
("Attorneys," "Elmer"); gradually over a period of years all but 30 of these had
been given as gifts. More than half carried statements that they were to
remain sealed until the deaths of Faulkner's wife, daughter, and grandchil
dren. Their "sensitivity" turned out to consist primarily of Faulknerian
improprieties with alcohol and women, and in one case with Estelle Faulk
I3
These
ner's wearing Asian silks on the beach at Pascagoula in 1928.
restrictions, imposed in the immediate aftermath of Faulkner's death and
based for the most part on outdated standards, were renegotiated with
Collins, and the grey and red files have now been collated and combined into a
single archive.
The sheer mass of this material is impressive,
amount of material already at Texas is yet to come from the Collins estate. In
the materials now available, there are records of all sorts from virtually every
period of Faulkner's life. Many of the names and places are familiar from
Blotner's Biography and other sources, some of the facts are partially or
imperfectly recorded, and some of the speculations are in error. But a
significant portion of the Collins Collection is new to Faulkner studies (the file
materials on Dorothy Ware are an example) or sets previous facts in a new
light (the materials on Sanctuary), and virtually all of the Collins files will have
to be scanned with care. In scope, too, the collection ranges from the
mundane to the rare and unusual. The files for Faulkner's family are typical of
the biographical records, which contain an early, and imperfect, genealogical
chart; newspaper accounts of Faulkner's immediate ancestors; photographs of
Falkner/Faulkner people and places; letters to the Oxford Eagle written by
William's brother Jack from the Front in France in 1918; Collins's transcribed
notes on interviews with Faulkner and with most of his then living relatives;
his correspondence with Faulkner's stepson, stepdaughter, and his daughter
Jill; his interview notes and correspondence with Faulkner's Aunt Alabama;
and some thirty letters written after the Nobel Prize by Maud Falkner to Sallie
Falkner Burns in which Faulkner is mentioned. Together, these files
constitute the kind of foundational information essential to any biography. In
the Jill Faulkner Summers file is a xerox copy of a letter from Phil Stone
written six days after Faulkner's death offering legal assistance with such a
project and urging Jill and Paul "to let me hire the young man who would
actually do it."" Ostensibly he had in mind the Faulkner scholar and collector
whose work he personally had been assisting: Carvel Collins himself.
Fascinating though they often are, documents such as these are not without
their ambiguities for contemporary scholars, and many of the problems they
present turn on the length of time the collection has been sealed. The
complexities are historical as well as literary. For example, despite his close
contacts with involved Southern liberals such as James Silver, Collins's
sincere attempts in the 1950s to understand Faulkner in the context of racial
tensions then erupting in the South seem disarmingly innocent in 1991. More
"Notes on an interview with Rosebud Leatherby, September 1962 (Carvel Collins Collection,
file "Leatherby, Rosebud").
MPhil Stone to Paul Summers, 7-12-62
[William Faulkner's daughter]").
22
file "Summers,
Jill
F.
"
23
itself has erupted in the last quartercentury in a number of directions and ways. Much of the careful biographical
and interpretive work Collins set aside to do was accomplished by other
hands. Theory has redefined approaches to literature and literary lives. So
irregularly did Collins enter his findings into the expanding dialogue among
scholars that his version of Faulkner's life and work loses some of the force of
argument
Unused,
who would not wait for it to be opened. For such reasons, Maud Falkner's
1950 report of the factual basis of some Faulkner characters and fictional
situations sheds no new light on the writer's methods of creation and
composition; similarly, Collins's speculation, in notes, that Faulkner reused
envelopes because "he had such a dislike of writing letters or anything to do
with letters . . . that he somehow wanted to show his contempt for that whole
form of communication" predates the scores of subsequently published letters
that bejie Collins's notion. " Again, there are times when the bare facts that
Collins documented make little or no sense without him to explain their
meaning. Leafing through the collection last spring, he could summon a story
about virtually every piece of paper that came to his hand. Yet his notes on
three interviews with Faulkner seem to lead nowhere: first, like the hundreds
of other transcriptions in the collection, they are notes not quotations; second,
they are about disappointingly ordinary subjects Faulkner's house, fishing,
and Eastern girls' schools. Where such apparent minutiae might have fit in the
Collins scheme of things, his collection does not tell us and he did not say. If
his unwillingness to publish his findings troubles this material, so does his
indirection, which prompted the collector William B. Wisdom to write him
once, "Have you ever mentioned to Faulkner the fact that you know he
writes?""
Wisdom and other collectors, notably Carl Petersen, were close and
important contacts for Collins as he pursued his researches. As an old New
Orleanian, Wisdom knew that city well and he had special interest in
manuscripts
and
"Notes on an interview with Dorothy Commins, 1-12-63 (Carvel Collins Collection, file
"Commins, Saxe and Dorothy").
"William Wisdom to Carvel Collins, 2-26-53 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Wisdom, William
B").
24
places, and events, and in all offered Collins his version of the Compleat
William Faulkner. From Stone, Collins recovered the fragments of burned
poems now at
important
HRHRC,
and places
supplemented
by long transcriptions
is
nearly twenty years, and concludes with Stone's sad last letters in 1963 from
White Male Cottage 5, Mississippi State Hospital. Bits and pieces of these
materials are scattered throughout the Collins Collection, cross-referenced
according to specific subjects. Some of this, as it pertains to Stone himself, is
by now familiar; some of the letters, including, in fact, some of Collins's own
letters to Stone, have been published by Louis Daniel Brodsky, who obtained
"
copies for his collection from Stone's wife Emily. The Stone letters in the
Collins Collection show that Stone made it his business to check Collins's
biographical materials for factual errors as he also did for Robert Coughlan's
Life magazine series, and that he offered his views on current critical work.18
In 1954 Stone approved Collins's treatment of the crucifixion plot of The
Sound and the Fury and, typically, claimed for himself significant contribu
tions to Faulkner's first masterwork. Letters from Stone assert that Faulkner
read the novel aloud to him in 1928, and that it was he who supplied the title
from Shakespeare. His letters also reference factual material, including
Dilsey's one-handed clock (Faulkner's Mammy Callie had one such) and the
models for Benjy (the Chandler idiot) and for Jason (Stone's brother, James
Stone, Jr.).19 By the 1950s Faulkner and Stone were estranged, but as other
local voices spoke up about Faulkner, Stone several times wrote Collins
asking to be consulted further. He still was the resident expert "nobody
knows Bill as I do," he said20 but increasingly now he was disparaging. It was
he who had translated Greek for Faulkner, he told Collins, and he said that
Faulkner's public stand on integration indicated his need for publicity in the
aftermath of the Nobel prize acclaim.21 To O.B. Emerson, he proclaimed that
except for a few early masterpieces, Faulkner's work was "very much over
rated. "a In a few cases, like this one, the collection documents the subsidiary
stories of people around Faulkner.
For the most part, Collins's sources of information are secondary to the
writer, and it is clear that Collins usually was canny enough to know their
value and to follow their promising leads. From New Orleans, in addition to
"A Comprehensive Guide to the Brodsky Collection, Vol. II: The Letters, eds. Louis Daniel
Brodsky and Robert W. Hamblin (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1984).
"Robert Coughlan, "The Private World of William Faulkner," Life pt. 1 (28 Sept. 1953). 118136; pt. 2(5 Oct. 1953): 55-68.
"Phil Stone to Carvel Collins, 8-16-54 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Stone, Phil").
"Phil Stone to Carvel Collins, 9-16-57 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Stone, Phil").
"Phil Stone
"Phil Stone
Photograph taken at the 1955 movie premier in Memphis, Tennessee, of William Faulkner's
Land of the Pharaohs. From left to right: Malcolm Franklin, Mrs. Malcolm Franklin, Mrs. Jack
Faulkner, Paul Summers, Mrs. Paul Summers, William Faulkner, Mrs. William Faulkner, Jack
Faulkner, Mrs. Walter McLean. HRHRC Collections.
Wisdom, the Collins Collection includes significant files on Marc and Lucille
Antony; John McClure from the Times-Picayune, and Mary Rose Bradford,
the wife of his colleague Roark Bradford; George Healy, who succeeded them
at the newspaper; Julius Friend and Lillian Friend Marcus from the Double
Dealer; Harold Levy, the "H.L." of Faulkner's sonnet "The Faun/To H.L. ";
and Helen Baird Lyman, for whom Faulkner made the gift books Collins
edited and to whom he dedicated his New Orleans novel Mosquitoes. A copy
of a letter to Helen, possibly from the 1940s, consists of a doggerel verse
entitled "Hank and His Dulcimer" and the note, "How are you? Bill. " Among
lesser New Orleans lights, these are complemented
by files on William
who
confirmed
to
Collins
that
Faulkner
threw
Spratling,
manuscripts into the
sea on their voyage to Europe together in 1925; Margery Gumbel, who
thought Faulkner was in love with her and remembered ribald epigraphs to
the chapters in the manuscript of Soldier's Pay; and the Scottish ex-soldier
Colonel Charles Glenn Collins, model for Colonel Ayers in Mosquitoes.
One of the surprises of the collection from Faulkner's New Orleans period is
a photocopy of an undated, typed letter thanking Sherwood Anderson for the
gift of a regimental striped tie. (The original letter is at the Newberry Library
in Chicago, and so far as I know it has not been published. ) Faulkner describes
the unseasonably warm weather, mentions several New Orleanians repre
sented in the collection, envies Anderson his "dramatized story" in which
actors take the place of cold print, and recounts a confrontation at the British
Service Club involving the new tie. The letter is signed "Bill Faulkner." A
postscript asks Anderson to "give my love to Mr Stark" and says that he and
"Miss Elizabeth" have been reading The Spanish Farm." Internal evidence
shows that the letter must have been written from New Orleans early in 1925
when Faulkner lived briefly with Anderson's wife Elizabeth and his eldest
son, Bob, who is mentioned. Faulkner had met Anderson in 1924. In January
1925, when Faulkner arrived in New Orleans, Anderson was away on a
speaking tour, and early in February he was in New York for the stage
adaptation of The Triumph of the Egg. There he would have visited Faulkner's
sometime benefactor, the Mississippi poet and novelist Stark Young, who had
rented rooms from Elizabeth Anderson before her marriage. The letter dates
from before Faulkner knew Anderson well enough to address him as
Sherwood but after he had spun him the story of his career in the Royal Flying
Corps/Royal Air Force. The tone of self-conscious artistry suggests that he
also, and justifiably at that time, had presented himself as a poet.
A selection of other such materials appears to resolve other mysteries, some
of them made so by Collins himself. Collins's notes on his interviews with
Faulkner to Mrs. Guy Lyman, n.d. (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Letters,
inscriptions by Faulkner").
"William Faulkner to Sherwood Anderson, n.d. (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Letters,
telegrams, inscriptions by Faulkner").
"William
telegrams,
27
William C. Odiorne, for example, almost certainly are the source of his
published claim that in Paris in 1925 Faulkner already was at work on The
Sound and the Fury.2* Faulkner's own claim, in a letter published by Joseph
Blotner, that in Montreux in 1925 he and Spratling called on a Russian
princess, "daughter-in-law to a member of the Czar's family, and herself a
daughter of the last Doge of Venice," is supported in the event by Odiorne's
information that the meeting was arranged by her nephew, a New Orleans
banker named Witte, whose grandfather was a Russian count.* Odiorne
remembered her as the Princess Dolgorouki;27 another former New Orleanian, Catherine Durieux, identified the "princess" to Collins as the Countess
Felippo Caracciolo, nee Margaret Clark of New Orleans.28 Mrs. Will Parks
and Ben Wasson, on the other hand, are responsible for new questions. Mrs.
Parks, nee Carolyn Smythe, described for Collins an illustrated book of poems
that Faulkner made for her, since burned.29 Poems by William Faulkner for
Carolyn Smythe adds another lost gift book to a growing list of such work.
Wasson possibly adds a previously unknown play. In his Introduction to
Wasson's Count No Count, Collins mentions and briefly describes a play
Wasson ascribed to Faulkner.30 A photocopy of such a play, a light romantic
comedy, is in the Carvel Collins Faulkner Collection marked in Collins's
hand, "Ben Wasson told me this play was written by Faulkner in college."31
Whether or not it was remains an open question.
Often as intriguing are Collins's investigations and discoveries, in class
rooms and libraries and on his travels, relating to Faulkner's published books.
Collins's attempts to understand them, and the processes by which they were
created, are documented in the collection by a range of materials that includes
Harvard seminar papers on Faulkner; offprints of critical essays, and in
several cases whole copies of books, in galleys or on microfilm; photostats of
Faulkner source materials that Collins worked with, including, for As I Lay
Dying, whole chapters from The Cults of Greek States; and Collins's copious
notes on the poems, stories, and novels, and on publicly and privately held
"Notes on an interview with William C. Odiorne, 7-2-63 (Carvel Collins Collection, file
"Odiorne, W.C."). Collins makes the claim in his introduction to Faulkner's Mayday (Notre
Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1978), pp. 23-25.
"Joseph L. Blotner, ed.. Selected Letters of William Faulkner (New York: Random House,
1977), pp. 10-11.
"Notes on an interview with William Odiorne, n.d. (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Odiorne,
w.c.7
"Catherine Durieux to Collins, 4-18-63 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Europe, trip by
Faulkner 1925 [France]").
"Notes on an interview with Mrs. Will Parks, 11-23-63 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Parks,
Will, Mrs").
inspired.36
3*Carvel Collins, "A Note on Sanctuary ," Harvard Advocate (November 1951): 16.
Dorothy").
"Notes on an interview with John Foley, 7-10-53 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Foley, John
["NubbyT)"Notes on an interview with Ruby N. , n.d. (Carvel Collins Collection, file "N. , Ruby").
29
of Popeye from his other sources this story must have come to his mind as a
He notes, too,
episode with integral fictional possibilities.
that the fictional reality in this case in fact is a paler image of evil than the real.
From fictional women and their models to actual women important to
Faulkner, the collection is equally but likewise unevenly intriguing. Collins
met Meta Carpenter Wilde Rebner in Hollywood in 1963, well before she
published her own book, A Loving Gentleman: The Love Story of William
Faulkner and Meta Carpenter.3" Even though Mrs. Rebner's book inevitably
covers much of what she told Collins, her information to him was an important
source about Faulkner's several stays in Hollywood and is made available in
the collection from Collins's unique point of view as a Faulkner expert and
intended biographer. Like Phil Stone in some ways, Mrs. Rebner introduced
Collins to Hollywood people she and Faulkner had known, and shared with
him stories and artifacts. Collins's transcribed accounts of eight long inter
complementary
37Notes and transcriptions from the Memphis Commercial-Appeal, October 1919, August 1920
(Carvel Collins Collection, file "Sanctuary novel").
^Meta Carpenter Wilde, A Loving Gentleman: The Love Story of William Faulkner and Meta
Carpenter (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1976).
30
ijjc reacts
to tho shoot
ing of
Over hsr carry
the ahadow of
he sha
dow turns and
advances as the
The shadow
stops.
'
Just
y in
Tn the backonly
the lets of
:>x to about
midway up the
thighs.
Tex's
at
shadow
covers
ill 'j*l.
Storyboard for the 1933 film The Story of Temple Drake, an adaptation of William Faulkner's
novel Sanctuary. The name of the character Popeye was changed in this screen version to Mex.
HRHRC Collections.
Meta Carpenter in William Faulkner's room at the Knickerbocker Hotel, Hollywood. Faulkner is
HRHRC Collections.
views with her in 1963 cover the stages of her relationship with Faulkner in
the late 1930s and 1940s, supplemented by her information about his friends
in Hollywood,
his favorite
his reading,
his serious
writing, his movie assignments, and her sense of his relationship with Estelle.
Mrs. Rebner shared with Collins inscribed gifts Faulkner gave her: Joyce's
Pomes Penyeach; copies of Swinburne and Housman; Notes on a Horsethief;
and the corrected galleys of Absalom, Absalom!, the last of which with a still
sealed collection of Faulkner's letters to her subsequently
became the
property of the HRHRC.39 Mrs. Rebner also gave Collins a large collection of
photographs taken of her and Faulkner separately, together, and in groups,
several of which have not yet been published. Through Mrs. Rebner, Collins
met such Faulkner acquaintances as John Crown, Professor of Music at USC,
and Yetiva Moss. To Crown, Faulkner claimed not to have read Thomas
Wolfe, praised Thomas Mann, and declared that as an artist all he could ask for
"Notes on an interview with Meta Rebner, autumn 1963 (Carvel Collins Collection,
"Rebner, Meta, Mrs.").
32
file
"would be to put something in the world which had not been there before. "*
Yetiva Moss worked at the Stanley Rose bookstore in Los Angeles where
Faulkner spent time with what Jo Pagano, another California friend from the
1930s, characterized to Collins as a California writers colony. Whether from
Mrs. Rebner's information or by other means, Collins also turned up a
previously unknown document of considerable biographical importance. It is
a complaint for divorce on grounds of desertion,
filed by Estelle in Los
"
Angeles on 22 October 1935, and withdrawn by her on 3 December 1935.
Even in its present, temporarily incomplete state, the availability of the
Carvel Collins Faulkner Collection inevitably raises the question of whether a
"
"new, perhaps revisionist biography of William Faulkner can now be written.
The dismal examples of the recent Oates and Karl biographies, neither of
which does much more than mine Blotner's work for facts, suggest that the
next biographer will need Blotner plus something more.42 The Collins
Collection may be that something, or a part of it.
Judging from the material so far deposited at Texas, it seems certain that
adjustments will be made in some facts of Faukner's life, and in the
chronologic sequence of his work, that will tie the two more closely together
and provide a better understanding of his means and materials of composition .
It is worth remembering, however, that Collins's own correctives to Blotner
since 1974 in his introduction to Helen: A Courtship, for example have
been relatively minor adjustments, characterized by his tenacious grip on the
telling fact more than by a broad reach of understanding of a life. Without a
Collins manuscript, that might be expected to give direction to the life and
work he examined for fifty years, the collection as he left it understandably
seems to consist in large part of his putting out feelers to Louis Cochran who
published Faulkner's poems and drawings in the University of Mississippi
newspaper and yearbook in 1919-1920, to Joe and Johnny Campassi who knew
Reno Devaux in Memphis, to Phoebe Omlie whose husband taught Faulkner
to fly in the 1930s, and to scores of other people who might, just might have
known the secret something that would pull it all together. In process, it must
be said, Collins met a good many dead ends and collected a fair midden heap
of dross. It will be the task of another biographer to discover, determine, and
synthesize a collection that occasionally is dated, eccentric, even mundane,
yet richly informs some aspects of Faulkner's life and work; a collection that is
perilously thin in manuscript holdings yet impressively broad and deep in its
facts about the books and the man who made them. Moreover, the collection
"Notes on an interview with John Crown, 12-23-63 (Carvel Collins Collection, file "Crown,
Prof. John").
''Carvel Collins Collection, files "Attorneys" and "Faulkner, Estelle."
"Stephen B. Oates, William Faulkner, the Man and the Artist: A Biography (New York:
Harper & Row, 1987); Frederick R. Karl, William Faulkner, American Writer: A Biography (New
York: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1989).
34
is not now as might have been claimed when it was sold in 1964 the only
one of its kind.
biographers
35
Graham Greene, from the book jacket for A Sort of Life (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971).
Photograph by Ottawa Karsh. HRHRC Collections.
By
Graham
periods,
tions of man's fallen state in this world rather than with language, aesthetics,
'Jeffrey Meyers, ed., Graham Greene: A Revaluation (London: Macmillan, 1990), p. 1. All
subsequent references to published writings on or by Graham Greene will be supplied in the text
and abbreviated to the names of authors, the date of publication where there is more than one
work by the same author, and page numbers where the publication is longer than one page.
Complete bibliographical information is supplied at the end of the article in the section headed
"Works Cited."
37
the shape of Greene's career; central concerns such as theology and politics
the notion of the "double" or "other"; film and other aspects of popular culture
the most recent publications by and about
Greene; work in progress and work to come; achievement and stature.
The difficulty of comprehending the intricacies and overall shape of
Greene's career is compounded by the fact that his papers and related
documents are scattered among various locations and that little has been
done with them to date. The largest and most important private collections are
undoubtedly those of Norman Sherry, Greene's authorized biographer, and
of Greene himself. Sherry possesses not only all of Greene's books, but also a
vast correspondence, unpublished interviews with both Greene and numer
aesthetics and style; intertextuality;
ous others he has met during the nearly fifteen years he has spent on the
biography,
In
Stories, The Comedians (novel and film), The Confidential Agent, The End of
Affair, The Heart of the Matter (corrected page proofs), The Honorary
the
though unannotated,
Greene's writings."
interview).
Seeking to
Skter
feftf
,1
I
!,. k.i
*
-'-y*^
.* *
*-%V-
r"-3**M- *'
f. I
"*"
^2*fe=7ESa-'
I.-_. *
-f....-i
"* pi -
,'
(fr.
r^
/r,T.r*-V-
,"-'o-^-T^-
Title page and other pages from Graham Greene's 1940 draft otThe Power and the Glory: A New
Novel. HRHRC Collections.
41
Greene's
footsteps,
as he had Conrad's,
Sherry
much that Greene had long kept secret or had recast and the
biographer has exposed it with a judicious balance of candor and discretion. If
there is significant difference in what Sherry has done in the cases of Conrad
learned
and Greene, that difference lies not in him but in his subjects: he has written
exactly the sort of book that Greene should have expected from Sherry's work
On Conrad. One suspects, in fact, that Greene's reaction results less from what
has so far been published (Volume I: to 1939) than from what promises to
follow in Volume II.4 Reviewing the first volume, R.Z. Sheppard summarizes
what remains to be done: Sherry, he writes,
. . .
the fact that what he had sought to head off is coming to pass: an unauthorized
biography, Drawn Swords: A Biography of Graham Greene, by Anthony
Mockler,
a nonacademic
'According to Norman Sherry, Greene thought that Sykes had taken advantage of his friendship
with Waugh to disparage him posthumously (Sherry interview). Greene also believed that an
academic, unlike a journalist, would at least get the facts right, would be what Sherry calls "a
writer on oath" perhaps because Greene had been a journalist and not an academic.
'Its projected date of completion is 1992.
Three excerpts from this work appeared in The Sunday Telegraph of March 1989. At that time
it was scheduled to be published by William Collins in November 1989, though a threatened
lawsuit over its unauthorized use of copyrighted material has delayed and may well prevent
publication. To judge from the excerpts, Mockler's text is far less detailed than Sherry's, highly
based on little or misused evidence, and often superficial; it is not, however,
speculative,
particularly badly written.
42
Mr Greene like an old hen, worried for his health and his
In Mr Greene's own account of himself. . . the writer deals
robustly with the darker parts of his history. Mr Sherry, convinced he
is being over-brave, presents Mr Greene with tender sentimentality.
("The Man Within" 97)
fusses round
future.
Greene's
autobiographical
statements
(1948),
have
to be recognized both as creative acts in
begun
Reflections (1990)
themselves and also as the bases for his more overtly fictive representations.
Criticism has also increasingly acknowledged that the fiction is highly
Richard Hoggart boldly asserts that "in Greene's novels we
we meet Graham Greene" (in Hynes 91-92). As
Greene maintains in numerous interviews (for example, Shuttleworth and
Raven [1953], Phillips [1969], Mewshaw [1977], Joannon [1981], Kyncl
[1984], Couto [1988], and especially Allain [1983]), the themes are identical in
both fiction and autobiography: "lost childhood," a sense of victimization,
autobiographical.
secrecy, depression,
"absurd
and reckless
217).
his
. . .
He
of his early years that "everything one was to become must have been
(Sort 15). Those early years were, as Greene
depicts them, a time of agony, of humiliation and victimization, of growing
morbidity and despondency culminating in his realizing that he is a manicto fear and distrust
depressive (Sort 128). Greene came, consequently,
innocence, and he developed, or discovered, what he called "a splinter of ice
in the heart of the writer" (Sort 188). As he says of his character Pinkie in
Brighton Rock, "hell lay about him in his infancy" (69). Greene found
consolation of a kind, when trying to win Vivien Dayrell-Browning as his wife,
in converting to Catholicism, though he maintains that "I had not been
converted to a religious faith. I had been convinced by specific arguments in
the probability of its creed" (Ways 56). The emotional groundwork, however,
says
43
The End
A Burnt-Out Case
IC17UI
1961
DespitehisImpatience
whhthe Catholic'label,(irecnecontinued
toerplnrelhemysteries
offaiih In TftrHndofihr.Xffair.written
afterthebreak-upofhi*ownmarriage,hechartsthecourseor
anaffairbetween
a marriedwoman.Sarah,andherloverBendrix
WhenBendrixisapparently
killedinthehliu, SarahcallsonGodlo
restorehimInreturnforwhichsin-willendtheaffair
survives;
Bendrix
Sarah'slovetransforms
im Martowtyioonitir
love,butBendrix
's uncomprehending
passionturnstohaired.
itt m
si
rflfia
Slflbfrom
Iti-W>t
Mmwtion>,f
rhrtndn/thr
\ffhtr
pU>*
SnhLrwrirdkNki-d
hhno*
"U~
mtnlina
tiiwrit*
nrrrrnplas
Inviimikft)
tfar
Arxtarai
riulHritfanh
Northtktr
Grwnr's
I
lt\i-d
hrforv
IV war.
>*
hrn-irAlii-d
dMbruins
forThrEndn/tir\
A Burnl-OutCasewaswrittentenyearslaterQuern,asuccessful
architect,
turnshisbackonfameandsexualsuccessandretreats
toalepercolonyintheOmgotofindspiritualmeaninginhislife.
.-;
t W,
. -
.v.k -
,
J . .-.**.
4 _
i -.__
I. 4 ,..4..., -.* L
'^: Q
J
toth*hprrrvte*f
intmrhafar+tmetrr
V, .sA.
atYonda.
,y, |^ .
V*
si
'
From a Graham Greene poster series chronicling Greene's life and career, organized by the
British Council. Highlighted is a page of notes from Greene's Congo Journal concerning a 1959
visit to a leper colony, a research trip for his 1961 novel A Burnt-Out Case. The journal forms part
of the Graham Greene Collection at the HRHRC.
had been laid by schoolboy misery, a sense of being betrayed by a boy he had
trusted: "One began to believe in heaven because one believed in hell, but for
while it was only hell one could picture with a certain intimacy" (Roads
4). Greene quotes from "Germinal," a poem by AE, to the effect that "In the
lost boyhood of Judas / Christ was betrayed." The motif, as Sherry notes, is
central: "The Judas figure [is] a powerful character in some of Greene's finest
novels" (83), and the Manichean vision hunter and hunted, victimizer and
victim, saved and damned, good and evil is at the heart of the fiction at least
a long
Greene
that he
("Places "4 [1964]). "It is," he insists, "the 'human factor' that interests me, not
apologetics" (Marie-Francoise Allain 150). Yet in 1945 Greene had written:
which allows him to justify suicides, among whom he numbers The Power and
the Glory's whiskey priest and Sarah in The End of the Affair. Much has been
written about Greene's playing Russian roulette, attempting suicide, and
courting danger through his journeys, but suicide and the contemplation of it
are more central in the fiction than the criticism to date indicates. There are,
for example, suicides in The Man Within, The Heart of the Matter, and The
Living Room; a pseudo-suicide pact in Brighton Rock; suicidal actions by the
priest in The Power and the Glory and Sarah in The End of the Affair; and the
contemplation of suicide by the narrator of Dr. Fischer of Geneva. Greene's
views remain unorthodox: in interviews he maintains that neither Bobby
Sands nor Jan Palach were suicides because they were politically motivated
(Joannon 164 [1981], Kyncl 3 [1984]).
George Orwell's much reprinted review of The Heart of the Matter (1948)
remains one of the most hostile and irrefutable treatments of Greene's use of
religion. "This cult of the sanctified sinner seems to me to be frivolous, and
underneath it there probably lies a weakening of belief, for when people really
believed in Hell, they were not so fond of striking graceful attitudes on its
brink" (in Hynes 107). In Brighton Rock, Greene had written a novel that
depends on its readers' believing (and caring) that salvation is possible for the
"
evil Pinkie between "the stirrup and the ground. Orwell's attack on a novel in
which a good man commits suicide for noble reasons suggests how far Greene
had come in seeming to subvert orthodoxy while continuing to share its
obsession with individual salvation.6 Echoing Orwell, John Atkins (1957)
similarly attacks Greene's moral and religious beliefs as expressed in the
fiction. Even the Pope entered the fray: "You see the Pope has condemned
you almost by name? 'Violent & immoral books cloaked in the glitter of
aesthetics.' Hard words" (Evelyn Waugh letter to Greene: March 1950, 322).
Such disparagement may have not only moved Greene away from faith, but
also prompted his increasing tendency to deny that he had ever really
possessed it.
Less partisan and more balanced treatments of the topic include Walter
Allen's examination
of Greene's
beliefs
in terms
of Augustinianism and
'Evelyn Waugh, agreeing that The Heart of the Matter "poses a vastly more subtle problem"
than Brighton Rock, says that the former "is a book which only a Catholic could write and only a
Catholic can understand. I mean that only a Catholic can understand the nature of the problem"
(in Hynes 96).
46
fiction" (vii). A.F. Cassis (1973) and George Gaston (1984) offer useful
discussions of Greene's varying treatment of religion in his fiction. Bernard
Bergonzi (1979) and Roger Sharrock (1984) see Greene as having moved
beyond the "Catholic novelist" category as does Greene: "With the ap
proach of death, I care less and less about religious truth. One hasn't long to
wait for revelation or darkness" (Sort 168). Donald Costello (1959) and Joseph
Geist (1972) usefully survey the Catholic response to Greene's writings.
critics are focusing on Greene's
Increasingly,
and on broad
heterodoxy
philosophical issues. Henry Grubbs (1949) and Robert Evans (1957) were
among the first to discuss Greene's relationship to Existentialism; Gangeshwar Rai (1983) and Anne Salvatore (1988) pursue the topic at far greater length
and depth. Julian Symons (1983) and Henry Donaghy (1983b) view "uncer
1).
Julian Symons (1983) also discerns links between early and late
Greene: "An ascetic distaste for human greed and desire runs through all the
work" (9). Yet
gathering critical consensus sees the life and career as
punctuated by at least two major changes. First, "His switchover from
romanticism to realism . . happened in 1932" (John Carey), following his long
wooing of Vivien; his conversion to Catholicism in 1926; the banality of
marriage, children, and poverty; the relative failures of his first, heavily
Conradian, novels; and such lessons as he learned about writing from his early
newspaper and film work.
The second major change occurred in the 1950s. Greene's summary of that
period restates themes from his early years. In the 1950s, he says,
(1973,
it
became
depression.
...
escape from
a
boredom,
it
escape from
hadn't
the
places, not to seek material for novels [though that of course resulted]
but to regain the sense of insecurity which had enjoyed in the three
(Ways 145-46)
manic
depression
..."
(227).
47
It
. . .
blitzes on London.
fiction" [ix]), and when he both definitively joined the literary establishment
and had opportunity to refashion himself. This radical change has received
relatively little attention to date.
The Heart of the Matter (1948) was Greene's first commercial success since
either The Man Within (1929) or Brighton Rock (1938) depending on how
one measures these things and it led Heinemann to reprint Greene's novels
in a uniform edition. This was followed by a Collected Edition by Heinemann
in conjunction with Bodle.y Head, which began appearing in 1970. For the
Collected Edition, Greene has not only written Prefaces to each of his books
(the Prefaces were subsequently collected together as Ways of Escape), but
has also seized the opportunity to revise: for example, he restored to The
Heart of the Matter a scene that presents Louise more sympathetically and
Scobie's suicide more harshly; and in revising The
he made
critics from labeling a major portion of his corpus as Catholic. Roger Sharrock
(1984),
one, a phase of Catholic novels, and a later group of books in which the
Christian themes, if not wholly absent, are removed to a greater distance" (9).
Brian Thomas (1988) similarly hypothesizes "that the novels published
between 1950 and 1973 constitute a new and distinct phase in the develop
ment of Greene's conception of narrative, and that the structural basis of this
phase is romance" (xi). As Greene says in his Introduction to the reissued
Brighton Rock, what he had always wanted to write was "the high romantic
tale, capturing us in youth with hopes that prove illusions, to which we return
in age in order to escape the sad reality."
Philip Stratford, who maintains that Greene's "main concern has always
been the problem of faith, religious and political, in an increasingly complex
and faithless world," nonetheless notes that, after 1953, "the religious
concerns of his characters take second place to political preoccupations" (1982,
289). John Spurling (1983) and Peter Conn (1989) suggest something analo
gous when they discuss what the former calls "the quintessential rogue's or
sinner's creed which is recited, or implied ... in almost every book Greene has
written" (16). Conn adds:
John Spurling (1983) notes that "Comedy for Greene is bound up with antagonism to
conventional society" (50). Greene dates it more precisely: "all my humorous stories date from the
Second World War, as though the proximity of death provoked this irresistible urge to laugh and
to 'unwind'" (Alain 122). Yet, as Spurling adds, "People don't laugh much in Greene's novels" (48).
48
. . . committed
the
After opposing the General Strike of 1926, Greene became increasingly left
wing during and after the 1930s, though he supported neither side during the
Spanish Civil War. He moved from Catholic conservatism (like that of Waugh)
to social liberalism;8 he became a member of the Independent Labour Party in
1933 and then a "fellow-traveller": "I find nothing unsympathetic in atheism,
even in Marxist atheism. My wasteland is inhabited by the pious 'subur
bans'
..."
Greene's
(Ways 265).
politics in the '50s and '60s are clear from numerous
letters,
death" (14).
M. M. Mahood (1977) notes with some surprise that "few of Greene's many
pay much attention to his politics ..." (203), a subject of major
importance from early on. The early England Made Me (1935) treats the
failure of capitalism; the exchange of letters with Bowen and Pritchett, Why
Do I Write? (1948), concerns the role of the writer from a social and political
point of view; and such novels as The Comedians (1965), The Honorary Consul
(1973), and The Human Factor (1978) attack Western politics. There is more
discussion of Greene's political and social concerns than Mahood 's assertion
implies, but their fundamental centrality remains insufficiently explored.
Arthur Calder- Marshall (1947) is one of the first to see Greene's novels as
essentially social in orientation (Greene refers to Brighton Rock in these terms
critics
49
is
is
is
"I
it
"),
"I
"I
."
"I
to change things
50
Getting to
^ Know the
;
INVOLVEMENT
Graham Greene
Cover of Graham Greene's Getting to Know the General (London: The Bodley Head, 1984).
HRHRC Collections.
Emergency, in Kenya during the Mau Mau rebellion, in Vietnam during the
French war. . ." (Pierre Joannon 167), as well as Liberia and Sierra Leone
under extremely harsh conditions; Mexico during the suppression of the
Church; communist Czechoslovakia, Poland, and East Germany; Duvalier's
Haiti; Cuba under Batista; Panama before and after Torrijos' death; Stroessner's Paraguay; a leper colony in the Congo; and Israel during the Six-Day
War. All of these experiences have entered into Greene's writings, whether
fictional or nonfictional.
In fact, the best treatments of Greene's travel
books which include those of Gwen Petersen (1971), Jeffrey Meyers (1973
and 1990), and M.M. Mahood (1977) usually minimize the distinction
between fiction and non-fiction.
Even before they had much focus, Greene's political concerns were
fictionally manifested in such motifs as espionage and the hunt. Walter Allen
(1943), who authored one of the first serious discussions of the topic, notes
Greene's obsession with frontiers, spies, and betrayals. John Bayley (1971)
writes that Greene's "popular strength has always been less in dramas of
religious anguish and dilemma than in his own brand of humour . . . and in the
twists he has given to the formulae of espionage and excitement" (376). A 1968
BBC program on Greene was called, appropriately, "The Hunted Man," and
spies and espionage are the central concerns of William Chace's essay (in
Meyers, 1990). Norman Sherry discusses Greene's fascination with numbers,
statistics, and codes, which connects with his interest in spies, espionage, and
intelligence (284-89). The related motif of the huntwhich is central to
numerous works, including The Man Within, The Power and the Glory, and
Brighton Rock has been fairly well discussed. Sean O'Faolain (1956)
connects it with his religious focus: "Greene's characters really are hunted
men, the hounds of heaven at their heels. It is one significant reason why they
are least interesting when they pause. Then they come down to earth, to
common life, and common life is a range of experience beyond Greene's
powers, since it is outside his interest." Neville Braybrooke examines the
theme of pursuit both physical and religious throughout the fiction. For
Philip Stratford (1973) it is central to Greene's problematic vision: "He always
took the side of the underdog, the unregenerate,
the eccentric, the in
dividual. His pursuit fiction was criminal-centered; his Catholic novels skirted
heresy; his journalism espoused unpopular causes; his comedies were sad,
and his politics paradoxical. . . . He has always been ... a subversive romantic"
(ix, xiv). In Paul Hogarth's lovely picture book on Greeneland, Graham
Greene Country (1986), Greene comments that "the artist . . . has followed me
like a detective after a criminal. And a writer is after all a kind of criminal
without a conscience. How many people have died at his hands and been
forgotten by the killer?" (15).
Perhaps the most interesting and fruitful manifestation of the motif of the
hunt concerns the notion of the double or other, the uncanny. Character
52
and he achieved
the camera with its ability to suggest emotion, character and drama, visually,
and to determine the pace of the drama" (Sherry 414-15). As
Adamson
(1984) notes, Greene "has been connected with more films
Judith
than have most other major novelists, and his writing offers us an almost
economically,
the attempt and Walter Allen (1943) writes that to his "presentation of the
contemporary scene he has brought a swift, nervous, almost kaleidoscopic
.53
DAVID
0. SELZNICK
and
ALEXANDER KORDA
present
..-
men said
hanging was
loo good for him.
WOMEN SAID
nothing
wot
ORSON
WELLES
TREV0R
HOWARD
A Solznick
Release
<SKk
'
^fc
flgaawn
PP*
..
Ktwoihtrmon
... no mailer
what he did.
THEATRE
MAT NO. SO! S COL. > 10%" or ! COL x 150 LINES
Newspaper advertisement for David O. Selznick's 1949 film production of The Third Man.
style and a technique of montage which owes much to the film" (22). John
Atkins (1957) long ago insisted that "it is his worst work which invites the film
argues that "perhaps his
has been to apply the technique of the
"
cinema scenario to the novel. Such use may help to explain why Greene is the
most filmed of any "major novelist this century. . . . With and without his
comparison";
have been
1).
connivance
that describes
is
of
and
it
3;
is
judgment. Though not film theorist, Greene was lively, outspoken, and
acerbic film critic. "Greene was, all seem agreed, one of the finest critics of the
thirties and revisiting his reviews today
as fresh an experience as
must
then have been for all but the most regular recipients of his critical whiplash"
Phillips [1987] discusses Greene's harsh treatment of Hitchcock's
(Falk
films). Greene's attacks on many of the films (primarily American) he
reviewed in the late 1930s, though generally justified, may have been
exacerbated by his own situation. His sales of the film rights to his books
55
(beginning with Stamboul Train in 1932 and A Gun for Sale in 1934) brought
him both recognition and the money that enabled him to continue writing full
time, yet they were also a source of frustration since they represented a loss of
control and led to the production of films he deplored. They also led to his own
writing of filmscripts, climaxing with what he calls "an almost slave contract
with MGM" ("Introduction" to The Tenth Man 12). Attention is finally being
paid to Greene's relationship to cinema but its connections to virtually every
aspect of his career remain to be fully explored. One would also like to see the
filmscripts published.
connection with other forms of popular culture has been little
Dominick Consolo (1962) and Bernard Bergonzi (1976) examine
Greene's use of popular music, primarily in Brighton Rock. Neil Nehring's
forthcoming PMLA essay, which follows from the work of Bergonzi and Fred
and Judy Vermorel, concerns Greene's (and especially Brighton Rock's)
relationship to popular culture (especially pop music) as a form of political
Greene's
discussed.
A.A. Devitis (1961) and Carolyn Scott (1969) offer early discus
sions oT those books Greene calls "Entertainments"; Peter Wolfe (1972)
provides the first full-scale treatment of them; and Gavin Lambert (1976), who
considers them a "continuous secret autobiography," discusses their themes
and techniques. Roger Sharrock (1984), in a study that complements Wolfe's,
expression.
of the form of the thriller into a medium for serious fiction" (12).
Little of value has been done on Greene's work for the theater, a medium he
"discovered [as] in effect a new drink just at that period when life seemed to
have been going on for far too many years" (Ways 239). His interest was
multiple: as playwright, actor, critic, and entrepreneur, Richard Findlater
(1953) offers a slight note praising Greene the dramatist; Beekman Cottrell
(1957) and E. Martin Browne (1961) overgenerously view Greene's early plays
as masterfully constructed,
while Philip Stratford (1961), who admires
Greene's work in both media, argues that his shift to comedy in the plays
parallels a similar shift in the novels. Gerald Weales (1961) and Frederick
Lumley (1967) consider the plays essentially undramatic. Jacob Adler (1963)
and Horton Davies (1967), on the other hand, view Greene's theatrical work
as a mixed success. Francis Kunkel (1959) offers a useful analogy: "Greene's
plays, like Henry James', are byproducts of a novelist's career, [though]
Greene's are relatively more successful on the stage than James' were" (155).
Future critics will doubtless analyze the individual plays at length, discuss
Greene's career as playwright, and relate it to the rest of his achievement.
Recent essays by Gerard Walling (1984), Germaine Goetz (1987), and Roger
Sharrock (in Meyers 1990) demonstrate that such work has begun.
The aesthetic quality of Greene's work has stimulated little discussion as
yet. Richard Hoggart (1953) describes Greene's style as "nervous, vivid,
astringent": "The effect of all these stylistic qualities is of repeated jabs from a
56
Cover of Graham Greene's play, The Potting Shed (New York: Viking Press, 1961). This copy is
from the library of Anne Sexton. HRHRC Collections.
which so often surround, or are embedded in, the catalogues" (161). B.P.
Lamba (1987) seeks, through a thematic approach, "to present a comprehen
sive study" of Greene's artistic achievement,
but this overly ambitious
monograph manages only to sketch out a few of Greene's central concerns.
Neil Nehring argues far more persuasively that Greene's "palpable anger,"
which results from childhood misery and a powerful sense of social injustice,
determines the essential tone and style of his fiction.
Much miscellanea by Greene has appeared in recent years. A Quick Look
Behind: Footnotes to an Autobiography (1983) is a mediocre collection of
verse arranged in inverse order by decades, from the 1980s to the 1920s; the
selection from Night and Day (1985), which includes a Preface by Greene,
highlights the superb quality of that ill-fated journal (its distinguished
contributors included Waugh, Elizabeth Bowen,9 and James Thurber);
Christopher Hawtree's edition of Greene's Letters to the Press, 1945-89
(1989), though something of a mixed bag, reveals Greene's evolving political
views. Why the Epigraph? (1989), with its epigraphs, even the suppressed
ones, to all of Greene's books plus a short introduction by Greene and a brief
comment on each, is mildly amusing. Reflections (1990) collects reportage,
reviews, and political and literary essays beginning in 1924. In 1990 Viking
issued its fiftieth anniversary edition of The Power and the Glory. It would be
The HRHRC is the major holder of Waugh and Bowen material. For information on the
Waugh holdings at the HRHRC, see the following articles in The Library Chronicle: Anthony
Newnham, "Evelyn Waugh 's Library," New Series No. 1 (1970); Alain Blayac, "Evelyn Waugh s
Drawings," New Series No. 7 (1974); and Robert L. Montgomery, "The Case of 'Black Mischief;
Evelyn Waugh vs. "The Tablet'," New Series No. 16 (1981). For information on the Bowen
holdings at the HRHRC, see J'nan M. Sellery and William O. Harris, Elizabeth Bowen: A
Bibliography (Austin, TX: Humanities Research Center, The University of Texas at Austin,
1981), and Heather Bryant Jordan, 'The Territory of Elizabeth Bowen's Wartime Short Stories,"
The Library Chronicle, New Series No. 48 (1989).
58
travel books; Roger Sharrock on the plays; John Bayley on the short stories;
Rowland Smith on the wartime tales; my own essay on death in the major
novels; and William Chace on the espionage fiction.
The work of Terence Eagleton and Neil Nehring indicates that Greene has
critics, and that his roots in and
taken up by Marxist/materialist
influence on his culture have begun to be acknowledged and explored. His
writings set in the third world have received some excellent and extensive
commentary, usually as part of a treatment of several writers (for example,
Meyers [1973], Gunn [1974], Mahood [1977], and Veitch [1978]), but little
has been done by critics from the third world or by new historicists. Those
who have examined Greene's writings intertextually have focused primarily
on Conrad, about whom Greene has said that his influence was so great that
he had to give up reading him in the early 1930s (though he returned to him in
the late 1950s). After Conrad, the writers most commonly linked to Greene
A. Ward [1979]); Lawrence (Jeffrey Meyers [1985]); Waugh
include: James
(Colin Wilson [1962], R. Davis [1986]); Camus (Henry Grubbs [1949], Gustav
Herling [1950]); and Mauriac (A.A. DeVitis [1963], Philip Stratford [1964]).
Scholars have yet to consider Greene's intertextual connections with such
writers as Donne, Marvell, Gray, Carlyle, Browning, Cardinal Newman,
Mare, R.L. Stevenson
cousin of Greene's), Baudelaire, Baron
Hardy, de
Corvo (Frederick Rolfe), T.S. Eliot, Ford Madox Ford, D.H. Lawrence, and
(a
la
(J.
been
59
is Greene's influence
Shaw.10 Also awaiting consideration
Anthony Burgess, V.S. Naipaul, and Paul Theroux. Greene
ignored by both Freudians and reader-response critics; and
have analyzed Lawrence, Joyce, and Faulkner, they have
Greene.
Graham Greene is a figure of significant international
on writers like
remains largely
while feminists
yet to take on
writer than the bulk of the criticism on him to date implies. His novels, which
are set in dozens of locales around the world, have been translated into some
fifty languages; all of them that he has not repudiated remain in print; and he
has been the subject of serious critical attention in numerous non-Englishspeaking countries. He has, both physically and imaginatively, borne witness
to many of the century's major and minor crises, and over the years he has
become increasingly outspoken and even heard on the subject of political
and social injustice. He courageously maintains that his calling imposes
certain obligations:
"the storyteller's
elicit sympathy and a measure of understanding for those who lie outside the
boundaries of state approval" (Allain 73). As early as 1943, Walter Allen wrote
"that Graham Greene is the leading English male novelist of his generation"
(15), and critical discussions of Greene increasingly tend to begin like those of
Roger Sharrock (1984): "Graham Greene is almost certainly the most distin
guished English novelist writing today" (11), and Jeffrey Meyers (1990):
"Graham Greene is the oldest and most distinguished contemporary English
novelist" (1). He is commonly mentioned as deserving of those major honors
and awards, including the Nobel Prize, that he has yet to receive. Norman
Sherry's assessment of Greene's stature and achievement seems a reasonable
one: Greene, he says, while not a Tolstoy or a Dostoevsky, shares with writers
like Hemingway a solid position in the second tier: "He is a very significant
writer; he will last." Perhaps in time such judgment will be validated by
critics' according his writings what has to date been notable mostly by its
absence: the most rigorous and theoretically
sophisticated
scrutiny.
"
"The HRHRC has major collections for the last five of these writers. For information on the
T. S. Eliot holdings at the HRHRC, see Donald E. Stanford, "The First Mrs. Eliot," The Library
Chronicle, New Series No. 40 (1987); for information on the D.H. Lawrence holdings at the
HRHRC, see a special Lawrence issue of The Library Chronicle, New Series No. 34 (1986);and
for information on the George Bernard Shaw holdings at the HRHRC, see Dan H. Laurence,
Shaw: An Exhibit (Austin: Humanities Research Center, 1977).
"Valuable assistance in the preparation of this essay was provided by Elizabeth Butler; David
Leon Higdon; Jeffrey Meyers; Neil Nehring; Nicholas B. Scheetz, Manuscripts Librarian,
Georgetown University; Thomas Staley, Director of the Harry Ransom Humanities Research
Center; and Rick Watson, an intern at the HRHRC.
60
Works Cited
Judith. "Fact, Fiction, and Film: Graham Greene's The Comedians."
Transformations from Literature to Film. Ed. Douglas Radcliff-Umstead. Kent:
Kent State University Press, 1987. 198-204.
Graham Greene and Cinema. Norman, OK: Pilgrim, 1984.
"
Adler, Jacob H. "Graham Greene's Plays: Technique Versus Value. In Evans: 219-30.
Allain, Marie-Francpise, ed. The Other Man: Conversations with Graham Greene.
1981. Trans. Guido Waldman. New York: Simon, 1983.
Allen, Walter. "Graham Greene." Writers of To-day. 1943. Ed. Denys Val Baker.
London: Sedgwick, 1946. 15-28.
Allott, Kenneth, and Miriam Farris. The Art of Graham Greene. New York: Russell,
Adamson,
1963.
Alvarez, A. "In the Gloomy Country of Graham Greene's Heart." Saturday Review 54
(25 September 1971): 33-35, 49.
Anon. "The Man Within." The Economist (15 April 1989): 97.
Atkins, John. GrahamGreene. London: Calder, 1957. Rpt. in part as "The Curse of the
Film." In Evans: 207-18.
Bayley, John. "The Greening of Graham Greene." Listener 86 (16 September 1971):
375-76.
Berg, Charles Ramirez. "The Third Man's Third Man: David O. Selznick's Contribu
"
tion to The Third Man. The Library Chronicle of The University of Texas at Austin
n.s. 36 (1986): 93-113.
Bergonzi, Bernard. "A Conspicuous Absentee: The Decline and Fall of the Catholic
Novel." Encounter (August-September 1980): 44-56.
"Graham Greene Supplied the Lyrics: A Footnote to the Thirties." En
counter 47 (December 1976): 67-71.
Reading the Thirties: Texts and Contexts. London: Macmillan, 1978.
Birmingham, William. "Graham Greene Criticism: A Bibliographical Study." Thought
27 (Spring 1952): 72-100.
Bloom, Harold, ed. Graham Greene. New York: Chelsea, 1987.
Braybrooke, Neville. "Graham Greene as Critic." Commonweal 54 (6 July 1951): 31214.
"Graham Greene The Double Man: An Approach to His Novel, The End of
"
Affair. Queens Quarterly 77 (Spring 1970): 29-39.
Brennan, Neil. "Bibliography." In Evans: 245-76.
Brennan, Neil and Alan R. Redway, eds. A Bibliography of Graham Greene. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Browne, E. Martin. "Graham Greene: Theatre's Gain." Theatre Arts 45 (November
the
1961):
20-24.
367-75.
Carey, John. "The Human Factor." The Sunday Times (London) (16 April 1989): Gl.
Cargas, Harry J., ed. Graham Greene. St. Louis: Herder (Christian Critic Series),
1969.
, ed. "Graham Greene: 100 Articles Through 1965: An Annotated Checklist."
Catholic Library World 40, 8 (April 1969): 488-90; 40, 9 (May-June 1969): 566-69.
Cassis, A. F. "The Dream as Literary Device in Graham Greene's Novels." Literature
and Psychology 24, 3 (1974): 99-108.
61
Conn, Peter. "Welcome to Greeneland." Chicago Tribune "Books" (18 June 1989): 1, 9.
Consolo, Dominick P. "Graham Greene: Style and Stylistics in Five Novels." In
Evans: 61-95.
"Music
as
"
20.
Costa,
1959): 3-28.
4459
Martin's,
1988.
471-73.
Freud, Sigmund. "The 'Uncanny'." The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychologi
cal Works of Sigmund Freud. Vol. 17. Trans. James Strachey. London: Hogarth,
1955.
62
217-56.
12-15.
1981): 41-69.
Greene, Barbara. Too Late to Turn Back: Barbara and Graham Greene in Liberia.
1938. London: Settle Bendall, 1981.
Greene, Graham. Another Mexico. New York: Viking, 1939. Published in England as
The Lawless Roads. London: Longmans, 1939.
Babbling April. Oxford: Blackwell, 1925.
Brighton Rock. 1938. New York: Penguin, 1977.
British Dramatists. London: Collins, 1942.
A Burnt-Out Case. New York: Viking, 1961.
The Captain and the Enemy. New York: Viking, 1988.
Collected Essays. New York: Viking, 1969; rpt. 1981.
Collected Stories. New York: Viking, 1973.
The Comedians. London: Bodley, 1965.
Doctor Fischer of Geneva, or The Bomb Party. London: Bodley, 1980.
The End of the Affair. 1951. New York: Penguin, 1977.
England Made Me. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1935.
Getting to Know the General: The Story of an Involvement. 1984. New York:
Pocket Books, 1985.
The Heart of the Matter. 1948. New York: Viking, 1963.
In Search of a Character: Two African Journals. New York: Viking, 1961.
Journey without Maps. 1936. New York: Viking, 1961.
The Last Word and Other Stories. London: Reinhardt, 1990.
Lord Rochester's Monkey: Being the Life of John Wilmot, Second Earl of
Rochester. London: Bodley, 1974.
The Lost Childhood ir Other Essays. London: Eyre, 1951.
Monsignor Quixote. London: Bodley, 1982.
'The Novelist and the Cinema: A Personal Experience." International Film
Annual 2. Ed. William Whitebait. New York: Doubleday, 1958. 54-58.
Austin: Harry Ransom Humanities
"Places." Unpublished manuscript.
Research Center, ca. 1964.
.. The Pleasure Dome: The Collected Film Criticism 1935-40. Ed. John Russell
Taylor. London: Seeker & Warburg, 1972.
.. The Power and the Glory. 1940. New York: Viking, 1990.
The Quiet American. London: Heinemann, 1955.
A Quick Look Behind: Footnotes to an Autobiography. Los Angeles:
Sylvester & Orphanos, 1983.
Reflections. Ed. Judith Adamson. New York: Reinhardt/Viking, 1990.
The Revenge: An Autobiographical Fragment. Barnet, England: Stellar,
1963.
of Graham
Greene.
London: Bodley
63
"Graham Greene's Second Thoughts; The Text of The Heart of the Matter."
"Saint Catherine, Von Hugel, and Graham Greene's The End of the Affair."
English Studies 62, 1 (January 1981): 46-52.
'The Texts of Graham Greene's A Burnt-Out Case." Papers of the Biblio
graphical Society of America 73 (July 1979): 357-64.
"
"A Textual History of Graham Greene's The Power and the Glory. Studies in
Bibliography 33 (1980): 222-39.
Hoffer, Bates, Courtney Westerman, and Matthew Welch. "Greeneland Revisited."
Linguistics in Literature 4, 1/2 (Spring/Summer 1979): 1-54.
Hogarth, Paul. Graham Greene Country. London: Michael Joseph, 1986. Foreword
and commentary by Graham Greene.
Hoggart, Richard. "The Force of Caricature: Aspects of the Art of Graham Greene,
with Particular Reference to The Power and the Glory." Essays in Criticism 3
(October 1953): 447-62. Rpt. in Hynes: 79-92.
Hynes, Samuel, ed. Graham Greene: A Collection of Critical Essays. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice, 1973.
Islam, Nurul. Graham Greene: An Inverted Humanist. Dacca, Bangladesh: Jahangirnagar University, 1987.
64
"
2-6.
Lamba, B.P. Graham Greene: His Mind and Art. New Delhi: Sterling, 1987.
Lambert, Gavin. "The Double Agent." The Dangerous Edge. New York: Grossman,
1976. 132-70.
Lodge, David. "Graham Green." Six Contemporary British Novelists. 1966. Ed.
George Stade. New York: Columbia University Press, 1976. 1-56.
Lord, Graham. "Sordid Secrets Graham Greene Has Been Hiding from the World."
The Sunday Express (9 April 1989).
Lumley, Frederick. "Britain: Graham Greene." New Trends in 20th Century Drama:
A Survey Since Ibsen and Shaw. London: Oxford University Press, 1967. 289-92.
Mahood, M.M. "The Possessed: Greene's The Comedians." The Colonial Encounter:
A Reading of Six Novels. London: RexCollings, 1977. 115-41.
McDonald, James L. "Graham Greene: A Reconsideration." Arizona Quarterly 27
(1971): 197-210.
McElhattan, Julia. "Bendrix's Descent in Greene's The End of the Affair." Language
and Literature 8, 1-3 (1983): 55-68.
Mclnery, Ralph. "The Greene-ing of America." Commonweal 95 (1971): 59-61.
McEwan, Neil. Graham Greene. New York: St. Martin's, 1988.
Mesnet, Marie- Beatrice. Graham Greene and the Heart of the Matter. London:
Cresset, 1954; rpt. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1972.
Mewshaw, Michael. "Greene in Antibes." London Magazine 17, 2 (June/July 1977):
35-45.
Meyers, Jeffrey. "Graham Greene: The Decline of the Colonial Novel." Fiction and
the Colonial Experience. London: Rowman and Littlefield, 1973. 97-115.
Review of Norman Sherry, The Life of Graham Greene. Volume I: 19041939. Virginia Quarterly Review (in press).
, ed. Graham Greene: A Revaluation. London: Macmillan, 1990.
, ed. The Legacy of D .H . Lawrence. London: Macmillan, 1985.
Miller, Robert Henry. Graham Greene: A Descriptive Catalog. Lexington: University
Press of Kentucky, 1979.
"Textual Alterations in Graham Greene's Stamboul Train." Papers of the
Bibliographical Society of America 71 (1977): 378-81.
.. Understanding Graham Greene. Columbia: University of South Carolina
Press, 1990.
Nehring, Neil. The Destructive Character: Culture, Anarchy, and Postwar England
(in press, Johns Hopkins University Press).
65
"Revolt into Style: Graham Greene Meets the Sex Pistols" (forthcoming in
PMLA).
O'Donnell, Donat [Conor Cruise O'Brien]. "Graham Greene: The Anatomy of Pity."
Maria Cross: Imaginative Patterns in a Group of Modern Catholic Writers. 1952.
London: Burns & Oates, 1963. 63-91.
O'Faolain, Sean. "Graham Greene; 'I Suffer Therefore I Am.'" The Vanishing Hero:
Studies in Novelists of the Twenties. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1956. 71-97.
O'Prey, Paul. A Reader's Guide to Graham Greene. London: Thames and Hudson,
1988.
"
Orwell, George. "The Sanctified Sinner. The New Yorker 24, 3 (17 July 1948): 66, 6971; rpt. in The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell. Ed.
Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus. New York: Harcourt, 1968. 439-43; in Hynes: 105-10.
Petersen, Gwenn Boardman. Graham Greene: The Aesthetics of Exploration. Gaines
ville: University of Florida Press, 1971.
Phillips, Gene D., S.J. "Film Criticism versus Film Maker: Greene's Criticism of
Hitchcock's Films." In Wolfe: 119-26.
Graham Greene: The Films of His Fiction. New York and London: Columbia
University Teachers College Press, 1974.
"Graham Greene: On the Screen." The Catholic World 209 (August 1969):
218-21; rpt. in Hynes: 168-75.
Pryce-Jones, David. Graham Greene. 1963. London: Oliver & Boyd, 1973.
Rai, Gangeshwar. Graham Greene: An Existential Approach. New Delhi: Associated
Publishing House, 1983.
Rank, Otto. The Double: A Psychoanalytic Study. 1914. Ed. and trans. Harry Tucker,
Jr. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1971.
Rosin, Werner L. "Graham Greene." Austin: Humanities Research Center, ca. 1968
[unpublished].
Anne T. Greene and Kierkegaard: The Discourse of Belief. Tuscaloosa and
London: University of Alabama Press, 1988.
Scott, Carolyn. "The Urban Romance: A Study of Graham Greene's Thrillers." In
Salvatore,
Cargas: 1-28.
Sharrock, Roger. Saints, Sinners and Comedians: The Novels of Graham Greene.
Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984.
Sheppard, R.Z. "A Useful Application of Faith." Time (12 June 1989): 69.
Sherry, Norman. The Life of Graham Greene. Volume 1: 1904-1939. London: Jonathan
Cape; New York: Viking, 1989.
Interview, 20 November 1989.
Shuttleworth, Martin, and Simon Raven. "The Art of Fiction III: Graham Greene."
The Paris Review 3 (Autumn 1953): 24-41; rpt. in Hynes: 154-67.
Smith, Grahame. The Achievement of Graham Greene. Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble,
1986.
Snape, Ray.
"
75,
(December
Spurling, John. Graham Greene. London and New York: Methuen, 1983.
Stratford, Philip. Faith and Fiction: Creative Process in Greene and Mauriac. Notre
Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964.
"Graham Greene." Encyclopedia of World Literature in the 20th Century.
Vol. 2. 2nd ed. New York: Ungar, 1982. 288-90.
"Second Thoughts on 'Graham Greene's Second Thoughts': The Five Texts of
The Heart of the Matter." Studies in Bibliography 31 (1978): 263-66.
"
"The Uncomplacent Dramatist: Some Aspects of Graham Greene's Theatre.
1
66
1982):
2, 3
138-54.
ed. The Portable Graham Greene.
1967.
Vann, Jerry Don. Graham Greene: A Checklist of Criticism. Kent, OH: Kent State
University Press, 1970.
Veitch, Douglas W. Lawrence, Greene and Lowry: The Fictional Landscape of
Mexico. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1978.
Vermorel, Fred, and Judy Vermorel. The Sex Pistols: The Inside Story. London:
Universal, 1978.
Walker, Ronald G. "Seriation as Stylistic Norm in Graham Greene's The Heart of the
Matter." Language and Style 6, 3 (Summer 1973): 161-75.
"World without End: An Approach to Narrative Structure in Greene's The
End of the Affair." Texas Studies in Literature and Language 26, 2 (Summer 1984):
218-41.
Wall, Stephen. "Graham Greene." The Twentieth Century: The Sphere History of
Literature in the English Language. Vol. 7. Ed. Bernard Bergonzi. London:
Cresset, 1970. 228-32.
Walling, Gerald Charles. "Graham Greene: A Study of Four Dramas." DAI 45, 2
(August 1984): 349A.
Ward, J. A. "Henry James and Graham Greene." The Henry James Review
1 (1979): 10-
23.
Woodcock, George.
67
Page
Two
CCNTEAtPO
A Review of Books and Personalities
Anthony J. Buttitta
CONTRIBUTING EDITORS
Barrett H. Clark Lancston Hughes
CONTRIBUTORS
Mary Austin, Harry Elmer Barnes, Bob
Witter Bynner, Lionel Britton, Grace Stone Coates,
Malcolm Cowley, Countee Cui.len, John Dos Passos, Theodore
Dreiser, Max Eastman, Paul Eldridge, James Feibi.eman, Nor
Gold, Louis Golding, Horace Gregory,
man Foerstv.r, Michael
Paul Green, Harry Hansen, T. Swann Harding, Archibald
Henderson,
Granville Hicks, Alfred Kreymboro, Sinclair
Munson, J.
Lewis, Pierre Loving, Marianne Moore, Gorham
Middleton Murky, George O'Neil, Llewelyn Powys, Lynn
Phillips Russell, George Schuyler,
Robinson,
Riggs, Selma
Evelyn Scott, L'pton Sinclair, Lincoln Steefens, James Stevbns,
Mark Van Doren, G. S. Viereck, W. C. Williams, L. Zukofsky.
Anderson,
Editorial office*
Published semi-monthly by Contempo, Ltd.
Contempo does
in Tankeksley Building, Chapel Hill, N. C.
Entered AS second-class matter
not pay for contributions.
Chapel Hill, N. C,
June 17, 1931, at the post office at
under Act of March 3, 1879.
Vol.
$1.50
a year;
$\
casion
six
months.
Hill, N.
Sev
the
e>
Social
Subscription Rates:
in
casion
Milton A. Abernethy
Sherwood
Brown,
any
depth
EDITORS
Louis Adamic
respor
the
ing th
and
TS
been
accept
the
>>
first
a
larg
amon
ers.
disco\
whost
trious
son
C.
No
18
some'
later
that
MORE COWLEY-MUNSONIANA
estim;
self,
playing pranks.
which
r ...
Contempo's editors and contributors, as shown in Vol. 1, no. 18 of the magazine for 15 February
1932. HRHRC Collections.
By
As the heralded tomes of literary Modernism (Ulysses, The Waste Land, The
Cantos, To the Lighthouse, The Waves, Finnegans Wake, etc.) are marshalled
along the bookshelf, the definition of Modernism tends to become monolithically fixed, so as to conform to a canonized number of texts by writers classified
recuperation.
In
World War Two, the publication of The Little Magazine: A History and a
Bibliography by Frederick J. Hoffman, Charles Allen, and Carolyn F. Ulrich
(a second edition followed in 1947) provided what has since become the basic
text for future research in and critical evaluation of the era, framed by the
editors between 1891 and 1946. ' Their historical survey runs 230 pages, and
their bibliography, including a supplementary listing of journals that "are
similar to those of the advance guard," but "do not answer strictly to the
'Frederick J. Hoffman, Charles Allen, and Carolyn F. Ulrich, The Little Magazine: A History
and a Bibliography (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1947).
definition of the little magazine," adds another 151 pages.2 The editors were
apparently rather eclectic in their editorial principles and as all-inclusive as
the little magazine format allowed, so that the term "advance guard" hardly
delineates even the most generous definition of Modernism. Some 554
primary and 104 supplemental periodicals are included, allowing for a
minimal margin of error when journals died and were reborn or changed
names in midstream. Many of these were virulently anti-Modernist and many
more blithely unaware of any such phenomenon as Modernism, but at least a
hundred of them are vital to a history of the literary "advance guard" of the
time as that history was in the process of unfolding, as Modernism was in
progress.
A certain amount of fundamental work had already been done and was
available for Hoffman, Allen, and Ulrich, including Denys Val Baker's Little
Reviews, 1914-1943, published in 1943, as well as the autobiographical
writings of such involved editors as Margaret Anderson (of The Little Review),
Ford Madox Ford (The Transatlantic Review), Alfred Kreymborg (Others),
Robert McAlmon (Contact), and Louis Untermeyer (The Masses).3 Since
1947, dozens of such volumes of memoirs recalling editorial work done on
hundreds of such magazines have been published, as well as biographies of
many more of the involved editors and the writers who interacted with them.
Richard Aldington, Malcolm Cowley, Harold Loeb, Samuel Putnam, Edith
Sitwell, and William Carlos Williams published autobiographies, and several
of the little magazines transition, The New Age, The Fugitive, Hound and
Horn, The Masses, Pagany, Twice-a-Year, Broom, and The Liberator have
had their lives written as well, or encapsulated in various ways in book form.4
'Hoffman, etal., p. 376.
Val Baker, Little Reviews, 1914-1943 (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1943);
Margaret C. Anderson, My Thirty Years' War (New York: Covici, Friede, 1930); Ford Madox
Ford, Return to Yesterday (New York: Horace Liveright, 1932); Alfred Kreymborg, Troubador:
3Denys
An Autobiography (New York: Boni and Liveright, 1925); Robert McAlmon, Being Geniuses
Together: An Autobiography (London: Seeker and Warburg, 1938); Louis Untermeyer, From
Another World (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1939).
'Richard Aldington, Life for Life's Sake (New York: Viking, 1941); Malcolm Cowley, The
Dream of the Golden Mountains (New York: Viking Press, 1980); Harold Loeb, The Way It Was
(New York: Criterion, 1959); Samuel Putnam, Paris Was Our Mistress (New York: Viking Press,
1947); Edith Sitwell, Taken Care Of (New York: Atheneum, 1965); William Carlos Williams, The
Autobiography of William Carlos Williams (New York: Random House, 1951); Dougald
McMillan, Transition. The History of a Literary Era, 1927-1938 (New York: Braziller, 1976);
Wallace Martin, "The New Age" Under Orage (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1967);
Merrill Moore, The Fugitive (Boston: 1939); Leonard Creenbaum, The Hound O Horn: The
History of a Literary Quarterly (The Hague: Mouton, 1966); Leslie Ashbein, Rebels in Bohemia:
The Radicals of the "Masses" (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982); Stephen
Halpert, A Return to Pagany (Boston: Beacon Press, 1969); William Wasserstrom, Civil Liberties
and the Arts: Selections from "Twice-a-Year" (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1964);
Matthew Josephson, Life among the Surrealists: A Memoir (New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, 1962); Genevieve Taggard, May Days (New York: Boni and Liveright, 1925).
70
As usual, the magazines that made the greatest impact and those that lasted
the longest are the ones that have been accorded the greater permanence of
such treatment, although these may be only the tip of the Modernist iceberg.
Many of those that represent the exciting moments of new thinking and new
archive.6
"Modernist
Humanities Research
of competing journals using the same name) totally disintegrates. (Monroe has
retained an important place in the literary history of the era, but Henderson,
Abernethy, and Buttitta need to be recuperated from relative obscurity.)
These turbulent personal relationships transcend petty animosities and can be
viewed as diagnostic of the conflicting ideologies that governed various
pockets of Modernist endeavors.
The history of Poetry can be read as the history of Modernism in miniature,
especially since its tenure dates from October 1912 to September 1942, and its
initial position was so unrelentingly avant-garde manifested in a willingness
to consider work that at the time was startlingly new. History tends to view
such originating movements as both dynamic and cohesive, and there is
certainly no hint of dissension as the Hoffman-Allen-Ulrich narrative records
that history in succinct form. A more leisurely, intimate, and frank reenactment, however, might be expected from the editor's own memoirs, published
A Poet's Life: Seventy Years in a Changing World, but Harriet
in 1938 as
Monroe proves to be a discreet memoirist, and any major battles within the
confine's of the Poetry citadel are carefully understated.7
Monroe introduces
us to both the
associate editor and the poet Alice Corbin published in the pages of the
magazine, with almost no commentary on the merit of her poems, but praise
for her editorial acumen. "A fine poet and intelligent critic, she was a keen
whip in those days," Monroe asserts, soon indicating that Henderson's tenure
as associate editor lasted only until 1916, when ill health necessitated a move
away from Chicago to Santa Fe, a move that resulted in the correspondence
between the two now in the archives of the HRHRC.8 Henderson had the
responsibility for the initial reading of incoming poetry, although Monroe
insists that all final selections were her own.9 The editor credits Alice Corbin
Henderson with an ability to "detect the keen note, the original style," and
notes that "indeed she made only one serious mistake during her three and
half years of service" mistake unspecified.10 For seven more years Hender
son's name was retained on the masthead, but she presumably did no further
editorial work, and Monroe eventually came to consider this nominal
retention a mistake but again is reticent to be any more specific. " When
Harriet Monroe died in 1936 she left her memoir unfinished at the year 1922,
'Harriet Monroe, A Poet's Life: Seventy Years in a Changing World (New York: Macmillan,
1938).
"Monroe, p. 284. The uncataloged Henderson Archive consists of 49 document boxes and 41
containing Henderson's manuscripts, correspondence, photographs, family papers,
and her research files concerning New Mexican history, art, and anthropology.
The bulk of the
notebooks
archive covers her New Mexico years, though items relating to Poetry and the Modernists are
present in small quantities.
Monroe, p. 318.
'"Ibid., p. 286.
"Ibid.,
72
p. 318.
oerm
idaztfiTof
ttst
CONTENTS
Arthur Davison Ficke
Woman
William Vaughan Moody
Ezra Pound
To Whistler, American
Ezra Pound
Middle Aged
Helen Dudley
To One Unknown
Poetry
I am
the
9rtobrr M C f *
* *
Cover of the first issue of Poetry: A Magazine of Verse (October 1912). HRHRC Collections.
73
and the succeeding editor of Poetry, Morton Dauwen Zabel, also took on the
responsibility for its completion. In his own voice, Zabel could be somewhat
more diagnostic, commenting that Monroe "had the aid of loyal and disturb
ing associates, beginning with Alice Henderson and Ezra Pound, and she
knew their value to lie more in disagreement than in easy harmony" (emphasis
added).12 (A recent treatise by Ellen Williams on Harriet Monroe and the
poetry renaissance hardly comes close to the dispute, although she is incisive
about Henderson's published and private concerns about the absence of good
poetry in Poetry expressed in 1916, when Henderson was detached for the
first time from the running of the journal.)13
Zabel's references to Henderson and Pound are more than merely casual,
perhaps even intended as a linkage rather than separate instances of
disturbance (Williams also emphasizes a real rapport between them), " the two
having established an early relationship by mail that continued beyond
"Ibid., p. 473.
"Ellen Williams, Harriet Monroe and
Press,
1977).
"Ibid.,
p. 74.
February
1919
he writes
H.M.
If
THE EGOIST
(Late the New Freewoman)
AN INDIVIDUALIST REVIEW
(fortnightly)
taboos.21
December 1914 the bubble has obviously burst: "I have no special
with the Egoist," he informs his correspondent; "I can't see that
they can improve, and they seem to me rather a waste of energy under their
However there's nothing better at present."22 His
present composition.
But by
21
connection
"Letter from Ezra Pound to Alice Corbin Henderson, 24 January 1916. HRHRC Collections.
Ezra Pound correspondence is copyright 1991 by the Ezra Pound Literary Property Trust. Re
printed by permission of New Directions, Agents.
"Letter from Ezra Pound to Alice Corbin Henderson, 9 February 1919. HRHRC Collections.
"Letters from Ezra Pound to Alice Corbin Henderson, 16 January 1913 and 8/9 August 1913.
HRHRC Collections.
"Letter from Ezra Pound
Collections.
from
H.M.
Xmas
1918."
use all its space on the home product with a perfectly clear conscience."23
"Letter from Ezra Pound
HRHRC Collections.
77
Harriet Monroe had had a momentary scare in 1912 when Poetry was about
to be launched, and for a while it appeared that it would not have the territory
to itself. Advance publicity had gone out and may have been intercepted in
Boston or at least Monroe thought so when a new poetry journal was
announced in that city. A Poet's Life tells the story of that worry and the rush to
beat the Boston periodical to the marketplace." Not only did Poetry antedate
Poetry Journal by several months, but it quickly became apparent that
Monroe had no real rival in the Modernist field, and that the intentions of the
later addition to the field were only marginally Modernist at best in its poetic
inclusions, anti-Modernist in editorial policy.25 (Monroe later gloated over the
winning away of Conrad Aiken, who had written an attack on the avant-garde
for Poetry Journal.)16 The Journal was being edited by a William Stanley
Braithwaite, who quickly became the target of Ezra Pound's venom.
As Pound's letters progressively reveal, Braithwaite's lack of name recogni
tion would prove somewhat embarrassing for Pound, since he was soon to
discover that his new bete noir was an African- American. "Sorry to learn that
Braithwaite is a nigger," he writes to Henderson on 16 January 1913.
of him than I
man of equal race.
to be more contemptuous
i27
And now that I know his affliction I shall have to stop saying what I
think of him. A Boston coon!! that explains a lot. Still his brand of
intelligence is quite indistinguishable from that of most of his pale
face confreres, poor devil,
is
(And he adds, "Please destroy this last sheet," although, more faithful to
posterity than to Pound apparently, Alice Corbin Henderson did not.)
Pound's brand of racism
oddly mixed here with an almost perverse
is
.
.
HRHRC Collections.
HRHRC Collections.
On one hand, Pound felt that it was necessary to reassure the Poetry
that the threat from the Poetry Journal was negligible, and on the
other hand, he remained obsessed with his bete noir. The word to Henderson
on 20 January 1914 is "Don't worry about other poetry journal. There is no
other. WE Are. the 'Boston Bucket' will do for our leavings."29 But on 14
October 1916, infuriated by his native land, he thunders in capitals to her:
contingent
By 9 February
1917,
however,
allegiance):
It is Ezra
Pound's dilemma that is here apparent, and by this date Alice Corbin
Henderson is connected with Poetry in name only.
From their earliest epistolary association, Pound and Henderson were
established in a mentor/pupil relationship, and it becomes apparent that Alice
Corbin Henderson not only had a Modernist aesthetics of her own, influenced
by her mentor, but that it was an aesthetic that was destined to outdistance
that of the editor of Poetry. Harriet Monroe, of course, had a monthly
periodical to fill, but it may have been more than just expediency that
determined her shift into a median position regarding avant-garde ex
In the Chicago Evening Post for 3 January 1919, Monroe
perimentation.
registers "An Editorial Protest" in which she insists that "Poetry has been
exploring the straight and narrow path between seductive but rock-enthroned
sirens of conservation and radicalism," obviously embarked on a path down
which Ezra Pound would never travel. Monroe sees herself besieged from
both sides, all the while laying claim to an eclectic approach to varying tenets
of Modernist and non-Modernist aesthetics. By noting that she is attacked
whether she introduces such "vers-librists" as Sandburg, Stevens,
MLetter from Ezra Pound to Alice Corbin Henderson, 20 January 1914. HRHRC Collections.
"Letter from Ezra Pound to Alice Corbin Henderson, 14 October 1916. HRHRC Collections.
"Letter from Ezra Pound to Alice Corbin Henderson, 9 February 1917. HRHRC Collections.
79
for many years, but was fated to come into the open once they
reunited in
handled
1921 to produce
contest between
an anthology
of poetry,
an undertaking
to be
It was also a
confirmed avant-gardism and the new pragmatic revision-
by correspondence
THE CHICAGO
between
Cartoon which appeared in the Chicago Sun Book Week (5 December 1943), depicting "early
stages of a Christmas Eve party 29 years ago." Pictured (from left to right) are Harriet Monroe,
Llewellyn Jones, Theodore Dreiser, Maxwell Bodenheim, Alice Corbin Henderson, Margaret
Anderson, Arthur Davison Ficke, and host Floyd Dell. The clipping is from the Alice Corbin
Henderson Archive. HRHRC Collections.
80
ism, and when the battle between the two anthologists went to court, it was
more than just a question of royalties (Henderson demanded and won half of
the royalties, rather than the one-third Monroe offered the "associate" editor).
MLetterfrom Alice Corbin Henderson to Harriet Monroe, 6 June 1921. HRHRC Collections.
*>Ibid.
"The first edition of The New Poetry: An Anthology, edited by Monroe and Henderson, was
published in 1917 by Macmillan. The 1921 meeting must have been in preparation of the "New
and Enlarged Edition" of 1925. Another "Revised and Enlarged Edition" from Macmillan
appeared
in 1932.
HRHRC Collections.
81
have something to say to them on that subject but were extremely generous
in adding to their board of "contributing editors" just about anyone whom they
printed in their pages. The anger of those they rejected was overshadowed by
the glowing responses of so many who marvelled at the contents and the
contemporaneity of Contempo.
Calling itself first "A Review of Ideas and Personalities" and then "A Review
of Rooks and Personalities," Contempo was easily identifiable as politically left
wing and aesthetically pro-Modernist at a time when those two factions in the
contemporary world were often in open defiance of each other (Mike Gold in
The Masses regularly attacking Eugene Jolas's transition), and there was
something in the verve and candor with a touch of youthful insouciance in
Contempo that proved immediately attractive. In its short tenure it devoted
an issue to the jailed Scottsboro defendants, another to Negro poetry, as well
as an issue each devoted to William Faulkner and James Joyce: Countee
Cullen wrote to Ruttitta on his enthusiasm for the forthcoming Negro poetry
issue and his admiration for the Faulkner number; Pound contributed an
article in which he declared that "You will get no ameliorization of Scottsboro
or anything else till you get an intellectual life [in America]";37 and Stuart
Gilbert wrote to Abernethy worrying about the juxtaposition of Joyce and
politics in the same journal.38 Gilberts letter is quite candid and revealing:
the material
TEMPO.
If,
I think
however,
number of CON
1,
of
of
"Clare Colquitt, "'Contempo' Magazine: Asylum for Aggrieved Authors," The library
Texas at Austin n.s. 27 (1984): 42.
The University
Chronicle
no.
"Ezra Pound, "Publishers, Pamphlets and Other Things," Contempo
(15 September
1931): 1-2.
"Letter from
82
HRHRC Collections.
Tony Buttitta, William Faulkner, and Milton Abernethy in Chapel Hill, North Carolina,
November 1931. Photo published in The Dictionary of Literary Biography Yearbook: 1985,
courtesy of Tony Buttitta. HRHRC Collections.
I should say that as an editor of an alive and vital little magazine and
literary sheet that it will be your duty to create enemies. And when
you decide to take some definite stand, such as going out of your way
to fight for books that you think are good and significant, and not be
afraid to have a policy's politics as well as an aesthetics, only then will
you begin to spawn enemies and only then will the magazine and
Pagany has gone downgrade because
a
and as for Hound and Horn, which at
to
have
refused
policy,
Johns
on
c sharp minor, it has always had the
best is a bostonese variation
sheet have an importance.
school.*
Dahlberg is sensitive to the factors that were already operative within the
world of little magazines: avoidance of "extreme" literary positions in favor of a
more inclusive "middle '; preference for an open policy in selecting what is
deemed good enough to publish over material that may be delimited by
identification with a particular school or movement; an aloofness from the
battles over Modernist contentions that abstracts a journal from the dynamics
of contemporary issues.
Untermeyer proves to be more longwinded, but touches on many more
issues pertinent to the conditions of the times that are worth noting:
It
is,
two
issues,
fever.")41
Contempo phenomenon:
It
international.
If it
or
a writer's
as
. . .
were offered,
There is a tone of nostalgia here from the contributing editor of the old Masses
for a period in the era of the little magazine when a manifesto was delivered
announcing the specific intentions of a new journal, an editorial policy
hammered out by an editorial staff: by 1932 much has changed since the
founding of The Masses in 1911 or of Poetry in 1912.
The demise of Contempo is shrouded in mystery, despite the numerous
letters each of the two contending editors wrote to their "supporters" to enlist
their unqualified allegiance. Most contributors shied away from taking sides,
confessing to their inability to understand the nature of the quarrel, a few
allowing themselves to be co-opted by the editor who happened to write to
them. Samuel Putnam, in the process of editing The New Review with Peter
Neagoe in Paris, confides to Buttitta: "It's too damn bad about CONTEMPO.
I am coming to believe that no two people can get along for long! Neagoe and
I are cold but still speaking" (The New Review ended immediately after, with
an even shorter life span than Contempo).**
remain
regarding
if Putnam's
indicates
in the Modernist
of Modernism.
Rival journals emerged over night (Poetry and the Poetry Journal); editors
"Letter from
Samuel
were responsible
If the
and
tracing its trail through the hundreds of little magazines of the period. These
magazines provide evidence of the ways the period expressed itself in
transition, of the Modernist urges toward polarities and opposition, as well as
the frequent efforts to separate art from history. By definition ephemeral
forms, dependent on the conditions of history, they established a contradic
tory figurative ground for these endeavors. While efforts to distance art from
social concerns constandy
engendered
for
stability.
magazines
manifested
87
INTELLECTUAL
SHELL-SHOCK
Vol. IV
I3C COPY
APRIL
5, 1933
No. I
$1-50 THE YEAR
Cover of A.J. Buttitta's Contempo, Vol. IV, no. 1 (5 April 1933), published in Durham, North
Carolina. HRHRC Collections.
By
Richard Watson
Accent (1940-
Alcestis:
July
A Poetry Quarterly
(1934-35): Vol.
1,
1935).
(Winter 1919)-v.
3, no. 2
Full run
(Spring
1920).
(June 1914)-no. 2
of New Rhythms
(Spring 1930)-no.
6
dropped after no. (July 1929).
no.8
89
Bruno's
(1917):
Vol.
(Feb.
1917).
(1919):
Vol.
9, no. 1
Bruno's Review of Two Worlds (1920-22): Vol. 1, no. 2 (Dec. 1920); v. 1, no.
4 (Feb. 1921)-no. 6 (Apr. 1921); v. 2, no. 2 (July 1921); v. 4, no. 2 (July-Aug.
1922).
Bruno's Weekly (1915-16): Vol. 1, no. 14 (21 Oct. 1915>-no. 21 (11 Dec.
1915); v. 2, no. 1 (1 Jan. 1916)-no. 2 (8 Jan. 1916); v. 2, no. 4 (22 Jan.
1916)-no.8 (19 Feb. 1916); v. 2, no. 10 (4 Mar. 1916)-no. 14 (1 Apr. 1916); v.
2, no. 16 (15 Apr. 1916)-no. 20 (13 May 1916); v. 2, no. 24 (10 June 1916)-v.
3, no. 4 (8 July 1916); v. 3, no. 6 (22 July 1916)-no. 7(29 July 1916); v. 3, no. 9
(12 Aug. 1916)-no. 10 (19 Aug. 1916); v. 3, no. 12 (2 Sept. 1916)-no. 13 (9
Sept. 1916); v. 3, no. 15 (23 Sept. 1916)-no. 17 (7 Oct. 1916); v. 3, no. 26 (30
Dec.
1916).
1, no. 1 (Summer
1934)-v.
2, no. 5
1,
no.
(May 1931)-v.
1937).
1921); no. 5
3, no. 13
(1936-37): No.
(Feb.
(June
1923).
1934).
(May 1936)-no.
10
1920-21).
The Criterion (1922-1939): Vol. 1, no. 1 (Oct. 1922)-v. 4, no. 2 (Apr. 1926);
no. 32 (Apr. 1929); v. 9, no. 34 (Oct. 1929)-v. 11,
no. 42 (Oct. 1931); v. 11, no. 44 (Apr. 1932); v. 12, no. 46 (Oct. 1932)-no. 47
Qan. 1933); v. 12, no. 49 (July 1933)-v. 13, no. 50 (Oct. 1933); v. 13, no. 53
(July 1934)-v. 17, no. 67 (Jan. 1938); v. 17, no. 69 (July 1938)-v. 18, no. 71
(Jan. 1939).
The Dial (1920-29): Vol. 68, no. 1 (Jan. 1920)-no. 5 (May 1920); v. 69, no. 2
(Aug. 1920); v. 69, no. 4 (Oct. 1920)-v. 70, no. 1 (Jan. 1921); v. 70, no. 4 (Apr.
1921)-v. 72, no. 4 (Apr. 1922); v. 72, no. 6 (June 1922)-v. 77, no. 4 (Oct.
1924); v. 77, no. 6 (Dec. 1924)-v. 78, no. 1 (Jan. 1925); v. 78, no. 3 (Mar.
1925)-v. 79, no. 2 (Aug. 1925); v. 79, no. 4 (Oct. 1925); v. 80, no. 1 (Jan.
1926)-no. 3 (Mar. 1926); v.80, no. 5 (May 1926)-v.81, no. 3 (Sept. 1926);
v.81, no. 5 (Nov. 1926)-v.82, no.
l(Jan.
(Mar. 1927)-v.83,
no. 6 (Dec. 1927); v. 84, no. 2 (Feb. 1928)-no. 6 (June 1928); v. 85, no. 2 (Aug.
1928)-v.86, no. 7 (July 1929). Full run of reprints, 1967.
1,
no.
(Autumn
1934).
The Double Dealer (1921-26): Vol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. 1921>-v. 5, no. 30 (Nov.
1923); v. 6, no. 33/34 (Feb. -Mar. 1924>-no. 35 (Apr. 1924); v. 7, no. 39 (Oct.
1924); v.8, no. 45 (July 1925)-no. 48 (May 1926). Full run of reprints, 1966.
The Egoist: An Individualist Review (1914-1919): Vol. 1, no. 6 (Mar. 1914);
(June 1914); v. 3, no. 4 (Apr. 1916)-v. 4, no. 3 (Apr. 1917); v. 5,
v. 1, no. 11
(1927-29): Vol.
1,
1919).
no.
Full
(Jan.
1928).
1930).
1, no. 4
(May
1 (1941);
10th
1932).
91
Fire
(1926):
Vol.
1,
no.
(Nov. 1926).
1,
no.
3 (Jan. 1922).
(Oct. 1921)-no.
no.
1,
no. 2
Furioso (1939-
):
Vol.
1,
1,
no.
Greenwich Village
no.
(1915):
1,
no.
Vol.
(Spring
1953).
1922).
2, no. 1
(Oct. 1930); v.
1,
1,
no.
Full
1915).
(Jan. 1940)-v.
1,
1,
no.
(Feb. 1927)-no.
57677
(Apr. -May-June
1927).
1,
1930)-v.8,
92
1967.
Continued
as
):
Vol.
13,
no.
(Sept.
17 (Jan. 1939);
(May 1939)-v. 47, no. 98 (Oct. 1945); v. 47, no. 100 (Dec. 1945);
49, no. 104 (Apr. 1946)-v. 52, no. 114 (Feb. 1947); v. 52, no. 116 (Apr.
v. 21, no. 21
v.
1947)-v. 55, no. 124 (Dec. 1947); v. 56, no. 126 (Feb. 1948)-v. 57, no. 129
1948); v. 58, no. 132 (Aug. 1948)-v. 59, no. 135 (Nov. 1948); v. 60, no.
138 (Feb. 1949)-v. 62, no. 143 (July 1949); v. 62, no. 145 (Sept. 1949)-v. 63,
(May
no. 146 (Oct. 1949); v. 63, no. 148 (Dec. 1949); v. 64, no. 151 (Mar. 1950)-v.
65, no. 154 (June 1950). Full run of reprints, 1967.
The Lion and Crown (1932-33): Vol. 1, no.
(Fall
1932).
The Little Review (1914-1929): Vol. 1, no. 1 (Mar. 1914)-no. 2 (Apr. 1914); v.
1, no. 5 (July 1914); v. 1, no. 7 (Oct. 1914); v. 1, no. 9 (Dec. 1914)-v. 2, no. 4
(June-July 1915); v. 2, no. 6 (Sept. 1915)-v. 5, no. 1 (May 1918); v. 5, no. 4
(Aug. 1918)-v. 12, no. 2 (May 1929).
The London Bulletin (1938-1940): No.
The
1, no. 1
(Apr. 1938)-no.
17
(June
1917);
1939).
Vol. 3, no. 5-
6 (May-June 1919).
The Magazine (1933-35): Vol.
l.no. l(Dec.
1933).
1967.
1966.
(1934):
Vol.
(1926):
1, no. 1
1,
Vol.
no.
(Nov.-Dec.
(August 1926).
1934).
The New Act (1933-34): No. 2 (June 1933); no. 3 (Apr. 1934).
no.
An Individualist Review
(June 1913)-no.
13 (Dec.
(1913).
Reprints
(1967):
Vol.
1913).
93
The New Review (1931-32): Vol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. -Feb. 1931); v. 1, no. 3 (Aug.Sept.-Oct. 1931)-no. 4 (Winter 1931-32); v. 2, no. 5 (Apr. 1932).
1924: A Magazine
The Observer:
of the Arts
(1924): No. 1
A Literary Publication
1924).
1934).
Others:
no.
A Magazine of New
(July
(June
(July 1915)-v. 3,
1917); v. 4, [no. 3]
1919); v. 5, no. 6
(1933-34): Vol.
1,
no.
(July
1919).
(Nov.
1,
(Mar.
1,
1922).
1 (1979).
Playboy:
"Poetry:
(July
Magazine
of Verse
(Jan. 1919)-no.
1916)-v. 15, no. 2 (Nov. 1919); v. 15, no. 4 (Jan. 1920)-v. 19, no. 3 (Dec.
1921); v. 19, no. 5 (Feb. 1922); v. 20, no. 4 (July 1922); v. 20, no. 6 (Oct.
1922); v. 21, no. 3 (Dec. 1922)-v. 24, no. 2 (May 1924); v. 24, no. 4 (July
1924)-v. 25, no. 2 (Nov. 1924); v. 25, no. 4 (Jan. 1925)-v. 31, no. 5 (Feb.
1928); v. 32, no.l (Apr. 1928); v. 32, no. 5 (Aug. 1928)-v. 33, no. 1 (Oct.
94
(Apr.
(June
1932)-v. 41, no. 1 (Oct. 1932); v. 41, no. 3 (Dec. 1932); v. 42, no. 1 (Apr.
1933); v. 42, no. 3 (June 1933)-v. 43, no. 1 (Oct. 1933); v. 44, no. 4 (July
1934); v. 45, no. 3 (Dec.
v. 52, no. 4
1944); v. 64, no. 2 (May 1944)-v. 65, no. 1 (Oct. 1944); v. 65, no. 3
(Dec. 1944); v. 65, no. 5 (Feb. 1945)-v .87, no. 3 (Dec. 1955). . . . Holdings
continue year by year through v. 133, no. 4 (Jan. 1979).
(Mar.
1913); v.
1967.
* The
Poetry Review (1912-): Vol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. 1912)-v- 3, no. 1 (July 1913); v.
3, no. 4 (Oct. 1913)-no. 6 (Dec. 1913); v. 4, no. 2 (Feb. 1914)-no. 7 (Jan.
1914); v. 5, no. 1 (July 1914)-no. 2 (Aug. 1914); v. 5, no. 4 (Oct. 1914>-v 6,
no.
Aug. 1930); v. 22, no. 4 (July-Aug 1931); v. 23, no. 2 (Mar. -Apr. 1932)-no. 3
(May-June 1932); v. 23, no. 5 (Sept. -Oct. 1932)-no. 6 (Nov. -Dec. 1932); v.
24, no. 2 (Mar. -Apr. 1933)-no. 3 (May-June 1933); v. 26, no. 1 (Jan.-Feb.
Apr.
(July-Aug.
1970-1971).
Purpose (1929-1940): Vol.8, no. 3 (July-Sept. 1936); v. 11, no. 3 (July-Sept.
1939)-v. 12, no. 3/4 (July-Dec. 1940).
95
1,
Rogue (1915): Vol. 1, no. 1 (15 Mar. 1915)-no. 5 (15 May 1915); v.
Aug. 1915)-v. 2, no. 1 (15 Aug. 1915); v. 2, no. 3 (1 Oct. 1915).
Scrutiny (1932(Mar.
):
Vol.
1,
no.8
(1
(June 1952)-v.
1953)-no. 4 (Oct.
1953).
S4N (1919-1925): No. 6 (Apr. 1920); no.8 (June 1920); no. 10 (Aug. 1920)-no.
12 (Oct. 1920); no. 15 (n.m. 1921); no. 18 (n.m. 1921)-no. 33 (July 1925).
Smoke (1931-37): Vol. 3, no. 1 (Winter 1934); v. 5, no. 3 (Autumn 1936)-no. 4
(Winter 1937). Full run of reprints, 1967.
Southern Review (1935- ): Vol. 1, no. 1 (July 1935)-v. 7, no. 4 (Spring 1942).
New Series holdings: Vol. 1, no. 1 (1965)-v. 11, no. 4 (1975).
The Symposium (1930-33): Vol. 1, no. 1 (Jan. 1930)-v. 3, no. 3 (July 1932); v.
4, no. 1 (Jan 1933)-no. 4 (Oct 1933). Full run of reprints, 1967.
1930).
1967.
96
1, no. 1 (Jan.
1938).
Full
run of
Twentieth
14 (Dec.
1938);
no. 17 (Apr.
1,
no.
1927).
1,
View (1940-
):
Vol.
1,
Vol. 1, no.
(Spring
1941)-v. 7, no. 3
):
no.
1,
1942).
no. 6 (June
1947).
97
Ludwig Lewisohn
Collection.
in his study,
2 January
1940.
By
The Case
Robert Greenfield
first
is no
of
of
is
a
work
of
Ill,
it
is
if
of art, and,
it
less sensational,
is
it
is
than
p. viii; Ludwig and Edna Lewisohn, Haven (New York: The Dial Press,
Press,
1965),
99
harrow the feelings of its readers. "The most terrible book I have ever read,"
remarked one reviewer; "the most depressing book we have ever read," wrote
'"An Editor's Notes and Impressions," Haldeman-Julius Quarterly [1927]: 229; unsigned
review of The Case of Mr. Crump, San Francisco Chronicle, 5 June 1927.
'Unsigned review of The Case of Mr. Crump, Times Literary Supplement, 20 August 1931
Joseph Wood Krutch, "Significant Ugliness," TheNation, Vol. CXXIV, 9 February 1927, p. 149
H.L. Mencken, "Portrait of a Lady," American Mercury, Vol. X, March 1927, p. 379
"...
erschreckend wie ein Explosion," in letter from Jacob Wassermann to Ludwig Lewisohn,
Lilly Library, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
'Joseph Wood Krutch, "Significant Ugliness," The Nation, Vol. CXXIV, 9 February 1927. p.
19 November 1928,
149.
'Frederick J. Hoffman, Freudianism and the Literary Mind (New York: Grove Press,
Inc.,
1959), p. 283.
"Letter from Mary Lewisohn to Ludwig Lewisohn, 2 March-22 April 1934. From the Ludwig
Lewisohn Collection at the Brandeis University Libraries Special Collections Department.
Written in response to a request for a divorce, this.letter marks the first time in eleven years that
Mary Lewisohn had the opportunity to communicate her feelings directly to her husband. The
period which elapsed between her commencing and concluding the letter suggests that she
sought to exploit the occasion to the fullest. The result is a carefully crafted seven-page
typewritten indictment not only of the "libelous novelized biography The Case of Mr. Crump"
but also of Lewisohn s conduct toward her generally. Only after he has suppressed the novel and
agreed to other "reparations," she announces, would she even consider discussion of a divorce.
100
edition but deleted thereafter. Both holograph and typescript incorporate the
author's emendations. The HRHRC collection also includes one of the 500
numbered copies of the limited first edition published by Edward W. Titus at
the Sign of the Black Manikin Press in Paris. These materials provide an
invaluable guide to Lewisohn s state of mind during the process of creation
and afford a number of insights into how he worked, his intentions, ambitions,
and frustrations. In addition, the HRHRC holds a number of letters by
Lewisohn as well as correspondence from such figures as Thomas Mann,
Bertrand Russell, Sisley Huddleston, Edgar Lee Masters, and Sinclair Lewis.
Several of these contain comments about the climate of opinion which existed
at the time of the novel's publication; one, written by Lewisohn to Sisley
Huddleston, is especially important for the light it sheds on the belligerent
incentive behind his decision to write the novel. Also held are three letters
from Lewisohn to George E. Howard, a prospective purchaser of the
holograph manuscript, in one of which he offers a brief description of his mode
of composition and comments on the history of both the holograph and the
typescript. Finally, the HRHRC collection includes a typewritten manuscript
of unknown origin, which comprises a list of "suggested excisions" of libelous
material prepared, one suspects, either by one of the publishing houses
with which Lewisohn negotiated unsuccessfully in his efforts to bring about
the publication of a popular American edition or by Charles Recht, his
personal attorney. Taken together, the Ludwig Lewisohn holdings of the
HRHRC make possible a privileged perspective from which to assay the
genesis, composition, and demanding personal dimension of The Case of Mr.
Crump.
American literature has no substantial tradition of works inspired by an
admixture of loathing and aggression such as that which prompted Lewisohn
to write his novel. However, among the writings of such Europeans as Swift,
Flaubert, and George Sand, there are works sufficiently analogous with The
Case of Mr. Crump to constitute a pattern in which it may be placed. For
example, Flaubert's portrait of the shallow, affected, and possessive Emma
Bovary is based in part on his mistress Louise Colet, who some years later was
to avenge herself on Flaubert by writing two novels in which she drew vicious
portraits of him. In Elle et Lui, George Sand recounted her version of her
love affair with Alfred de Musset, in which the poet is
tempestuous
maliciously portrayed as a carefree gigolo and hopeless drunkard who, despite
her efforts, was never to live up to his promise a portrait which so angered
Paul de Musset, his brother, that he wrote an angry rebuttal, Lui et Elle, in
which George Sand is depicted as rapacious, domineering, and greedy. Other
works that contain such depictions include Dostoevsky's destructive carica
ture of Turgenev as the superficial, self-seeking "Westerner" Karmazinov in
The Possessed; August Strindberg's
artfully constructed
character assassina
101
A Madman's Defense; and D'Annunzio's brutal portrait of his aging mistress, the actress Eleonora Duse, in The
Flame. Nearer to our own time, there is Montherlant's Costals and the
tion of his first wife, Siri von Essen, in
Hippogriff
. . .
remained
for her demise. "The work goes on," he writes on one occasion; "it would go on
better if God took Anne Crump."12 On the very morning that he learned of her
death, one of his first acts was to write to Cass Canfield, his former editor at
Harper and Brothers, to inquire about the possibility of their publishing his
novel, for, as he exulted, "the book itself is still very much alive."13 Having
outlasted his "old enemy," he was now fast approaching the time when he
could test the truth of the Sicilian proverb: Revenge is a dish that tastes
sweetest when it is cold.
Needless to say, so considerable an hostility has a complicated history.
Fortunately, the available documentation makes it possible to chart at least
some of its major phases independently of what is set down in the novel.
Ludwig Lewisohn was an intense, impressionable, and painfully determined
twenty-one, in his second year of graduate study at Columbia University,
when in 1903 he met his future wife. At the time the recognition which he had
sought from his teachers had eluded him and the prospects of a career as a
teacher of English in a university seemed dim. Though he had been raised a
Methodist and acknowledged himself a Christian, he believed that prejudice
directed at his Jewish ancestry was responsible for the reverses which he had
suffered. He was morose, despondent, and, even at this early age, an over
sensitive grievance collector. Twenty years his senior, Mary Arnold Crocker
Childs was born 2 March 1863, and when she met Ludwig Lewisohn she was
already the mother of four children, the eldest only two years younger than
her future husband. There is no firm evidence, as later alleged, that at the
time she was in the last throes of a disastrous marriage from which she was
looking desperately to be rescued. Rather, the relationship between Mary
and Ludwig seems to have developed by a mutual seduction, a selfishness a
deux, and sustained itself for so long a time because each simultaneously
fulfilled several roles for the other. Despite his later claim that he was the
victim of a bizarre entrapment, a skein of intrigue and hidden malice, at the
hands of a woman whom he tried to comfort, Lewisohn appears to have been
less a romantic quixote than a young man in whom wounded vanity and the
disappointments of life had developed an unusual susceptibility to the kind of
"mothering" which a woman twenty years his senior might be expected to
provide. The intense eroticism of his unpublished poetry of the time, in which
literary convention seems to give way to personal testimony, makes it plain
that a passionate sexual desire was also a prime impetus. " Moreover, yearning
for the fulfillment of creative work, Lewisohn seems to have seen himself from
,2Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Eugene Saxton, 19 October 1936. From the Ludwig
Lewisohn Collection at the Brandeis University Libraries Special Collections Department.
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Cass Canfield, 9 April 1946. From the Ludwig Lewisohn
Collection at the Brandeis University Libraries Special Collections Department.
"Ludwig Lewisohn, bound manuscript volume of unpublished poetry, 1903-1905, Lewisohn
Collection, South Caroliniana Library, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina.
103
the dramatic standpoint and to have liked the pose of a young scholar and
writer being nurtured by an older woman, whom he imagined filling the role
of femme inspiratrice and patroness. "Did it not often happen that a young
artist still struggling, still unrecognized,
had a friend who was an older
friend,
woman
a
a mistress
who took upon herself . . . the ache of the
young artist's years of waiting; who then, an exquisite and autumnal figure,
faded into the background and gave him over to love and fame?"15
For her part, Mary Childs seems nearly as responsive to the vagaries of her
imagination as Lewisohn was to his. If her future husband was a dreamer who
felt the need of an inspirational partner in pursuing his star, she enjoyed being
viewed through the mirage of a romantic temperament. The reason is clear.
She is described by a sympathetically disposed member of the Lewisohn
family as "a most charming woman and very brilliant," but also, pointedly, as
"much too old for Ludwig. She was a grandmother when she married [him].""
Furthermore, Mary Childs, too, had literary ambitions she had already
published some verse and, allegedly an illegitimate child, her claim on
respectability seems never to have been as strong as she would have wished.
She may well have believed that, in partnership with this intensely cultured
young man whose ruling passion was literature and whose eloquence and taste
exerted a strong fascination, she might find a place in the cultivated society to
which she had always been attracted and even fulfill her longstanding
ambition to succeed as a professional writer. (Some years later, under the
name of Bosworth Crocker, she was in fact to see two of her plays produced in
New York and several others published, including one with an admiring
Foreword by John Galsworthy.)17 Whatever part other causes played, the
confusions and cross-purposes already apparent in the earliest stages of the
relationship were to plague the marriage, which took place in 1906, until the
very end.
In
1922,
time was an associate editor of the Nation as well as a respected literary critic
and translator offers a picture of the desolation which he had come to
experience during the intervening years.
p. 75.
Case
"Cora H. Evans, Lewisohn's cousin, quoted in Stanley Chyet, "Ludwig Lewisohn: The Years
of Becoming," American Jewish Archives 40 (1959): 141.
"Bosworth Crocker, Pawns of War (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1918). In his
Foreword, Galsworthy says of the play that it "has a sustained crescendo . . . very gripping and
should play extremely well, I congratulate the author in having written a play that is so well worth
while, so lifelike and so forceful" (vii). A second volume, with a dedication "To John Galsworthy in
Gratitude and Admiration," appeared five years later: Bosworth Crocker, Humble Folk: One Act
Plays (Cincinnati: Stewart Kidd Company, Publishers, 1923). Included are The Last Straw, The
Baby Carriage, The Dog, The First Time, and The Cost of a Hat.
104
What
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Upton Sinclair, 30 June 1922. Lilly Library, Indiana
University, Bloomington, Indiana.
"Ludwig Lewisohn, Up Stream: An American Chronicle (New York: Boni and Liveright
Publishers, 1922). Lewisohn remarks of the early days of the relationship: "We had each
other . . . and recked little of the world. . . . We sat on a bench under the bare poplars with all
the stars of heaven for our own," and then goes on to allude to the "brave and lovely brightness in
her eyes." Once married, he finds her "full of cheer and sweetness and courage," acknowledges
105
Ellery Leonard, he was still of a mind to believe that if "M. got far more good
I'd be the last to deny that she had
her loyalties and helpfulness."20
A marked change is evident, however, in Lewisohn's Don Juan, published
the following year of 1923, and in several important respects a preliminary
exercise for the writing of The Case of Mr. Crump. In this roman a clef
Lewisohn's animus is everywhere apparent: in his portrayal of his marriage as
the enslavement of one person to another's purposes; in his contempt for what
and, not least of all, in his determination
he deems social narrow-mindedness;
to vent the resentments of many years in a destructive characterization of his
wife. The story line is simple enough. Lucien Curtis, the protagonist, is
unhappily married to Elise, a woman whose nature, he has gradually come to
see, is entirely incompatible with his own. In Helga Strong he discovers his
ideal soul mate. But the way to happiness is barred by the conventions and
institutions of society for instance, by divorce laws which require the
consent of both parties before a marriage can be dissolved as well as by the
personal insufficiencies of his wife's nature. Ignorant of the imperatives of
what is instinctive and natural, Lucien's father and friends treat his involve
ment with Helga as a case of amatory dalliance. He is labeled a "Don Juan."
(The book's title is clearly intended ironically.) Elise, citing the "sanctity of the
marriage bond," remains insensible to his appeals for a divorce: "I know you
are not heartless, Lucien. I don't think you mean to be wicked. You are just
monumentally selfish."21 Like the others, Lucien realizes, she has been bred
on the values of "Puritanism" Lewisohn's term for all that he found
stultifying and repressive in American life and he likens her soul "to a little,
blind mouse running frantically up and down in a wooden cage. "** The story
ends on a note of futility. In an effort to mitigate the pain of his ordeal, Lucien
takes off for Europe. But he goes alone. He is in his own way as much a child of
Puritanism as his wife, for he will not ask Helga to share his life outside of
out of the situation than ever did you
...
marriage.
It is only in the recording of this last vital instance that Lewisohn departs
significantly
from the direction that his own life was taking even as he wrote.
In 1923
his marital miseries had reached a crisis; his portrait of Mary Lewisohn
as the
relentlessly
possessive
Elise thwarting
husband by refusing to divorce him was true to his situation as he saw it at the
her sustaining faith in his talent as a novelist, underscores their closeness in moments of travail
("for she and I had each other"), reports of her efforts to restore his sense of calm after he learns of
his mother's
fatal illness,
and recalls poignantly how the latter eventually died in Mary's arms (pp.
"Letter from William Ellery Leonard to Ludwig Lewisohn, 24 June 1925. Lilly Library,
Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
"Ludwig Lewisohn, Don Juan (New York: Boni and Liveright Publishers, 1923), p. 298.
"Ibid,
106
p. 31.
time. He had, that is to say, turned his own marriage completely on its head by
entering into a relationship with an aspiring concert singer named Thelma
Spear who was more than twenty years his junior and whom he had met in the
It is she who is the model for Helga Strong and, later, for
summer of 1922.
recoiled,
she all ungrudging tenderness and spontaneous affection; his need for love a
craving like hunger, and she, "the bread and water of life." Her
physical
the "little Madonna" who sanctifies his life.26 By the time that he wrote to
"Letter
"Ibid.
sIn a letter
...
you were safe with me and that, moreover, we were pledged to a three months' period of absence,
silence, waiting. (Privately [Mary] says that if I can't stand it, she will let us meet at my house and
thus give you the social protection.)" Lilly Library, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Thelma Spear, beginning "My very and ever dearest . . . ":
"You are always with me a light in my eyes, a guide to my soul, a spring time in my heart"; letter
from Lewisohn to Spear,
Edgar Lee Masters, in a letter dated 27 March 1924, "We think of [sic]
genuine delight of the evening you spent with us and hope that you can do it
again," Lewisohn had formalized his relationship with Thelma Spear by
moving into her apartment in New York City and was already occupied with
making arrangements to leave the country.27 When in August 1924 he
departed for Paris, it was with Thelma Spear at his side. Ten years would pass
before either would return to the United States.
Ludwig Lewisohn was not a member of the so-called "Lost Generation" and
had little in common with most of his fellow expatriates. Nor did the fact that
he had detached himself in one instance from conventionality mean that the
determined bohemianism of the American literary colony in Montparnasse
held any attraction for him. Rather, Lewisohn had taken flight involuntarily in
order to avoid the legal repercussions of having abandoned his wife and to
escape the ignominy of the scandal which had followed upon it. Indeed, it
appears that he contemplated returning to America as soon as the din aroused
by his actions subsided and that he continued to hold to this expectation
despite his evident happiness in being able to live openly with Thelma Spear
and the stimulation which his new environment afforded to his creative
A letter from Edgar Lee Masters to "Thelma and Ludwig
imagination.
Lewisohn," written shortly after their arrival in Europe, refers enthusiasti
cally to a "safe return to these shores, where if the chances for the free spirit
are not so abundant there are still friends here to welcome you. . . ."" The
difficulties of his situation Lewisohn was quick to attribute to his wife's refusal
to grant him a divorce and to a tangle of intrigues the planting of vile stories
in the press, a whispering campaign and other subterranean maneuvers that
had undermined his position at the Nation which she had instigated. (The
truth of the first of these allegations has since been established.)29 Indeed,
Lewisohn's letters to Thelma Spear in the months leading up to their
departure have their dark side in repeated references to surveillance by
detectives hired by his wife, mysterious letters reporting on his movements
sent to her by some of his unsympathetic associates, and a host of precautions
and subterfuges and secret meetings, all of which he finds "morally repulsive."
"The world our world is seething," he writes on one occasion; "We
are
on the edge of scandal & I must not let my rashness or my yearning
hurt you."30 Many of his messages convey a mood of scrambling, muted panic;
others speak of being endlessly tormented by nerves, daily headaches, and his
...
''Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Edgar Lee Masters, 27 March 1924. HRHRC Collections.
^Letter from Edgar Lee Masters to Thelma and Ludwig Lewisohn, 24 October 1924. HRHRC
Collections.
^Letter from John Larkin to Cass Canfield, 14 February 1930. From the Ludwig Lewisohn
Collection at the Brandeis University Libraries Special Collections Department.
^Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Thelma Spear, undated, beginning "Monday. Forgive
pencil. . . ." Lilly Library, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
108
Ludwig Lewisohn and Thelma Spear, probably during their European sojourn.
York Journal- American" Collection.
HRHRC "New
beyond repair.
Ludwig Lewisohn was forty-four years old and in the second year of his
European "exile" when he began to write The Case of Mr. Crump. On the first
page of the HRHRC holograph manuscript, inscribed in his neat hand, is
"Paris, November 24, 1925"; on the last, "May 16, 1926. "^ It is, it should be
stressed at the outset, the work of a man who saw himself as a defendant under
seige. On the homefront, he learned from William Ellery Leonard, among
others, that Mary Lewisohn had labeled him both a bigamist and the father of
an illegitimate child and was busily declaiming his insensitivity and in
gratitude to all who would listen.34 "He won his way into my heart by telling
me his troubles and of how little he was understood," she would later tell the
purveyors of yellow journalism; "I took his problems upon myself. I became
',35
Should he decide to return to
his secretary at the expense of my own career.
the country, she declared, it was her intention to have him arrested for
for
defaulting in his alimony payments and, of far graver consequence,
Thelma
had
had
their
Spear
violation of the Mann Act.36 Although he and
^'Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Thelma Spear,
Collections.
"Letter from William Ellery Leonard to Ludwig Lewisohn, 24 June 1925. Lilly Library,
Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
^Saunders,
"Too Many Wives and a Libel Suit Add to Famous Author's Troubles." South
Caroliniana Library, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina.
"Enacted by Congress in 1910, the Federal White Slave Traffic Act, also known as the Mann
Act, was designed to prohibit the transportation of women and girls in interstate or foreign
commerce for prostitution, debauchery, or other immoral purposes. Subsequently, the Supreme
Court made it clear that there was no requirement that a pecuniary element be involved the
mere fact of transportation to promote immoral transactions was sufficient to invoke federal police
powers for the protection of public morals. Lewisohn may not have grasped all of the details of his
110
...
situation, but he accurately reports his and Thelma Spear's predicament in his remark in MidChannel: An American Chronicle (New York and London: Harper and Brothers Publishers,
1929): "But if we were to go home and travel from New York to Vermont, I might be arrested
under a state [sic] law ostensibly designed for the apprehension of procurers and their
victims. . . . Such is in the America of the twentieth century the relation between law and
civilized morality . . ."(145).
"Despite the feet that they were never married, Lewisohn referred to Thelma Spear as his wife
throughout the period of their relationship. "My wife joins me in kindest regards," he writes to
Edgar Lee Masters. "We often think of your coming to see us in our little place on Upper
Broadway." Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Edgar Lee Masters, 17 October 1932. HRHRC
Collections.
^Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Horace Liveright, 18 December 1926. The Horace B.
Liveright Collection, Special Collections, Van Pelt Library, University of Pennsylvania.
WI wish to thank Ralph Melnick, currently at work on a biography of Lewisohn, for supplying
this information. A veiled allusion to the episode
Ill
Ludwig Lewisohn and Thelma Spear's bookplate, which appears on the inside cover of the bound
manuscript of The Case of Mr. Crump. HRHRC Collections.
it,
seems to have been occupied in searching for a vehicle which would permit
him to express publicly what up until now he had churned almost entirely in
private reflection. Within four months he had begun writing The Case of Mr.
Crump. Later in Mid-Channel, he was to insist that "My conscious mind had
of
planned this novel only in the vaguest way" a proof, as he interpreted
his moral sincerity and of the genuineness of his devotion to the truth.
.
of
is
it
...
manuscript,
script, and the first edition of the published text from among the holdings of
the
HRHRC
is
claim that once he began to write he was able to carry through with his task
borne out, first of all, by the dates which in the
I,
holograph
It
"In
41Lewisohn,
it,
American publication was impossible, at least for some years, this Ms. was turned over to my
friend and attorney, Charles Recht. . . . Recht sold
more as joke than in serious spirit, for
$25 to believe the Gotham Book Mart. Of its further adventures only vague rumors reached
me. The $25 Recht duly sent me. There was only one other carbon copy of the typescript on very
is
.
.
is
It
had determined never to sell this Ms. and in fact turned down
is
It
very handsome
fantastic days of Coolidge. Now the equally fantastic depression has struck me too.
of
offer in the
..."
113
"Typewritten manuscript of Lewisohn's The Case of Mr. Crump, Book I, pp. 20-21. HRHRC
Collections.
114
encounter with his future wife with an episode in a work of fiction: "He felt like
in a novel by Murger. It was delicious."4* In the typescript and
published version, "Murger" is replaced by "Bourget" the emphasis remains
the same, but a taste for Bourget is much more in keeping with one who, in
Lewisohn's words, "hugged his sophistication" (74). The protagonists tend
ency to be led astray, like Flaubert's famous heroine, by too much reading of
a gentleman
to the
"...
. .
.*
"Ibid.,
"Ibid.,
p. 9.
p. 12.
115
for
and inaction.
What had happened was evidently this, that in the detachment and
the peace which I found in Paris things that had been working
themselves out and ripening primarily in my subconsciousness for
years, reached the point of condensation or precipitation . . . and
that the book wrote itself measurably, at least, under the guidance of
my notion of what a novel should be.49
That the writing of The Case of Mr. Crump provided Lewisohn with an
imaginative outlet for the considerable fund of impotent rage which he carried
about is clear. And, several years later, he acknowledged as much, charac
terizing the transposition of his feelings to the realm of "fiction" as an
abreaction or homeopathic catharsis though he wisely refrained from at
tributing any long-range therapeutic benefits to his self-purge. So in a letter to
Sisley Huddleston, dated 29 April 1929, Lewisohn offered the following
illustration of how to go about achieving a "creative catharsis":
Lie fallow for six months
. . .
Reflecting Lewisohn's "notion of what a novel should be," The Case of Mr.
Crump is a "well-made" narrative in the tradition of Flaubert and Henry
James amply demonstrating what the French call I'esprit de suite. Elaborate
technique is absent. It is composed for the most part of a series of scenes which
record the unwinding of the years in a rectilinear fashion. In keeping with the
personal and self-centered nature of his effort, Lewisohn often substitutes
"report" for "dramatization" and makes no attempt to mask the presence of his
"Lewisohn,
"Letter
116
HRHRC Collections.
than
that of Don Juan as best suited to convey the ruthlessness of his predicament
contrasts
outlook
accenting
disparities
that Lewisohn
in temperament,
experience,
taste, and
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Horace Liveright, 18 December 1926. The Horace B.
Liveright Collection, Special Collections, Van Pelt Library, University of Pennsylvania.
117
taking advantage of her new husband. Herbert Crump, on the other hand
his name, a shortened version of the German Krumpf, carries suggestions of
crooked and bent is portrayed as a sensitive, gifted musician, raised by selfeffacing and unworldly parents in the orderly, if narrow, environment of
Queenshaven (Columbia, South Carolina). From them, he derives his belief
in the worthwhileness of spiritual endeavor, his commitment to self-sacrifice,
and his high-minded devotion to principled behavior; from his environment,
he takes away a misguided sense of the obligations of gentility and a number
of
"Ludwig
118
1940), p. 101.
the power,
1923,
"I
can't beat
anyone into divorcing me."53 Three years later the fantasy was no longer the
ineffective daydream of a thwarted man but had been transformed into art. He
in its full force the lethal hatred which he bore
Kenneth Burke has written somewhere that any novel
is but the expression of a single sentence, perhaps simply the example of a
single gesture. The death-blow to the head of Anne Crump is the "single
gesture" in the language of Gestalt psychology, the "schema" or paradigm
which The Case of Mr. Crump was written to express. And, no less
importantly, to justify. Inspired by the ruthlessness of his imagination and the
extremism of his temper, Lewisohn had contrived what for him, at least, must
had realized imaginatively
toward "Anne Crump.
"
so sadistically
drawn
to call it an exercise in
its unexampled
some may care to admit in bringing the reader into complicity with the
clue to understanding
his portrayal of Anne Crump is given by Arnold Bennett in his remark that The
Case of Mr. Crump is "of the same type" as his The Old Wives' Tale. What, one
to say (what he may in fact have said,
since his statement is given only in paraphrase) is that the two novels are
suspects, Bennett
actually intended
conspicuously
the immutable
of all
kinds and varied in all kinds of ways to reinforce their themes: in one case,
a
So, for example, in a skillful joining of the use of repetition with an adaptation
of naturalistic technique, Lewisohn presents Anne Crump initially from the
perspective
is no attempt,
in the
ling.
119
episodes
reminiscent
she
will
respects him but because he is well-bred and promises entry into a finer and
richer world. When on their honeymoon he confesses that he has embezzled
his employer's funds, she drops all pretense of docility and, now having a
weapon to use against him, shows herself to be the mean and grasping person
she has been all along. Quickly and easily, the marriage slips into a condition
120
compounded
controlling,
Too lazy even to wash, she will couple her vigorous sexuality with a long string
of abortions. Blindly pretentious, she insinuates a sexual undertone, a furtive
animalism, into her most casual encounters with men: even as a woman well
advanced in years, she will slyly and coyly repeat "I do believe he was half in
love with me" (22). Keenly sensitive to any affront to her person, she will bury
slights as a dog buries bones for future use. When Harrison Vilas returns home
with a case of gonorrhea, she quickly affirms a desire to get even "There's
something of the Indian in me" (25). Soon she does, a Dr. Vogel, a
neighborhood physician, being the instrument most ready to hand. "I do
believe he was half in love with me." The reaches of her life before Herbert
Crump enters it are clear enough and, marked by repetition, they underscore
the limits of her nature. There is in her no compunction, no generosity, no
forgiving tenderness, and no shame. When, again through the repetition of
incident, expected and then presented, Lewisohn comes, then, to describe
her marriage to Herbert, the result is, inevitably, a monotony of horrors
once again, with suitable variation, a story of "dirt, genteel tastes . . . and
powerful passions." The contours of this circularity are striking; its purpose,
clear. The repetition provides a mounting reinforcement of Herbert's claim
that he is caught in the coils of a predatory and even demonic creature
implacably determined to fulfill her own willful designs. "Nothing could daunt
that forehead of brass, that soul of leather, that heart of steel. . ." (283).
Reflecting a second adaptation of naturalistic technique by whose pre
scriptions character tends to be viewed almost exclusively from without
Lewisohn sought to present a portion of Anne Crump's inner life by
frequently resorting to a fairly simple form of expressionism. His concern is
not to portray complexities in motivation or subtle shades of feeling, but
rather to make plain that Anne Crump's physical unpleasantness, about which
he has so much to say, is to be understood as a direct reflection of her spiritual
ugliness. In his own words, to show how "Anne's moral nature . . . shapes the
outer and visible Anne into an image of itself" (275). A second concern is to
avoid the kind of "passive documentation,"
long a deficiency of naturalistic
method, which imposes a burden of minutiae on a character. In the
accomplishment of both of these aims repetition once again assumes a vital
role. Singling out several features of Anne Crump's outward appearance at the
start, Lewisohn recurs frequently to these images, separately and in combina
tion, adjusting them suitably to fit a succession of different contexts, so that
they grow in meaning and take on the function of symbols. For example, what
in the fleeting enthusiasm of their first meeting Herbert remarks as "clear
gray eyes, speaking, merry, pathetic, younger than anything else about the
as Anne no longer feels
(70) undergoes a rapid metamorphosis
constrained to conceal her aggression behind a pose of helplessness: her eyes
woman"
121
become
"stone gray,"
concentrated
reflecting the
assume an ominous fixity as her entire person is shown gradually to take on the
appearance of "a gray gnarled shaft of stone" (300).
Additional instances of such disfigurement, communicated
by means of a
is
is
it,
122
Gathering
of
is
...
^Albright's merciless precision in portraying the blemishes, excrescences, and decay of the
flesh is evident in a host of paintings: Into the World There Came a Soul Called Ida, in which the
body of a woman glows with the phosphorescence of her own premature decline; And God
Created Man in His Own Image (Room 203), in which the necrotic bulk of the sitter's flesh appalls
the eye; and Woman, in which the parchment-like skin of the face and breasts and every dimple in
the model's hands are examined with the same cruel insistence. In his Ivan Albright (New York:
Abbeville Press, n.d.), Michael Croyden quotes the painter as remarking, "I like a cold light
what some people might call a cruel light the kind of light that no actress would want. I like a
powerful white light on the head this is the light that shows the form the most" (43). It is the light
which Lewisohn likewise favored, and for the same reason. Croyden characterizes Albright's
focus on unsightly detail as a "corrosive kind of factualism"
uncompromising disclosure of the human condition for the viewer's close inspection" suggests
that the efforts of the two men did at times coincide in the production of a most disquieting kind of
naturalism. Conversation with Michael Croyden, Lake Forest, Illinois, 24 October 1990.
123
as possible;
principle, documented
vulgarity,
the bitterness,
the one-sidedness,
the psychological
astigmatism,
which transfuses it." And he goes on to ask Lewisohn "one or two questions
questions which I would ask you to ponder long and seriously before you
answer me."
First, do you believe that you are far enough removed, in time,
from the actual events about which this book is written, to approach
them with the clear, uncolored unemotional viewpoint which any
writer must have when actionizing that which lies nearest his heart?
"Theodore Dreiser, American Diaries,
Pennsylvania Press, 1982), p. 200.
"Ibid.,
124
p. 27.
ed.
University
ot
Collection.
Do you think you have brooded long enough about those years of
to be able to set them down without bitterness, without
your life
hate, and without distortion? Personally I don't believe you have.
Do you not think it wiser to let the years mellow your viewpoint?
It is hard for any of us to stand on the sidelines and view
ourselves with impartiality, but is that not necessary in transcribing
our temperaments to fiction? And can that fiction have real power
real force reality itself, until we have reached that state of objectiveness which gives us an honest, or at least unbiased, viewpoint.58
...
...
is no record
It
is to deny
it.58
neither his unashamed admiration for his own talent nor the
to
During the same year that Lewisohn had written most of The Case of Mr.
Crump, what was fast proving to be his besetting sin, his passion to discuss his
private affairs in print, had already exceeded the bounds of neurotic
garrulousness. Revising Up Stream in preparation for its re-issue by the
Modern Library, he had impetuously used the occasion to incorporate a
number of spiteful references to his wife. The episode ended quickly on a note
of retreat, for Lewisohn found himself the target of a libel action, and Up
Stream was reprinted only after payment of damages and the restoration of the
original Boni and Liveright text. Following upon this setback, he had
experienced difficulty in securing a publisher for The Case of Mr. Crump.
Both Horace Liveright and Harper and Brothers had rejected the manuscript
because of fear of legal action. Discouraged, but still obdurate in his desire to
settle old scores, he had begun to inquire about personally underwriting the
cost of a private printing when his friend Edward Titus, newly installed as the
publisher of the Paris-based Black Manikin Press, agreed to publish a limited
Dreiser, Letters of Theodore Dreiser, ed. Robert Elias, Vol. 2 (Philadelphia:
srTheodore
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959), pp. 451-52.
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Horace Liveright, 8 February 1927. The Horace B.
Liveright Collection, Special Collections, Van Pelt Library, University of Pennsylvania.
126
Several
it,
"I
is
it
.
.
It
".
of
succeeded
"Letter from Sinclair Lewis to Ludwig Lewisohn, January 1927. HRHRC Collections.
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Horace Liveright,
February 1927. The Horace
B.
127
p.By
the author
t?/"UP STRlSAM
An
American Chronicle by
UDWIG LEWISOHN
**"& Jk Wmmu
widely known through the success of
"The Island Wichin" and "Up Stream," has written
here a significant study of America. In the form of %
spiritual autobiography, he offers his mature criticism and
appreciation, recording the result of provocative thought
and intense experience with his usual beauty of style and
CMr.
Lewisohn,
ESTABLISHED
1817
birth.64
Somewhat
or
a hardly disguised
contemporaries,
autobiography
immoderate:
"A
a gossipy roman a
clef
be either the one or the other. Let but a few years pass; its
universal and high legendary character will stand revealed."88 In writing The
Case of Mr. Crump, he had, he argued, exemplified Balzac's dictum that "We
describe best that which has given us pain," and the passage of time would
show that with its publication he had joined the ranks of "the modern novelist,
especially
the naturalist,
the
and the things that hurt him and has tried, by that
creative act, to heal himself, to mitigate the pain of others, to rob the evil from
which he has suffered of pretension and of power. "86 His self-apotheosis was to
reach its climax in a letter to Sisley Huddleston, dated 26 July 1932, which
contains the following personally reflexive encomium: "There is a saying of
Schiller," he writes, "to the effect that he whose work has satisfied the noblest
spirits of his own time is sure of surviving through time. . . .',67
Following the publication oiThe Case of Mr. Crump, Lewisohn was visibly
buoyed by its critical reception. Celebrated personages wrote to congratulate
him. Thomas Mann's first impression of the book was typical, and he remained
sufficiently impressed to assist Lewisohn in securing a German translation
"Ludwig Lewisohn, Cities and Men (New York
to Sisley Huddleston, 26
July
1932.
HRHRC Collections.
129
and publisher. In a letter dated 6 February 1927, Mann writes: "It must be a
real satisfaction for you, that this book, which was frowned upon by prudish
America, could finally get out into the daylight in such a beautiful and
dignified form. I use the word dignified', because the first impression that I
get leafing through the pages is, that its spiritual value absolutely matches the
',68
luxurious production.
Bertrand Russell wrote: "I feel move [sic] to write and
say how extraordinarily
sympathetic your outlook is to me. All that you say
about America, about the connection of sadism with sexual virtue . . . expres
ses just what I feel, the only difference is that Americans (with the exception of
my first wife) have never been in a position to make us suffer.'"69 To add to his
happiness, translations were following one another in rapid succession and
these, in turn, prompted reviews which compared The Case of Mr. Crump
with such illustrious works as The Sorrows of Young Werther and Madame
Bovary. Lewisohn derived no consolation from the fact that Samuel Roth,
the notorious literary pirate, thought so well of the book, or, at least, of its
scandalous possibilities he likened it to Lady Chatterley's Loverl that, in
1930, while still defending himself for having published an unlicensed version
of Ulysses, he published an unauthorized American edition of 1,000 copies of
The Case of Mr. Crump. "Ludwig Lewisohn's Suppressed Classic," ran the
advertisement; "The Most Truthful, the Most Relentless, the Most Devastat
ing Story of a Marriage Ever Written in Any Language or Any Age."71 In
response to this act of theft, Titus was busy readying his own popular edition of
3,000 copies when the United States Post Office abruptly banned the novel on
the grounds of obscenity. This interdiction, coupled with repeated threats of
legal action from Mary Lewisohn, constituted a crucial and long-lasting
setback. Another, though Lewisohn's response to it was doubtless different,
was to follow in 1937. "Lewisohn Swaps Book for Divorce" ran one newspaper
account.
The book
shocking
. . .
is my own.
"Letter from Bertrand Russell to Ludwig Lewisohn, 22 November 1928. HRHRC Collections.
"A circular announcing the publication by Edward Titus of the "Authorized, Unabridged,
Popular Edition [of] The Case of Mr. Crump by Ludwig Lewisohn, with an Introduction by
Thomas Mann," contains the following quote from De Telegraaf (Amsterdam): "Lewisohn has
created types that recall Mme. Bovary, and Pickwick, and Werther. The man who does that
cannot be other than a great master" (3). From the Ludwig Lewisohn Collection at the Brandt-is
negative.
HRHRC "New
The author has been wishing that his first wife would divorce him.
She declined to do so until he destroyed the plates and suppressed
the current editions of "Mr. Crump." This novel, published in
Europe, depicted the plight of a young and sensitive artist who
married an older woman and then found his true love in a younger,
talented girl.
Consequently, the first Mrs. Lewisohn had her way. Her suit for
divorce, which will not be defended by Lewisohn, contains a formal
agreement that "Mr. Crump" will die.72
Until the death of Mary Lewisohn in 1946 made it possible for the book to be
published in America, Lewisohn could take heart only in the succes de
scandale which it continued to enjoy on the basis of copies smuggled into the
country from abroad.
Nor, in the war which he continued to wage on other fronts was he proving
any more successful. For example, in Mid-Channel, published in 1929, and
the sequel in more ways than one to Up Stream, Lewisohn showed that he was
still not only without the "justice of mind" which Dreiser had called for, but
that he lacked even the blind instinct of self-protection. In a letter to Horace
Liveright, dated 14 June of that year, he had, as was his habit, attempted to
present himself in a sympathetic light by proclaiming that he was once again a
victim of harassment: "I am still being pursued by the professional fury. There
seems to be no end to it and no let-up. Unless some land friends hire assassins
I sometimes wonder what the end of it will be. "73 What he had neglected to say
was that Mid-Channel was now the focus of a libel action because, within a few
pages of assuring his reader that the living and recognizable characters whom
he had presented in The Case of Mr. Crump would soon be seen sub specie
aeternitatis as the individual representations of universal concepts, he had,
without waiting for the assistance of "kind friends," gone about the business of
assassinating his wife's character yet one more time. Unable to forgive or
forget, he now coupled a vituperative attack on American divorce laws, which
"have no regard for love or virtue or the creative mind but give their support to
legalized malignity and moral foulness,"74 with an equally strident portrayal of
Mary Lewisohn as a woman who outrages all normal instinct, as a sore from
which there oozes a subtle poison, as a "towering ogre" in short, as Anne
Crump drawn once again in hysterical proportions. And, once again, he soon
found himself tallying the cost of instructing his readers so recklessly in the
pleasures of revenge. Mary Lewisohn charged him and Harper and Brothers
with libel, won her case, and eventually received a monthly stipend for the
"Unidentified newspaper clipping. From the Ludwig Lewisohn Collection at the Brandeis
University Libraries Special Collections Department.
"Letter from Ludwig Lewisohn to Horace Liveright, 14 June 1929. The Horace B. Liveright
Collection, Special Collections, Van Pelt Library, University of Pennsylvania.
"Lewisohn,
132
Thelma Spear,
with whom Lewisohn fled to Europe in 1924. HRHRC "New York Journal-
American" Collection.
1947
nor
in subsequent editions.
savage
and merciless
The Case of Mr. Crump was destined to be the central book in Lewisohn's life.
Certainly there is no doubt that in his own mind it quickly came to represent
something like a charter of emancipation.
Upon its completion he was to
write, revealingly enough, "The umbilical cord had been cut."76 That he
continued to refer to it in language fit for a sublime epic and remained aloof
from any discussion of the unrecoiled antagonism which had given thrust and
sensibility to every portion of its content are two of the intriguing features of
what today is still a very strange and only partially documented life history.77
No man, Bernard Shaw once wrote, can tell the truth about marriage unless
he hates his wife. In the last analysis, however, one suspects that like many
readers of The Case of Mr. Crump, Shaw would not stop at asking whether
Lewisohn's representation of the facts about his marriage was accurate or even
if it was justified. Rather, it seems likely, he would read the novel as Lionel
Trilling has remarked of the fiction of Zola "for the pleasure of its fierce
energy, for the strange pleasure we habitually derive from the indictment of
the human kind."78 In brief, for the pleasure which accompanies a recognition
of its "significant ugliness."
them much of the same vehemence which he had displayed earlier in discussing Mary Lewisohn.
Haven, devised to follow Mid-Channel as the final volume of his autobiographical trilogy An
American Chronicle, and written jointly with Edna Manley Lewisohn, reports on this period of
135
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Bernard Benstock
Alan W. Friedman
Richard Watson,
HRHRC, received
a second-year
4)
Philip C.(20,
no. 3);
Bowden, Ann; see Collections at Texas (48); Patrick, David H. (20, no. 3)
Bowen, Elizabeth; see Jordan, Heather Bryant (48)
Braithwaite, William Stanley; see Benstock, Shari and Bernard (20, no. 4)
Brett, Dorothy; see Ratliff, Clare (48)
Bridges, Robert; see Introduction, Bender, Todd K; Giles, Richard F.;
MacKenzie, Norman H (46/47)
Brighton Rock; see Friedman, Alan Warren (20, no. 4)
Brown, Robert Morgan; see Collections at Texas (48)
Brown, Sir Thomas; see D.F. McKenzie (20, no. 3)
Bute, Lord; see Scheick, William J. (20, no. 3)
Buttitta, A.J. ; see Benstock, Shari and Bernard (20, no. 4)
Carrington, Dora; see Ratliff, Clare (48)
Carver, Larry (20, nos. 1/2)
Case of Mr. Crump, The; see Greenfield, Robert (20, no. 3)
Catholicon; see Hellinga, Lotte (20, nos. 1/2)
Chalmers, John (48)
Coccioli, Carlo; see Collections at Texas (20, no. 4)
Coleridge, E. H. ; see Feeney, Joseph J. , S. J. ; MacKenzie, Norman H.
Collins, Carvel; see Watson, James G. (20, no. 4)
(46747)
137
Conrad, Joseph;
see
4)
Egoist, The; see Benstock, Shari and Bernard; Watson, Richard (20, no. 4)
Eliot, T.S.; see Collections at Texas (20, no. 3); McGann, Jerome (20, nos.
2); MacKenzie, Norman H. (46/47); Ratliff, Clare (48)
Every Man in His Humour; see Warren, Michael (20, nos. 1/2)
1/
(48);
McLeod, Randall
(20, nos.
1/2)
(20, no. 4)
Hoffman, Judi
(20, no. 3)
(48)
4);
1/2)
Collections at Texas
(20, no. 3)
La Casa del Libra; see Chalmers, John; Schminky, George R., Jr. (48)
Langland, William; see Middleton, Anne (20, nos. 1/2)
Lawrence, T.E.; see Patrick, David H. (20, no. 3)
Lewis, Wyndham; see Benstock, Shari and Bernard (20, no. 4)
Lewisohn, Ludwig; see Greenfield, Robert (20, no. 4)
Little magazines; see Benstock, Shari and Bernard; Watson, Richard (20, no.
4)
(20, no. 4)
139
Prokosch,
Frederic;
see Sutton,
see
(20, no. 4)
140
see
Willison, Ian
(20,
nos. 1/2)
see Benstock,
3)
D.F.
(20, no. 3)
J., S.J.
(46747);
(20, no. 4)
Whitman, Walt;
Who's
see Sutton,
W.B.;
141
Department and
Acquisitions & Serials Dept.
Wayne Perryman
Cataloging Dept.
Ernestine Potter
Center
Cynthia Kehoe
Collection
(Mallet) Library
Christine Johnston
Classics Library
Bonny Keyes
Collection Heads
East Asian Studies Librarian
Kevin Lin
Engineering (McKinney)
Library
Susan Ardis
Mexican-American
Studies
Librarian
Margo Gutierrez
Music Librarian
David Hunter
Physics, Mathematics &
Astronomy (Kuehne) Library
Molly White
Public Affairs
Library
(Wasserman)
Olive Forbes
South Asia Librarian
Merry Burlingham
Undergraduate Library
Ralph Alberico
Recent Publications
of
The
Authors' Libraries
James Joyce's Trieste Library, a catalogue of materials at the HRHRC by
Michael Patrick Gillespie, with the assistance of Erik Bradford Stocker.
$30.00 in cloth.
$18.95.
HRHRC.
$16.95.
WCW
HRHRC.
at the
at the
HRHRC.
$14.95.
0000
004
PERIODICAL
HECKMAN
BINDERY
INC.
m,
OCT
i.-r
w
91
n MANCHESTER,
648
238