Page 35 - Hamlet: The Cambridge Dover Wilson Shakespeare
P. 35

xxviii             H A M L E T

                Second Quarto was far  from  being so, the  compositor's
                worst  fault  being  the  omission  of words,  phrases,  lines
                and  occasionally of lengthy  passages. He was also guilty
                of  a  large  quantity  of  misprints,  while  his  departures
                from  Shakespeare were  both  complicated  and  obscured
                by  an  overlooker  who  took  upon  him  to  'correct,'
                without  reference  to the  manuscript  copy,  such  of  his
                sins,  of  omission  and  commission  as  he  detected  or
                imagined  that  he  detected.  Thus,  though  the  Second
                Quarto is the text to build upon, no editor  can afford  to
                neglect the First Folio, if only for  the supply of omitted
                words and lines.  Folio readings are often  helpful  too in
                the  rectification  of  misprints,  though  in  view  of  the
                corruption  by  double  transcription  they  must  be  used
                with  the  utmost  caution.  Nevertheless,  in  one  or  two
                passages I have adopted Folio readings which have been
                rejected or ignored  by all modern editors.  For when  one
                can  see the ground upon which one treads, it is possible
                to  take  bold  steps.  Indeed,  this  sense  of  assurance,  of
                knowing  more  or  less  exactly  where  one  stands,  is
                perhaps the greatest of all the rewards to be reaped  from
                a  definition  of copy.
                  The  foregoing  paragraphs  give  the  gist  of  the  first
                volume  of  my  monograph  on  the  good  Hamlet  texts.
                The  second  is  devoted  to  a  detailed  discussion  of  the
                editorial problems arising therefrom;  a discussion which
                serves the  purpose of the textual  notes in  other  plays  of
                the present edition and enables me very greatly to lighten
                the  notes  that  follow  in  a  manner  set  forth  on p.  139.
                Here it only remains for  me to indicate briefly the  main
                trend  of these editorial findings.
                  By  editing the text which  was printed  directly  from
                Shakespeare's  manuscript  instead  of one printed  from  a
                careless copy of the prompt-book, and  by thus using the
                latter merely as an auxiliary, it has been possible to decide
                with  fair  confidence  a  number  of  hitherto  doubtful
                points and also to  restore many readings which  are  not
   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40