Editing Scott’s Last Edition

Summary of the Talk:

The talk focuses on the editorial challenges and the methodology behind editing the Magnum Opus edition of Sir Walter Scott's Waverley Novels in the Edinburgh Edition of the Waverley Novels (EEWN). The Magnum Opus edition, published between 1829 and 1833, was Scott's final edition of his novels, and it included significant revisions, new introductions, and explanatory notes.

The core of the text is about the efforts to prepare Scott’s Waverley Novels for modern publication, with specific emphasis on the challenges faced in editing Scott’s Magnum edition. Alexander reflects on how the Magnum edition—published posthumously—was designed for a broader, more popular market and included both revisions to the text and the addition of introductions and notes. These texts were often rewritten or annotated by Scott himself, sometimes in collaboration with assistants.

The Edinburgh Edition of the Waverley Novels takes a different editorial approach by returning to the first editions of Scott's novels, rather than using the Magnum as the copy text. The editors then present the Magnum Introductions and notes separately to avoid confusion. The editorial team aimed to correct errors that accumulated in the Magnum over time and ensure clarity in distinguishing between Scott’s original text and later additions.

Alexander explains how the editorial team dealt with several challenges:

• The difficulty in deciphering Scott’s handwriting in the interleaved manuscripts, which were vital in understanding the original revisions Scott made.
• Decisions on whether to accept changes made by Scott, his assistant, or his publisher, Robert Cadell.
• The question of whether to restore quotations to their original form or to leave them in the modified form they appeared in the Magnum edition.
• The editorial handling of hundreds of notes Scott made on his novels, which were a mix of glosses on Scots terms and historical references.

Interesting Points:

1. The Interleaved Set: Scott’s revisions were done on a special edition of his novels that Cadell prepared for him, with blank pages between the printed ones where Scott could make alterations. This "Interleaved Set" was crucial in understanding Scott’s later revisions and is highlighted as a key resource for the editors.
2. The Editorial Approach: One of the main decisions was to prioritize the first editions of the novels over the Magnum edition for the core text, ensuring that the original text was preserved. The Magnum’s revisions, such as Scott’s extensive footnotes and introductions, are presented separately in later volumes.
3. Scott’s Autobiographical Element: The Introductions in the Magnum are seen as semi-autobiographical, providing insights into Scott’s life and literary career. However, Alexander suggests that these accounts are sometimes self-serving or selective, such as Scott’s inaccurate statements about the genesis of certain works.
4. Misreadings in the Magnum: There are several amusing misreadings and errors that crept into the Magnum edition. For example, Scott refers to a "ruddy vicar" in one instance, but the Magnum has it as a "muddy vicar" due to a transcription mistake. There are also instances where Scott’s assistants altered his more informal or colloquial style to something more formal.
5. Annotations and Anecdotes: Scott's notes often included rich historical anecdotes and engaging stories, making them more entertaining than purely scholarly. For instance, in Redgauntlet, Scott provides an amusing note about a lawyer's daily routine of drinking a "noontide dram" at a coffeehouse, which adds a touch of humor to the historical context.
6. The Complexity of Quotations: When dealing with long quotes in the Magnum, the editors had to decide whether to preserve Scott’s changes to his sources or return to the original texts. This was a significant editorial decision, given Scott’s tendency to alter or paraphrase his sources, sometimes to fit his own literary or moral agenda.
7. The Source of "The Heart of Mid-Lothian": One of the most interesting revelations involves the acknowledgment of Helen Walker as the inspiration for the character of Jeanie Deans. Scott himself suggests that his fictional account might have altered or "improved" upon the true story, raising questions about the fidelity of his literary adaptations.

This article offers fascinating insights into the meticulous work involved in editing historical literary texts, particularly Scott's, which straddle the line between history, autobiography, and fiction. It also underscores the collaborative nature of modern scholarly editions and the complex decisions editors face in preserving an author’s legacy while making it accessible to contemporary readers.

Download the [transcript]