Overview
Editions[i]
abound of Shakespeare's plays. Admittedly, there is not an overwhelming choice
of editions of King John[ii],
but for the more popular plays there is a good choice. Fortunately, they differ
far more than just in the choice of cover (which as we shall see range from a
simple collection of coins, through a self-portrait of Titian to a tinted image
of
The Raw Material
The
quarto (Q1) of 1600, the quarto (Q2) of 1619 (previously thought to be the
first Quarto as it contains the (deceptive) imprint "Printed by J Roberts
1600" (
Summary of twelve editions
The
The Alexander Shakespeare- Edited by M Etherington
and R B Kennedy. 1984. Reprinted 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993.
Slightly
unusually this edition boldly or foolishly tells us why Shakespeare has done
certain things[iii].
For instance, in the Leah scene (Act 3 Scene 1) where Tubal tells Shylock that 'Your
daughter in
Shakespeare Made Easy - Modernised by Alan
Durband
This
edition is unique amongst those described here in that on the left hand page we
have Shakespeare's text, and on the right hand we have a modern day
translation. Durband does not take it upon himself to try to write poetically
so we lose so very much. Durband does not just present the meaning of the
occasional difficult word but the whole text has been rewritten for the
present. So where Shakespeare has: 'The quality of mercy is not strained' (Act 4 Scene 1, line 181)
Durband has "By nature, mercy is never subject to
compulsion".
The back cover comes with endorsements from Dame Judi Dench 'What
a good idea'.
and Julie Walters 'I wish I'd had one when I did my O-levels' [v]
Although it is easy to be negative about an edition like this, I think this is
largely due to my familiarity with the play. I've seen various versions on
screen and stage and have a number of audio versions; so there is a tendency for
this approach to Shakespeare to appear oversimplified. However, to someone new
to the play it could prove invaluable. An edition in this form a few months ago
for Titus Andronicus would have probably been very useful to me.
The
Slightly
strangely, the cover of this edition is adorned by a colour print of a detail
of 'Self-portrait' by Titian. Presumably chosen because of a possible
resemblance to Shylock - it is of an elderly bearded man wearing a prayer hat.
This seems slightly cheeky; it would have been more acceptable if it had been a
portrait of an unknown person. Titian would surely take legal action if he were
still alive! Unfortunately, to my mind, he just does not look like a valid
Shylock; perhaps a plausible Tubal.[vi]
This edition contains many fine illustrations including a drawing of Henry
Irving as Shylock (different to that in the New Cambridge). The format is
similar to the New Cambridge with quite so detailed notes in small font as
footnotes. The text is preceded by notes on
The Everyman Shakespeare - Edited by John F. Andrews
The
cover of this edition shows a number of coins laid out. Perhaps a suggestion
that everything in the Merchant of Venice has a price[vii].
From the pound of flesh that Shylock wants to take from Antonio to the money
spent by Jessica and Lorenzo on a single night on the town. Like the Longman,
this edition has notes on the left hand side and text on the right hand. The
notes are more detailed than the Longman, but less so than the
Longman Literature
Shakespeare
- Edited by Laura Hutchings
This
edition lies somewhere midway between the barrenness of the 'New Penguin' and
the literary depths of the
Introduction (which consists of)
Shakespeare's
Life and Times
{
mentions Francis Drake, plague, WS dying wealthy,
Shakespeare's
Language
The Merchant of
{ each of the 5 acts is preceded by a one page summary of what happens.
On the left hand page there are fairly basic but adequate explanations
of words and phrases with the text of the play on the right hand page. This
lacks the scholarly depth of the
Study programme
Before reading
the play
During reading
After reading
Study questions
Using part of
the text
The Macmillan Shakespeare - Edited by Christopher
Parry
This
edition's front cover shows Eric Porter and Janet Suzman as Shylock and Jessica
from the 1965 RSC production. There is quite a short introduction about the
sources of the play and it's history. Notes, which are detailed but do not have
the scholarly depth of the
The New
This
edition is one of the two discussed in detail below. Essentially this is not as
scholarly as the
The New Penguin Shakespeare
- Edited by W. Moelwyn Merchant
This
edition goes against the style of most editions surveyed here as it presents
the text 'raw' as it were in a section by itself. This is in contradistinction
to the norm which presents either text with, usually verbose, footnotes or with
text on one side and notes on the opposite. There are at least two views one
can take on this. Firstly, one may decide that the reader is already familiar
with Shakespeare generally and in particular the play at hand (the edition's
back cover states that it is "used and recommended by the RSC[viii]")
and so does not need constant explanations of, for instance, the changing
meaning of success or what usary is. This edition also avoids putting a gloss
on the play[ix]
and stops the reader being slowed down by constant referral to dense notes in
order to extract every nuance of the play - including all the classical
references and speculation on what the typical Elizabethan theatre-goer would
be expected to know about world history. By leaving the notes out of the main
text it makes it appear less cluttered[x]
and perhaps less elitist and therefore presumably less disconcerting to many
potential readers. It must be off-putting to new readers of Shakespeare to have
a side of dialogue followed immediately by another side explaining it - for
instance, dragging out the classical references in gory detail to an audience
that won't necessary have the classical education to relate to. The
disadvantage of this is that it is somewhat impractical to pick up the
commentary if you feel you need it - which I do and surely most readers will
also benefit from. The second view is that by having the footnotes or
side-notes streamed with the text of the play it is easy for the reader to
refer to them if they wish. Having just the raw text in the main body of the
edition becomes liability when, for instance, there is a piece that defies
immediate interpretation. For instance the famous crux in Hamlet - "I
am but mad north,
Introduction
Further
Text of the Play
Commentary
An Account Of The Text
The
commentary is not very detailed. It is a mixture of word explanations,
derivations of the names Shylock and Tubal,
phrases (such as 'upon the
hip') and dipping
into critical commentary of the past. For instance in the section on the "I am a Jew" speech it mentions Hazlitt commenting on
Edmund Kean's rendition of these lines "worth a wilderness of monkeys that have aped humanity". It
lacks any commentary on Leah. This seems a significant omission as this one
reference tells us much about the character of Shylock. The introduction is
interesting indeed, referencing Medea's father
This
is one of the two editions that will be considered in greater detail below. The
front cover of this edition has a tinted print of Henry Irving as Shylock. This
edition is different to the others discussed here as it is more of a guide for
a Merchant of Venice workshop than the expected format of notes and text. Notes
are provided: a minimum of words are simply explained, but each page is
concisely summarised and students are invited in groups of varying size to
explore the plays in many different ways.
Gutenberg online plain text
edition
This
can only barely be considered an edition as there is a complete absence of
notes and commentary. It is one of many classic texts available freely (apart
from ISP/phone charges!) from the massive Gutenberg project. It is excellent
for searching, but has no merit as an aid to study.
MIT online HTML edition
The
internet is in its infancy. This is a fairly bare edition and is only a little
better than the Gutenberg. It has a choice of the play as a single HTML page,
or as one scene per page. Difficult words are linked to explanations but this
is a rather hit and miss affair. This cross-referencing has presumably been
produced by an automatic process as sometimes words are linked to inappropriate
meanings. Sometimes words are linked to explanations of different words. It
lacks history of performance, illustrations, background and history of the play,
analysis of characters, etc. So far then, this is a missed opportunity. The
situation will improve! Certain plays (for instance Hamlet and King Lear) have
been produced in CD-ROM format with a searchable version of the text,
background of the play and characters and interviews with Professor Stanley
Wells and Dr Russell Jackson. Similarly there is a version of Romeo and Juliet
with video clips. So far the on-line versions are the worst available - their
only advantages being their availability and ease of searching. Eventually they
will be better than the text versions. Already it is possible to produce a
device that will easily fit into a shirt pocket that can hold the entire
Shakespeare Canon in a searchable form.
Two editions compared in
detail
I
have chosen to look in detail at the two following editions, both published on
Cambridge University Press, because they are so different. That is not to say
that one is good and the other awful; they are both very good but are aimed at
different types of readers[xiv].
1)
Cambridge School Shakespeare edited by Jonathan Morris
and Robert Smith - commentary and notes © 1992. (Reprinted 1992 through 1997.)
This will be referred to as the 'School'
below.
2)
The New Cambridge
Shakespeare
edited by M. M. Mahood © 1987. (Reprinted 1989, 1992, 1993, 1996.). This will
be referred to as the 'New' below.
I
bought both of these editions (new) in January 1999 and judging from the
printing dates, the publisher has considered them both to be current editions
from 1992. Note that the Cambridge School Shakespeare also uses Mahood's
version of the text. So they use the same choices from the three sources;
despite this I consider these two editions to be appropriate for comparison as
their use of the raw material is so very different.
The New
This
edition is structured as follows:
List of illustrations (of which there are many including Sculpture and famous Shylocks)
Preface
Abbreviations and conventions
Introduction
Date and source
Some attitudes and assumptions behind the play
Experiencing the play
The afterlife of The Merchant Of Venice
Notes on the text
List of characters
The Play
Supplementary note
Textual analysis
Appendix: Shakespeare's use of the Bible in The Merchant Of Venice
Reading List
Like
many editions this one is very mindful of the history of the play and awareness
of the play as a thing created a long time ago that there has been much
scholarly activity over. It is a long time before we reach the play itself.
(Compare this with the 'School' below.
There are notes on Jews and usurers, staging, money, love, famous performances,
the play's structure, the Law, kinds of comedy an dthe play's date and source.
The cast list is very similar to that given in Q3 (as indicated on p56).
Compare this with the grouping given in the 'School'. Although the 'New' is a very good scholarly edition
with a wide range of relevant notes and fine illustrations there is nothing
radical about it.
The
This
edition is structured as follows:
List Of Characters
The Merchant of
Looking back at the play
Telling the story
Shylock: villain or victim?
Women in
Tensions and oppositions in The Merchant Of
The Language Of The Merchant Of
The Play In Performance
Staging the play
William Shakespeare
To
start with the end, it seems rather strange to have the playwright last - this
completely undefinable, timeless widely acclaimed genius generally considered
to be the greatest playwright in the English language appears to be almost a
footnote. But it has been the tendency since the 18th Century for
the stature of the playwright to suffer in relation to the principal actors[xv].
I think that this is a very deliberate choice. They are trying to avoid
monumentalising Shakespeare; they simply do not want to put the young off him.
Their approach seems to be that this play is about people as they are today and
so it is relevant that we study and think about it. Then having done that 'by
the way this play was written by somebody called Shakespeare who lived four
centuries ago'. I think that this is a very wise decision in view of their main
target market: schools.
The
focus with this edition is to get right into the play we just have the bare
minimum to start us off - the list of characters. Interestingly, this is broken
down as follows:
Christians
The
Duke, Bassanio, Antonio, etc
Jews
Shylock,
Jessica, Tubal
Portia's
household
Portia
Nerissa,
etc
Portia's suitors
The
Prince Of
The
Prince Of Arragon
So
immediately we are given an impression that religion, or perhaps more
accurately race (or tribe) is going to be at the centre of debate[xvi]
in this play. Portia in
Like
many editions there are explanations of difficult or more or less obsolete
words. But whereas many editions including
the 'New' Shakespeare have
quite detailed explanations of words (presented as large footnotes in the 'New'), the 'School' version just has the minimum explanation. The guidance on
the left hand side of the page breaks into three sections. At the top of the
page in italics is a two or three line summary of the key part of the right hand page. The
second section is a series of exercises that the one page introduction page
invites the class to do as many or as few with more or less pupils than that
suggested. This seems a wonderful way to teach a play; to encourage the
students to think about the play and discover the play for themselves. ("By
choosing your activities, and by exploring and experimenting, you can make your
own interpretations of Shakespeare's language, characters and stories. Whatever
you do, remember that Shakespeare wrote his plays to be acted, watched and
enjoyed".
This is a noble intention as well but is perhaps suggesting that Shakespeare
went on record as stating this; whereas it is only what we presume; he
certainly seems to have seen performance as publication - that the characters
come alive before us on a stage.) It does seem to adhere to its intention
stated on the introduction page to not to give right and wrong things views "you
are encouraged to make up your own mind ".
The
first word explained in each is for the second word that Antonio speaks
'sooth'. 'School' just has 'truth' but 'New' has 'Truly'. We are to suppose
Antonio is replying to a question that has just been put to him". But the
'School' conveys the same information in one of its questions. The summary for
the first 22 lines of the play is as follows:
"Antonio
says he does not know what causes his sadness. Salarino and Solanio suggest
that he is worried about the safety of his ships, in which he has invested so
much money"
These
summaries are useful as it is easy especially during an early reading of a
Shakespearean play to become lost in the language and lose the main line of the
plot.
The
second section of the 'School' has three exercises. The first 'Where are they' invites pupils to try
to locate the scene - as Shakespeare neglected to so do. It suggests a variety
of possible answers from house, office through to the Stock Exchange (this
edition predates David Thacker's interesting modern day Stock Exchange
production of the mid 90s.) But rather than simply giving the pupils an easy
answer it asks them to give reasons for their choice. The next exercise is 'Before the play begins' which pickings
on the fact that the play begins in mid conversation. Significantly it does not
mention Shakespeare's use of the device of continued conversation in Hamlet Act
5:
Scene 2. A
Hall in the Castle.
Enter HAMLET
and HORATIO.
Hamlet So
much for this, sir; now shall you see the other.
You
do remember all the circumstance?
This
is typical of the 'School'; it
doesn't ask the student to consider this play in relation to any others (by
Shakespeare or otherwise). The edition
has been written particularly for students who quite possibly have not
experienced a Shakespeare play before at all and most likely have not studied
one in detail before. The 'New' is
more mindful of academia and the more mature student. For instance in it's note
to Act 1 Scene 1 lines 47-48 Sad because
you are merry - "a catchphrase
to brush off enquiries, as in TGV 4.2.28-29" It doesn't quote the lines
from The
Two Gentlemen Of Verona ("Marry, mine host, because I cannot be
merry")
perhaps we're supposed to know them J! Seriously, this is a major difference between the two editions. The
thrust of the 'New' is to unfold
classical references, refer to many other works about Shakespeare's plays and
cross-reference the plays themselves. Whereas, the thrust of the 'School' is to roll up shirt and blouse
sleeves and discover the play for oneself in a classroom or drama studio. There
is no right or wrong about this; but certainly the most fun method for a class
of students is surely that of the 'School'
to learn about the play by discovering it through reading, listening and
thinking about the text of the play. Students would only be intimidated if they
felt that they had to assimilate a vast body of criticism and other plays; it
would pose a massive hurdle to understanding the play. Since Shakespeare wrote
about people and they (sadly!) have not changed very much in the last four
centuries the body of work produced by academia over the last two centuries is
not a pre-requisite for understanding
This is not to say that there is no place for academia; it's just that
it does not seem appropriate to weigh down a Shakespeare beginner with it.
This
approach of inviting the young to discover a Shakespeare play in their own terms
is not unique. At a meeting of the Friends of the RSC in
Interestingly,
neither edition mentions Antonio's possible previous homosexual relationship[xvii]
or at least desire for Bassanio as a likely reason for his depression: i.e. he
is imminently going to lose him to a wife which will forever change their
relationship.
A
good example of something for the class to think about in the 'School' is Jonathan Miller (a Jew)
asking Olivier who was playing Shylock if he had seen a newsreel of Hitler
spontaneously dancing a jig at news of the surrender of
In
addition to these things to think about on every page in the 'School', there is a look back at the
end of each act with a series of broader questions; sometimes relating to a
particular production. For instance, at the end of Act 4, we are told that
Dustin Hoffman would like to ask Shakespeare for more lines for Shylock
half-way through the trial scene. The exercise is to write that speech and
choose where best to place it! Not a two minute exercise but something to think
about! The first question here is 'A fair trial'! Another exercise is to
arrange the characters in order of prejudice, and then in order according to
how much you like them and compare the two lists! Excellent.
Conclusion with a personal
voice
Clearly,
there are many ways of focussing an edition. There is the notes at the back
approach demonstrated by the New Penguin Shakespeare. Personally, I reject this
format for my own uses since I really do need ready access to the notes. It
would be more usable, of course, as would all the others if they were presented
in HTML on the WWW but academia will probably take a hundred years to catch up
with the technologyJ Alan Durband goes too far the other way in 'translating' Shakespeare
into modern language. Shakespeare isn't that
difficult to understand. We don't need to have all the words replaced with
alternate words! However, I feel he is to be congratulated in an attempt to
bring Shakespeare to the masses, albeit too much of an attempt! Shakespeare has
benefited from people in the past adapting and cutting his work - perhaps most
notably by Garrick. The Bard survives in this way, down the ages. A work like
this may help popularise the works and bring more people into Shakespeare's
theatre. However, if all it succeeds in doing is stopping people reading the
original text, preferring the simplified version, then I feel it is an
abortion.