Act 1, Scene 1, lines 32-119
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 15:59:07 -0400 (EDT)From: Scott Newstrom
Bcc: "Shakespeare's English Kings --
Subject: KING LEAR response paper -- due on Monday after break
Here is the logic behind our reading and first response paper for _King Lear_.
* For our class, we are reading the CONFLATED version of the play -- that is, an edition in which an editor has made decisions throughout about differences between Quarto and Folio variants (editors always have to do this, but you're paying special attention to this here). This version starts in your Norton edition on page 2479. Those of you with other editions already have a 'conflated' version. Read the CONFLATED version first; this is generally the version we'll refer to in our discussions of the play.
* For the response paper, however, you will want to go back to the Quarto vs. Folio side-by-side version of the play after having read the full conflated version. You only have to read one scene in these two versions (1.1.32-109 in Q, 1.1.32-118 in F). In the Norton edition, this starts on page 2320. (Before line 32 there aren't very many interesting differences.)
I want you to get a sense of what it is like to be an editor, and how difficult even a very simple decision between two variant words can be. For example, I handed out the model essay on the difference between choosing "kingdom" (singular) and "kingdoms" (plural) in the first scene. This is a good essay because it takes into consideration the context of the whole play, the implications of choosing one word over the other, the contemporary meaning of the word through the OED, and so forth. That's the kind of editorial essay I want you to write.
This is like another version of the first response paper on 'one word.' In other words, another chance for you to focus your attention and do some close reading. Students have had a lot of fun with this assignment in the past, and I think you'll be surprised about how much you are able to say, and how contentitious these kinds of decisions can be.
The Folio adds some additional lines; you might want to talk about what their absence means to the Quarto. But I think it would be far more interesting to compare a single word across the two editions -- for example, at line 54, Cordelia says to herself in the Quarto, "What shall Cordelia do? Love and be silent." This reads in the Folio as "What shall Cordelia speak? Love and be silent." A very slight difference, but a significant one once you start to consider the issues of speech and action across the scope of the rest of the play.
As always, use lots of textual support and analysis for your choice of one word over the other (but don't just quote and summarize; break lines down to words and phrases). A good essay will be able to make its argument based on the sense of the whole play (e.g. talking about the implications of speech versus action [and giving specific examples], or one kingdom vs. multiple kingdomS). This is what editors have to do all the time.
So: first read the conflated version all the way through. Then go back to the side-by-side versions of Q & F 1.1. Catalog all the variants. Choose a pair of words that seems particularly troublesome to you. Then decide which one you would choose if you were an editor of a conflated version (you can't have it both ways), and make your argument for your decision.
Return to scene