|
Phantom-Wooer: The Thomas Lovell Beddoes Web Site | Works
THE KELSALL EDITION
Of Thomas Forbes Kelsall's edition, H.W. Donner wrote, "His first concern was for Death's Jest-Book,
which he transcribed entirely in his own hand, selecting the readings
he preferred and omitting weak passages, or such as might give offence.
'My office has been to collate, adapt, omit & transcribe—a labor of interest,'
he [Kelsall] wrote to his sister Eleanor on 13 April 1850 (manuscript in the
possession of Ms. Kelsall)." Donner further noted: "It is easy to criticize
his edition, but an investigation of the facts proves it to have been
not only a great achievement in itself, but also the very best that
could be produced in the circumstances. Kelsall himself was always
apologetic about his treatment of Death's Jest-Book and anxious
to obtain the opinion of others concerning the suppression of the
comic parts (The Browning Box, letter CVIII), but in his editorial
work he had to consider the feelings of the family and exclude both from
the play and from the letters everything that might strike them as
coarse or vulgar." Kelsall's active editorial hand extended beyond
his treatment of Death's Jest-Book and is evident in other ways; for example he
invented titles for some fragments he selected for publication. While Kelsall's edition
must thus be used with caution, it is important to note that his
presentation of the works of Beddoes was the only one known to the
world until Edmund Gosse began preparing his editions at the close of the
19th century. Kelsall's edition is therefore of historical
importance.
Christine Hankinson of the Thomas Lovell Beddoes Society supports Kelsall's work
in some ways. "I think Kelsall was a very sensitive editor. Many find his titles a bit cosy but I
don't—he wasn't writing an academic tome he was trying to get an
audience—mid-Victorian audience for TLB and to just have fragments
without titles would not have worked—it made them more accessible for
his audience. At the end of the day TLB entrusted his works entirely to Kelsall—to publish as he saw fit. And with
all the constraints they were fit." Alan Halsey considers Donner's
evaluation of Kelsall's work to be a bit too generous. "Suppression
of the comic passages in DJB considerably changes the nature of the
work & I'd argue that Kelsall's sensitivity (timidity?) in this
regard seriously limited the possibility of appreciating its scope
for a considerable time. His remarks to [Robert] Browning (Nov 13 1867) are
worth looking at again:
'You will find many passages omitted in my publication—being mainly
those relative to Mandrake—& this personage I was anxious, from
various motives, to keep as much as possible out of sight. I was
publishing against the inclination of the near relatives, & to these
I knew that Mandrake & his belongings would, as well as to the almost
universal public, be most distasteful. Neither did I much admire them
myself. They seem laboured & artificial—& quite unworthy of the
company they are in.'
This doesn't bear out Donner's statement that Kelsall was 'always
apologetic' about what he'd done; he seems rather proud of his
expurgations. After all he didn't need to say so much—he could easily
have blamed family pressure alone for the omissions. ('I was glad to
find the Mandrake so much suppressed', Capt C.H. Beddoes wrote to him
on 8/7/50—showing that the Captain at least had looked at the MSS and
recoiled.) But he elaborates, perhaps only to impress Browning with
his tastefulness—but the phrase 'quite unworthy of the company they
are in' betrays his intent to present DJB as a SERIOUS tragedy rather
than the 'satire' TLB announced in his earliest remarks about the
play. In this respect it's hard to see Kelsall as the most
appropriate editor for a poet whose best work raises two fingers to
'the almost universal public'. TLB's personal tragedy was so to have
isolated himself that he knew no one with any deeper comprehension of
his work & the nerve to publish it without tasteful expurgation. To
say this is not in any way to denigrate Kelsall's virtues as a friend
or his achievement in getting the work published & preserved."
Back
Home
|