Page Contents
The Modern Edition (2)
3.4. The Modern Text
3.4.1. Determining the copy text
a) General
In recent years many basic assumptions about the nature of the transmission of the text from Shakespeare's pen to the printed page have come under scrutiny. There has been a rebirth of skepticism in a discipline that had for many years prided itself on its almost scientific objectivity. This has been on the whole a valuable exercise; you are encouraged to return to first principles in determining your copy (or "control") text and in deducing what you can about its provenance.
At the same time, remember that the overall objective of the Internet Editions is to provide tools: usable editions for others. The Internet Editions will accept high quality texts from editors with varying convictions about the ability of any modern editor to decide matters of textual transmission; the important point is that for these texts to be useful tools to a user, the editor's position must be clearly spelled out and justified in the textual introduction. In general, the nature of the electronic medium will make possible a more "inclusive" edition than is possible in print, along the lines of the New Folger editions of Paul Werstine and Barbara Mowat. The eccentric and the merely pedantic are to be avoided; where there are no compelling arguments for changing a generally accepted reading it may be preferable for your modern edition to prefer the familiar and to comment (if necessary at some length) in the commentary or collation.
See also the list of recent studies below.
b) The provenance of the text
Where it is possible to do so, please make every attempt to achieve as clear an awareness as possible of the process of translation from manuscript copy to the surviving printed edition(s). Where you do not believe it possible to reach a defensible conclusion, make clear the issues that have been debated in earlier editions of the play. Matters which will affect treatment of the text may include:
- the identification of compositors (and, where relevant, scribes) and study of their ascertainable habits of work;
- the sequence of setting of pages and the casting-off of copy;
- the sequence of imposition and printing of the forms;
- whatever evidence survives of proofing and correction, in the form of proof pages or press variants.
c) Reporting your findings
State succinctly your findings in your discussion of the text, in such a manner as to indicate their likely significance and the nature and degree of their importance for the editing of the text. Where appropriate (e.g. when you are dealing with a subject of some controversy), you may wish to present a fuller and more detailed consideration in a separate file, to be linked both to the collation and the commentary.
d) Editions of plays with multiple source texts
In the electronic medium, multiple modern texts of single plays will be possible. Taking Lear as an example, the site may eventually offer the following:
- A separate edition of the Quarto
- A separate edition of the Folio
- A conflated text of Quarto and Folio
- An inclusive text of Quarto and Folio.
In addition, of course, the site will have electronic versions of both Quarto and Folio, and digitized images of both texts.
The crucial point is that you should make clear what kind of edition it is that you are offering.
e) Emendations
All emendations and conjectures should be consistent with the proposed history of the text as outlined in the introduction, and you should fully understand, and explain, how the reading of the copy-text may have come into existence (e.g. misreading, mechanical error, scribal sophistication, authorial revision).
f) Some recent studies
Specialized studies that may be helpful in cases involving complex or obscure transmission of the text can be found listed in T. H. Howard-Hill, Shakespearean Bibliography and Textual Criticism: A Bibliography (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971). Periodical articles published between 1933 and 1985 can be found in the Bibliographical Society's Index to Selected Bibliographical Journals, 1933-1970 (1982); and in John Feather, An Index of Selected Bibliographical Periodicals, 1971-1985, Oxford Bibliographical Society (1991). For more recent publications see the annual review of "Textual Studies" in Shakespeare Survey and the relevant section of the Shakespeare chapter in The Year's Work in English Studies. See also William Shakespeare: A Textual Companion. ed. Stanley Wells, Gary Taylor et al. (Oxford UP, 1987).
Recent studies which discuss some of the challenges to long-accepted beliefs about the capacity of the editor to determine textual matters include William B. Long, "Stage-Directions: A Misinterpreted Factor in Determining Textual Provenance," Text 2 (1985): 121-37; Paul Werstine, "McKerrow's 'Suggestion' and Twentieth-Century Shakespeare Textual Criticism," Renaissance Drama 19 (1989): 149-73; "Narratives about Printed Shakespearean Texts: 'Foul Papers' and 'Bad Quartos,' " Shakespeare Quarterly 41 (1990): 65-86; Barbara Mowat, "The Problem of Shakespeare's Text(s)," Shakespeare Jahrbuch 132 (1996): 26-43.
3.4.2. Modernization of Spelling and Usage
a) General
Be thorough in your modernization of spelling, bringing the text, wherever possible, into line with current correct US American English usage. Remember that the original spelling is a click of the mouse away. The accessibility of your source texts may be expected to have two balancing effects: you will have a sense of some freedom in changing spelling to make your text accessible to the modern reader since the original is there for the curious to check; and on the other hand you may feel constrained to be modest in your changes since they can so readily be judged by the reader who does consult the original. Thus, for example, it is undesirable to retain earlier spellings like "murther" or "aleven" on the grounds that they may represent distinct phonetic variants; such argument should be limited to the commentary.
The principal issues involved in modernization are surveyed by Stanley Wells, in Stanley Wells and Gary Taylor, Modernizing Shakespeare's Spelling (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), 3-36, and in Re-Editing Shakespeare for the Modern Reader (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 5-31. His discussion should be of value to all future editors of modernized Renaissance drama, not least in drawing attention to some of the words which will face editors with their most difficult decisions and in indicating how uncertain is the line that divides the categories of "genuine forms" (to be retained) and "variant spellings" (to be reduced to standard modern form). Textual notes to the Oxford Complete Works which discuss modernization of particular forms are indexed in the Textual Companion, 666-7. Editors should also read the concise rationale for the principles of modernizing adopted in David Bevington's edition of the Complete Works (HarperCollins, 1996); see the Preface.
b) Earlier practice
The practice of earlier editors may prove a helpful guide but should not be allowed to stand as an inhibiting precedent. Remember, however, that the originality of the Internet Shakespeare will lie more in the kind and depth of critical apparatus than in the text itself.
c) Neither flesh nor fish
Any compromise between full modernization and total retention of copy-text forms creates a text which represents no known stage in the development of English orthography. The attempt to preserve the phonetic values of a few words (even if we could be confident of knowing what they were) is anomalous in a text whose standard of spelling is that of the late twentieth or early twenty-first centuries. Spellings inviting discussion should be collated, and may be discussed either in an additional note in the collation or in the commentary.
3.4.3. Punctuation
a) General
Again, remember that the original punctuation is a click away. Your modernized punctuation can generally be a good deal lighter than the more formal punctuation employed by nineteenth-century editors; lighter punctuation probably approximates more accurately Shakespeare's habits, and leaves more open to the reader the varying possibilities of interpretation in the text. As elsewhere, the MLA Handbook is the basic guide.
b) The punctuation of the copy text
Do not preserve the punctuation of the copy-text when it conflicts with modern usage (e.g. "?" in place of modern "!"; brackets for vocatives; the colon merely indicating a pause). On occasion, however, you may wish to retain your copy-text's punctuation for the sake of its dramatic or rhetorical significance. Your response to the punctuation of the copy text will be conditioned by your theory of that text's transmission. You should collate any change in punctuation that may involve a change in meaning.
c) Specific usages
- Do not over-use exclamation marks or dashes.
- Use a dash -- a space followed by two hyphens followed by a space, as illustrated in this present sentence -- to indicate change of character addressed within a speech. You may sometimes have to indicate who is being spoken to.
- Do not leave extra spaces after punctuation marks, even after full stops at end of sentences.
d) Some recent studies For a useful and comprehensive standard of reference as to what constitutes "modern practice," see, in addition to the MLA Handbook, Randolph Quirk, S. Greenbaum, G. Leech and J. Svartvik, A Grammar of Contemporary English (New York: Seminar Press, 1972), 1053-81.
3.4.4. Scene Division
a) Accepted practice
Follow the accepted division of the play into acts and scenes. Where there has been some variation of practice, justify your choice in the general textual discussion.
b) Format
The display format of act and scene divisions will vary with different browsers. You should tag them as described in Appendix A. Example for act 2, scene 1, first closing the previous scene and act:
</SCENE></ACT>
<ACT n=2><SCENE n=1>
<H1>[2.1]</H1>
Where there is an authoritative act or scene division this fact should be recorded in the collation.
3.4.5. Stage Directions
a) Scene location You should omit from the text editorial notes of location, but you may, if you wish, collate or discuss the matter in the commentary. See 5.2.10 below.
b) Wording
Retain the wording of original stage directions, unless emendation or substitution is essential. Collate such emendations or substitutions. Indicate additions to stage directions by square brackets, and collate substantive additions, including names of editors who introduced them. See 4.6.1 below.
c) Foreign languages
Collate stage directions translated from a foreign language.
d) Latin in stage directions.
With the exception of Exit and Exeunt, Latin words in stage directions, such as Ambo, Manet, should be translated, enclosed in brackets and collated. Manet may be rendered as "s/he remains/stays behind," or else the stage directions may be rephrased as "Exeunt all but," enclosed in brackets and collated. Omnes may be retained in the formula Exeunt omnes, but should be translated elsewhere in stage directions, and also when used as a speech heading, either as ALL, or with indication of the group in question. Once again, all such instances must be collated.
e) Format and tagging
All stage directions should be separated from the surrounding text by blank lines, even when they occur within a speech. Use the container <SD> </SD> for all stage directions; there is no need to italicize them, since the tag will indicate where the fount should change. To make the analysis of stage directions more accurate, you should indicate the "type" of the stage direction, according to this list:
<SD t=entrance | exit | setting | sound | delivery | whoto | action | other> </SD>
Where a stage direction contains more than one instruction and there is a staging sequence implied, these should be separated by a blank line and tagged separately. Examples:
<SD t=setting>Hautboys.</SD> <SD t=sound>Torches.</SD>
<SD t=entrance>Enter a Sewer, and divers Servants with dishes and service over the Stage.</SD>
<SD t=entrance>Enter Macbeth</SD>
Of course there will be single instructions that include more than one direction; in such cases indicate the type you consider most important:
<SD t=entrance> Enter Lady MACBETH alone with a Letter.</SD>.
f) Capitalization
In entries and exits write proper names in caps (e.g. BlANCA); write common nouns referring to minor characters (e.g. "Servant," "Lord") or used as prefixes (e.g. "Lady MONTAGUE") in lower case with an initial capital; write common nouns referring to major (i.e. individualized) characters in capitals (e.g. "DUKE" in Measure for Measure). These instructions also refer to the list of characters. All stage directions should begin with an initial capital (whether the stage directions occur within a speech or separately).
g) Placing of stage directions
When action or stage business is simultaneous with dialogue, place stage directions in what seems the most convenient place and explain any resultant difficulty in the commentary. You must decide where to place entry or exit stage directions in relation to lines referring to arrival or departure of the characters in question (e.g. how long a time elapses between visible entry and arrival at downstage positions). Since the possibility of overhearing often has profound effects on the interpretation of a scene, you should discuss the different possibilities in the commentary. When you find it necessary to move a stage direction from its position in the copy text, use no square brackets, but do collate the emendation. See E. A. J. Honigmann's "Re-enter the Stage Direction: Shakespeare and some contemporaries," Shakespeare Survey 29 (1976), 117-25.
h) Punctuation
Stage directions that form complete sentences should end with a full stop, otherwise not. Where a text has its own method of indicating an aside, you may retain this, provided you have good grounds for so doing. Such a departure from normal practice should be negotiated with the Coordinating Editor and explained in the Textual Introduction.
i) Editorial changes and additions
Editorial stage directions and editorial additions to stage directions of the basic text(s) should be enclosed in square brackets. Do not use square brackets for expansion of abbreviations. Comment on additions and alterations of substance to the stage directions of the basic text(s) in the commentary. Original punctuation of stage directions to which additions are made should remain outside the square brackets, editorial punctuation goes within them.
j) Asides
Asides should be indicated by <SD>[Aside]</SD> immediately before the relevant words if there is no doubt that they are an aside; the following words of the speech, if not spoken aside, should be preceded by <SD>[To them]</SD> or whatever is appropriate. When the beginning of a speech is an aside the direction should be placed immediately after the speech prefix, on the same line; other asides should be placed on the same line as the speech immediately before the passage concerned. Be cautious in designating speeches as asides, since to do so will materially alter the interpretation of surrounding speeches; where relevant, discuss the issue in the commentary.
k) Disguise You should normally draw attention to the adoption of disguise by adding in square brackets the assumed name of a disguised character after the regular name in entry stage directions, separated by "as."
<SD t=entrance>Enter KENT disguised [as CAIUS]</SD>
Collate assumed names of disguised characters in entry stage directions in accordance with the normal procedures for stage directions variants. Do not introduce into the stage directions a disguise name unused, or rarely used, in dialogue. Use the commentary for fuller discussion of any point of difficulty, or where disguise identities change within a scene.
l) Line numbers of stage directions
On numbering stage directions in the commentary, collations, and introduction, see 2.7.2 above, and Appendix A.
3.4.6. Speech Prefixes
For a recent discussion of some of the issues involved in speech prefixes, see Susan Snyder, "Naming Names in All's Well That Ends Well" SQ 43 (1992): 265-79.
a) Normalization
Normalize speech prefixes silently throughout a play. Use the full form of a character-name throughout. Collate significant variations in the copy-text, and note the matter in the commentary; you may also wish to discuss the issue in the Textual Introduction. Do not use square brackets [ ] in the text for altered or supplied speech prefixes.
b) Format
Give speech prefixes in the shortest unambiguous form of the name or description of the speaker: e.g. CANTERBURY or ARCHBISHOP rather than ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. Where rank or title changes during the action, you may change speech prefixes to reflect the fact, unless confusion is likely to result.
3.4.7. Lineation
a) Numbering
Insert both TLN number and the edition line number at the beginning of each line (see 2.7. above for format, and for the numbering of lines that do not exactly coincide with the Folio).
b) Definition of lines of verse
Complete verse lines are counted as one unit, even when divided between two or more speakers. You must indent the second (and subsequent) speaker's portion of the line with one or two tab characters to provide a visual reminder that a single line is being shared, according to this scheme:
one tab = a medial part of a line when it is broken into three or more parts
two tabs = the final part of a line (even if it is divided into only two parts).
(In the final SGML version these line parts will be distinguished by tags.)
c) Verse and prose
Consider carefully whether or not lines conventionally represented as divided verse lines are best so represented; note that the display of indented lines may not be as elegant as on the printed page, so that when there is some doubt as to whether the line is fully metric you may wish to put the speeches on separate, short lines. Valuable discussions of this issue will be found in the "Textual Analysis" in Antony and Cleopatra, ed. David Bevington (Cambridge UP, 1990), 266-70, on the handling of three consecutive half-lines which admit of more than one possible lineation (in which case, you may be well advised to indent none of the three), and more generally in G. T. Wright, Shakespeare's Metrical Art (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1988). The Oxford Textual Companion, 640-65, gives a detailed list of problems of lineation in all the plays; see also its general discussion of the issue, 637-40.
d) Stage directions
In collation, commentary, and introduction, line references to stage directions at the beginning of a scene should take the form 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, etc. ( 1, 2, 3 refer to the lines in the stage direction). Similarly, stage directions on separate lines should take the number of the last preceding line of the text, followed by a decimal point and 1, 2, 3, etc. (e.g. 157.1, 157.2). If the stage direction occurs between two half-lines or is run in the midst of a verse line, or is in a passage of prose, refer to the line without decimal addition (e.g. 157). For more on cross-referencing, see Appendix A, section 3.
e) Mislineation
Emend demonstrable mislineation in the copy-text, and collate the emendation. Very frequent mislineation may more easily be recorded in an appendix. Take account of the kind of verse Shakespeare was writing at the time of the play in making your decisions. See Paul Werstine, "Line Division in Shakespeare's Verse: An Editorial Problem," Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography 8 (1984): 73-125.
f) Prose
Prose passages in the modern edition are typed continuously, and occupy one line. Although it has not been a common practice, you may choose to break up a longer prose speech into more than one line, introducing what is in effect a paragraph break.
g) Quotations: songs, poems, letters etc.
Songs and poems sung, read or recited are tagged <VERSEQUOTE> </VERSEQUOTE>. Letters and proclamations and other such quoted passages are tagged <PROSEQUOTE> </PROSEQUOTE>.
h) Foreign languages
All words and passages in foreign languages should be tagged <FOREIGN lang=[language]> </FOREIGN>; they will appear in italic in the HTML version.
3.4.8. Insertions in the text
Use square brackets only for insertions in marking of scene divisions and in stage directions. Do not place any insertion of a letter or word in the text itself in square brackets. Collate all such insertions.
3.4.9. List of the characters in the play
Place a list of characters' names before the start of the text. Where such a list exists in the basic text(s), retain this form, supplementing it as necessary. For other plays (the majority), arrange the list for ease of reference; do not follow editorial convention if good reasons exist for departure from it. You should not observe social or political hierarchies if other systems, e.g. order of appearance or relationship (family, national or factional), make for greater clarity. The practice of segregating female roles at the foot of the list should be abandoned (except in the case of your retaining a list from the original text), though notes on casting and doubling of roles should make it clear which roles would, or might, have been played by boys. The list of characters in the play will be titled "List of Characters in the Play."
Notes on the list of characters in the play should include discussion of variant forms of speech headings or changes in designation of characters in the course of the action, including disguises. Other matters that may best be considered here include pronunciation of names and information about historical characters.