JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for SIDNEY-SPENSER Archives


SIDNEY-SPENSER Archives

SIDNEY-SPENSER Archives


SIDNEY-SPENSER@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SIDNEY-SPENSER Home

SIDNEY-SPENSER Home

SIDNEY-SPENSER  September 2011

SIDNEY-SPENSER September 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: 'Froward' / 'Forward' - VI.x.24.7

From:

Stuart Hart <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Sidney-Spenser Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 15 Sep 2011 20:09:10 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (66 lines)

Dear Scott,
this is perfect. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. I'll seek this out immediately.

Best wishes,

Stuart.

________________________________
From: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott Lucas [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: 'Froward' / 'Forward' - VI.x.24.7

Dear Stuart (and all),

The one article I know of about the 1611 edition is Steven Galbraith, "Spenser's First Folio: The Build-It-Yourself Edition," Spenser Studies 21 (2006):  21-49.  Galbraith calls the 1611 edition "bibliographically unstable," since any single copy of the text may contain material printed as early as 1609 and as late as 1613.  The second part of the Faerie Queene may exist in any single edition with a 1611 title page as either an unsold leftover from the 1609 separate folio issue or as a new printing undertaken in 1612-13.  So some of the 1611 editions evidently do contain the "forward" reading, since they contain the 1609 FQ, while others incorporating the 1612-13 printing introduce "froward."

Galbraith suggests that the printer Lownes "did not see fit to invest a great deal of time and money in Spenser's first folio," which may suggest that "froward" is a textual error that simply was not caught due to carelessness (41).  However, Lownes himself (at least in 1611) claimed on his title page that the text he used for the collected works was "carefully corrected."  Did this also apply to the 1612-13 new printing of material for the collected works?  It is an interesting question to explore!

Scott

Scott Lucas
Professor of English
The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina
Charleston, SC  29409

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>



On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Stuart Hart <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I am currently researching the textual crux of VI.x.24.7-9 involving the spatial positioning of the three Graces.

In the 1596 and 1609 editions of the FQ, the lines reads:

'That two of them still forward seem'd to bee,
But one still towards she'd her selfe afore:
That good should from vs goe, then come in greater store.'

In the 1611 edition, line 7 has been changed to read: 'That two of them still froward seem'd to bee'. Much has been written about the implications of this rerendering of line 7. By positioning two Graces with their backs to the viewer, and one looking 'afore', the sugegstion is that it is better to give than to receive. This interpretation is dependent upon  us reading 'then' as a conjunction ('than') rather than as an adverb ('then') as in the 1596 and 1609 editions. As Geller (1972) and Bates (1992) acknowledge, this reordering of the Graces' position invites a more altruistic reading of their significance, and indeed their role in relation to the book's titular virtue of courtesy. It encourages us to to read it in the light of Christian charity.

My question to the list is whether anything has been written specifically about the 1611 edition of the FQ. Do we have any sense as to whether it is a good copy of the text? Do we know whether the editors intentionally changed 'forward' to 'froward'? Could it be seen as a wilfull revision...perhaps working from Spenser's manuscri[pt, or is it merely a textual error?

If any one on the list has a knowledge of a study that might be relevant to my questions then I would be extremely grateful.

As always, many thanks in advance,

Stuart Hart
PhD researcher,
University of Birmingham.


________________________________
***** Email confidentiality notice *****

The information contained in this email may be confidential and is for the intended recipient only. Unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is strictly forbidden.
Any views or opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of Solihull School.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error.
Solihull School cannot accept responsibility for the transmission of any virus or guarantee the security of the content.

Solihull School is a limited company registered in England and Wales No. 6337650. Registered Charity No. 1120597
Registered Office: 793 Warwick Road, Solihull, West Midlands B91 3DJ

This email has been processed by SmoothZap - www.smoothwall.net

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager