Teaching & Learning Guide for: Modern Problems of Editing: The Two Texts of Marlowe's Doctor Faustus
Authors: Duxfield Andrew 
Published: March 2008

Author's IntroductionMost people familiar with Christopher Marlowe's Doctor Faustus will have experienced it as a unified entity neatly presented in a twentieth‐century edition. What is fairly well known, but not always taken into serious consideration by scholars, however, is that Doctor Faustus is a play that exists in two widely differing forms, and that in making modern editions, editors often produce something that is in turn similar to neither of these. Looking at how the problem of the two texts of Doctor Faustus has been dealt with by editors over the last hundred or so years provides students with an accessible way in to the subject of textual scholarship and editing theory, and the consideration of potential future directions for editing practice.Author RecommendsThe introduction to W. W. Greg's parallel edition Marlowe's Doctor Faustus: 1604–1616 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1950) is a prime example of New Bibliographical editorial practice at work, while the mirrored texts provide a visual breakdown of the differences between the two texts of the play. For a more modern approach to the play in its variant forms see either the Revels Plays edition Doctor Faustus: A‐ and B‐ Texts (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993) or the Oxford World's Classics edition Doctor Faustus and Other Plays (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), both edited by David Bevington and Eric Rasmussen.Great examples of Shakespeare in multiple text format can be found in Rene Weiss's King Lear: A Parallel Text Edition (London: Longman, 1993), and, more recently, in Ann Thompson and Neil Taylor's three‐text edition of Hamlet for the Arden Shakespeare series, released in two volumes: Hamlet (London: Arden Shakespeare, 2006) and Hamlet: The Texts of 1603 and 1623 (London: Arden Shakespeare, 2006).Leah S. Marcus's Unediting the Renaissance: Shakespeare, Marlowe, Milton (London: Routledge, 1996) is an insightful and accessible example of the kind of challenges laid down to traditional author‐centric editing by late twentieth‐century editorial theory. Particularly useful in the context of this guide are the chapters on Doctor Faustus and The Tempest.Several recent publications offer useful collections of essays on the history and the current position of the textual scholarship and the editing of early modern texts, mainly with reference to Shakespeare. They include Shakespeare Studies 24 (1996); In Arden: Essays in Honour of Richard Proudfoot (London: Arden Shakespeare, 2003), edited by Ann Thompson and Gordon McMullan; and Shakespeare Survey 59 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), edited by Peter Holland. A more general approach is taken by Laurie E. Maguire and Thomas L. Berger's collection Textual Formations and Reformations (London: Associated University Presses, 1998).Finally, an up to date practical aid can be found in Michael Hunter's Editing Early Modern Texts: An Introduction to Principles and Practice (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).Online Materials1. Early English Books Online http://eebo.chadwyck.com/home An online resource offering access to facsimile copies of virtually every work printed in England before 1700, a substantial and growing number of which are also presented in a searchable text format.2. The Complete Works of Christopher Marlowe http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/Texts/Marlowe.html An exhaustive online complete works, which provides modern spelling versions of the plays, poems and translations alongside transcripts of the original texts and, where relevant, sources. Interactive features allow direct comparisons in some cases.3. Internet Shakespeare Editions http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/index.html Excellent resource offering transcripts and colour facsimiles of early Shakespeare quartos and folios, as well as a selection of modern spelling editions and extensive performance histories of each play.4. The Printing Press Online http://www.earlymodernweb.org.uk/emr/index.php/the‐printing‐press‐online/ A directory of links to numerous Web resources which provide information on many elements of early modern printing and publication.Sample Syllabus: Marlowe, Shakespeare and the Modern Edition Objectives Students will:

Develop an understanding of early modern printing conditions and publication practices.
Become familiar with the development of editing practice through the 20th century and beyond.
Understand the impact editorial decision making can have on the meaning/s of a text.
Develop a familiarity with well known early modern works in their variant forms.

Assessment

Three assessed worksheets – 20%
One assessed essay – 40%
Final Exam – 40%

Students should read the A and B texts of Doctor Faustus, and any Shakespeare play of their choice which is available in variant texts. Discussions in class will refer to these. Weeks 1–3: Early Modern Printing

Early modern publication: how, and by whom, was a dramatist's work published?
Early modern printing practice: the opportunities and limitations of the print house.
Reading early modern text: why do we need editions?

Reading:

Look at Early Modern Resources: The Printing Press Online: http://www.earlymodernweb.org.uk/emr/index.php/the‐printing‐press‐online/
Facsimiles of the 1604 and 1616 texts of Doctor Faustus on EEBO: http://eebo.chadwyck.com/home
Michelle O’Callaghan, ‘Publication: Print and Manuscript’, in Michael Hattaway (ed.), A Companion to English Renaissance Literature and Culture (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 81–94.

Assessed worksheet due in week 3. Weeks 4–6: New Bibliography

Good and bad quartos, foul papers and prompt books.
Authorial intention.
Removing the influence of the printing process.

Reading:

Introduction to W. W. Greg (ed.), Marlowe's Doctor Faustus: 1604–1616 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1950).
Joseph F. Loewenstein, ‘Authentic Reproductions: The Material Origins of the New Bibliography’, in Laurie E. Maguire and Thomas L. Berger (eds.), Textual Formations and Reformations (London: Associated University Presses, 1998), 23–44.
Giorgio Melchiori, ‘The Continuing Importance of New Bibliography’, in Ann Thompson and Gordon McMullan (eds.), In Arden: Essays in Honour of Richard Proudfoot (London: Arden Shakespeare, 2003), 17–30.

Assessed worksheet due in week 6. Weeks 7–9: Editing and Theory

Problems with New Bibliography.
Who does a play belong to?
Works of art or artefacts?

Reading:

Andrew Duxfield, ‘Modern Problems of Editing: The Two Texts of Marlowe's Doctor Faustus’, Literature Compass 2 (2005): http://www.blackwell‐synergy.com/toc/lico/2/1
Random Cloud, ‘The Marriage of Good and Bad Quartos’, Shakespeare Quarterly 33/4 (1982): 421–31.
Paul Werstine, ‘Touring and the Construction of Shakespeare Textual Criticism’, in Laurie E. Maguire and Thomas L. Berger (eds.), Textual Formations and Reformations (London: Associated University Presses, 1998), 45–66.

Assessed worksheet due in week 9. Weeks 10–12: Editing Now

What is an editor's job?
Multiple text editions.
Electronic editions: a solution?

Reading:

Paul Werstine, ‘Editing after the End of Editing’, Shakespeare Studies 24 (1996): 47–54.
Bernice W. Kliman, ‘Print and Electronic Editions Inspired by the New Variorum Hamlet Project’, in Peter Holland (ed.), Shakespeare Survey 59 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 157–67.
Michael Hunter, Editing Early Modern Texts: An Introduction to Principles and Practice (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).

Assessed essay due in week 12.Final examination.