Electronic Textual Editing:
Drama Case Study: The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Ben Jonson [David Gants]
Licensed under
No source: this is an original work
31 October 2007
Converted to P5 for new website
Introduction
To engage in textual and editorial scholarship is to enter into a
dialogue: with past men and women responsible for the creation and
transmission of linguistic works; with current scholars and students
negotiating among various theoretical perspectives; with future
readers and teachers who will use and ultimately displace the editions
that come down to them from us. Since the emergence of the
scholar-editor toward the end of the nineteenth century, the relative
emphasis given the voices of the past, present and future has shifted
a number of times, and with those shifts has come a succession of
overlapping editorial principles. The current state of affairs is
fairly complex,Among the recent overviews of
editorial options a few stand out for their balance of theoretical
acumen and practical insight: Greetham, Textual
Scholarship; Speed Hill, English
Renaissance; Shillingsburg, Scholarly Editing in the
Computer Age; Tanselle, Varieties of
Scholarly Editing. but the essential issues facing an editor
embarking on a new project center on the weight given to the role of
author or authors in the initial textual creation, the treatment of
historical reception and material production in the overall
interpretive presentation of the text, and the forms in which the
planned edition will be issued.
The
Cambridge Edition of the Works of Ben Jonson
project has navigated these critical waters since it emerged from a
series of meetings and conferences organized by Ian Donaldson, David
Bevington and Martin Butler in the 1990s, events that sought to
generate ideas for a new edition of Ben Jonson's collected works.Some of the main concerns behind the project have been laid out by
Bevington. The current standard edition is the monumental but
outdated Oxford Ben Jonson of C. H. Herford and Percy
and Evelyn Simpson. While the eleven-volume work was published between
1925 and 1952, the initial contracts were issued in the 1890s, and the
final volume to contain Jonsonian texts (volume eight, The
Poems and Prose Works) was published in 1947, three years
before W.W. Greg's ground-breaking The Rationale of
Copy-Text. From the perspective of editorial rationale, therefore,
Herford and Simpson's texts present numerous problems. Furthermore,
the Oxford edition has no concordance or adequate index, the format of
text on page is increasingly arcane and difficult to use, it lacks
serious consideration of the circumstances of staging, and perhaps
most important, materials relating to one work are often distributed
among five or six volumes. The goal of the Cambridge General Editors
is to re-edit the Jonson canon for scholars, teachers and students
using current historical, literary and textual approaches and to
re-present the results of this initiative in a comprehensive and well
organized fashion that makes full use of all modes of textual
reproduction.
To this end, the
CEWBJ is envisioned as two
complementary but materially distinct projects that together attempt
to participate in the continuing editorial dialogue: a six-volume
traditional edition that will be published in print form, and a
networked electronic edition that, while initially released
simultaneously with the print edition, will continue to develop
dynamically on its own as scholarship and technology advance. The
print side will present all of Jonson's works in modernized form along
with introductions and annotations, essays exploring the historical,
social, political, artistic, literary and theatrical environment
within which he worked, and an extensive bibliography of Jonson
scholarship. More than two dozen Contributing Editors have worked on
the print edition, proceeding from an editorial rationale based upon
authorial intention and emerging from fresh examinations of early
manuscript and print witnesses, primary documentary evidence, and a
re-evaluation of four centuries of scholarly commentary.
The initial version of the electronic side will contain all of the
print edition in digital form as well as the complete old-spelling
texts and image facsimiles of all the early print and manuscript
witnesses, a full census of those witnesses, life and court masque
primary archives, performance calendars, a reconstruction of Jonson's
library, and a diverse collection of other materials that might help
us better understand these important works. Once the basic electronic
archive is completed the developmental strategy will shift from
traditional to innovative, from compiling and organizing the essential
evidence to investigating and analyzing the complex possible
interactions among the various elements. As each part of the
electronic edition accrues multiple layers of cross-referencing, the
resource will form a dense research matrix in which individual items
connect with one another in sophisticated ways. Hypertext theorists
refer to this complex and unpredictable texture as
rhyzomatic, a term that comes from the tangled root
structure beneath a field of grass, a non-hierarchical mass of
ever-growing links between and among tufts.
The primary research goal of this second and ongoing editorial
phase is to explore and exploit the rapidly expanding potential of
electronic publishing. In terms of content this means fully
reconceptualizing the relationship between the structural demands
placed upon information by computer networks and the needs of the
scholars, teachers and students who will use those resources. Many
electronic archives and editions rely upon relatively simple
frameworks that structure material according to rigorous hierarchies
branching from a central core. These organizing principles are partly
the result of the way computers process information and partly the
result of editors following traditional print-based
models. Consequently the digital archives themselves are peculiarly
static—they provide for the possibility of addition but not
reorganization of material. Unlike such rigid etext collections, the
CEWBJ seeks to explore the vision of electronic
textuality imagined by Jerome McGann in his influential Rationale of
HyperText. Rather than simply generating yet one more centralized
archive we will embrace emerging technologies to distribute editorial
power among the users, to provide them the means for establishing an
indefinite number of ‘centers', and for expanding their number as well
as altering their relationships. One [will be] encouraged not so much
to find as to make order—and then to make it again and again,
as established orderings expose their limits (29). The CEWBJ
will thus create a new paradigm for organizing digital
scholarly editions, but at the same time it will also seek new ways of
delivering and using its complex materials. Current
search-and-display strategies serve hierarchically structured
collections, but they can only skim the edges of an interwoven
information matrix. Concurrent with the shift in editorial design from
hierarchical to rhyzomatic will come a series of intensive research
and development initiatives into more robust delivery modes designed
specifically for resources of this new type of resource.
At the core of any editorial project, of course, resides the text,
and the accuracy of the authorial materials must be a continuing
concern. The
CEWBJ derives its core texts from manual
and keyboarded transcriptions of the source witnesses, employing
either copies of the early quartos and folios owned by editors or the
UMI Early English Books series of microfilm facsimiles, along with
on-site transcriptions of manuscripts held in research archives.Keyboarding was performed by Remote Services Inc. of
Vancouver, Washington. The print edition's Contributing Editors
had the choice of using the keyboarded texts or generating their own
transcriptions, which in turn formed the basis for their modernized
texts. Proofing of each work and its attendant secondary materials
will occur in three stages: the first proofreading sequence is the
responsibility of the individual Contributing Editors, the second will
be performed by the General Editors, and the third by Cambridge
University Press.
The original spelling texts upon which the electronic edition is
based derive completely from keyboard transcriptions of the printed
sources and manual transcriptions of the manuscript sources. The
initial texts were keyboarded twice and the resulting copies compared
electronically against one another as the first stage of proofing. In
addition, because digital facsimiles of early modern books can often
contain obscured or deleted text, the keyboarding firm was instructed
to transcribe only those characters that the persons responsible for
the actual data entry could positively identify. Any material not
readily identified was tagged with an unclear marker. The
second stage of proofing consists of concordances generated as a guide
for identifying typographic errors, followed by a manual reading of
the electronic text against its source facsimile (during which the
unclear passages are restored).The second
stage of proofing is being carried out under the auspices of the
Electronic Text Centers at the University of Virginia and University
of New Brunswick. Finally, the General and Electronic Editors
will proof the entire electronic edition.
Editing Drama
Considered structurally, drama consists at its core of spoken
language presented in soliloquial or dialogic form. These speeches are
usually organized into a sequence of scenes, which in the western
tradition can also be grouped into acts. Typographically the
representation of this structure on the printed page has changed very
little since the first publication of interludes in the early
sixteenth century. Here are a few lines of dialogue between Cornelius
and a servant named "B" from
Fulgens and Lucrece, the
earliest extant example of printed drama (published by John Rastell
ca. 1512-16):
Despite the use of the now-arcane blackletter face, the exchange
looks strikingly similar to a contemporary paperback play. The speech
prefixes are set left and the initial line of each speech marked with
an early version of the paragraph "¶" symbol, providing the
reader with a simple device for keeping track of who is
speaking. During this time speech prefixes were also centered above
the corresponding text and prefixed with a fleuron, as in this
exchange between Pity and Contemplation from the 1550 quarto edition
of
Hycke Scorner printed by John Waley:
When printing these early interludes, stationers primarily followed
the conventions employed in the production of manuscript collections
(the layout of the mystery plays in the N-Town Manuscript, for
example, closely resembles that of the 1550
Hycke
Scorner).
Beyond speech, however, printed drama can also contain a variety of
components that interpret the theatrical circumstances of the work for
the reader—character lists, stage directions and descriptions,
acting notes, and details of real or ideal performance. These details
may derive from authorial instructions meant for the stage, ranging
from simple sound cues to the complex visual alienation devices
employed Bertolt Brecht. In many cases printed plays will also contain
non-authorial stage directions added by the editor or publisher to
help the reader follow the action in the theater of the
mind. Sometimes a play text may include material never meant for the
theatrical audience, such as G.B. Shaw's famous final direction from
Candide: They embrace. But they do not know the secret
in the poet's heart.
Again, early printed drama provides numerous examples of how
printers learned to use format to distinguish among the textual
components. In the above example from
Fulgens,
Cornelius responds to B's line As sone as ye be go with:
Here the stage direction Et exeat corne[lius] is right justified
so as to distinguish it from Cornelius' exit line. The early 1520s
octavo of John Rastell's
The Nature of the Four
Elements contains a cast of characters, an abstract of the
interlude's main points, a musical score for the songs, and even
suggestions for cutting the piece:
whiche interlude yf ye hole matter be playd wyl conteyne the space
of an hour and a halfe / but yf ye lyst ye may leue out muche of the
sad mater as the messengers pte / and some of naturys parte and some
of experyens pte & yet the matter wyl de pend conuenyently / and
than it wyll not be paste thre quarters of an hour of length
(sig. A1r).
A 1559 octavo translation of Seneca's tragedy
Troas
printed by Richard Tottle includes act and scene divisions as well as
speech prefixes in-line with the text. Once printers began using roman
and italic faces instead of blackletter in the 1580s they could
differentiate speech prefix and speech typographically, which became
the model for the next four centuries. By the late sixteenth/early
seventeenth century authors began to bring an awareness of format and
design elements to their work, sometimes providing in their holograph
manuscripts a template for the printed book.Perhaps
the most famous early seventeenth century example is the manuscript
copy of Jonson's Masque of Queens he prepared for Prince Henry.
Sample facsimile pages have been published in a number of
venues.
In addition to the text within the covers of a book, theatrical
works frequently refer implicitly or explicitly to materials beyond
the printed page. The many ballad operas produced and printed
following the success of John Gay's
The Beggar's Opera
assumed a knowledge on the part of the readers of the tunes associated
with each song, while Ben Jonson loaded many of his plays and masques
with a thick shell of annotation until they resembled not so much
popular play texts as religious tomes. In each case the secondary
references form part of the work's linguistic and socio-historic
nexus.
Finally, most twentieth-century editorial work rested upon the
theoretical underpinnings of the New Bibliography, proceeded from an
assumption of the primacy of the author, and sought to reconstruct
the text of works as intended by their creators (Tanselle,
Rationale 92). In the process less-than-careful editors
often treated the physical evidence upon which complex editorial
decisions were based as sterile accumulations of quantitative
data.Such efforts did not prevent scholars from
attempting to humanize their object of study. Jeffrey Masten has
noted how compositor studies of the Shakespeare First Folio often
include implied biographical characteristics of an anonymous
printing-house worker, a composite-compositor-sketch (84).
However, recent scholarship on both sides of the Atlantic has
underlined the need for editors to recognize anew the expressive
nature of material forms and to investigate how material texts of all
kinds have been conceptualized, produced, marketed, and consumed at
specific moments in history (Marcus 3). Critics such as
D. F. McKenzie offered an approach that sought to show the human
presence in any recorded text (Bibliography
20). Exploiting the ability of emerging digital technologies to create
and circulate high-quality reproductions of printed books and
manuscripts as well as link together disparate materials, recent
projects have attempted to reimagine the scholarly edition in
hypertextual terms, freeing the text from the constraints of the
physical codex form. The result has been an evolving set of editorial
rationales that, as Jerome McGann and others have suggested, envision
an interactive relationship between text and user, one that encourages
a creative dialogue within a literary and textual community.
Encoding Drama
From the outset the Text Encoding Initiative recognized the special
textual and material requirements of theatrical works, including in
its guidelines a set of encoding strategies designed specifically for
drama. John Lavagnino and Elli Mylonas have already addressed the
issues surrounding the application to performance texts of the earlier
TEI Guidelines for SGML, and the following XML-based overview is
greatly indebted to their insightful and clear-headed analysis.
Speech, the component common to almost every dramatic work
throughout history, is encoded with the sp element.See TEI P4, section 10.2.2. The two most prevalent
materials within this container are the speech prefix, encoded as
speaker, and the contents of the speech, encoded according to
simple generic categories such as p or lg (discussed
below). In the printed drama, a speech prefix may vary according to
the needs of the work. If the perception of a character by an audience
is meant to change over the course of the evening, then an editor may
wish to mirror that changing perception on the page by manipulating
the speech prefix. For example, in Anthony Shaffer's mystery
Sleuth the Milo Tindle character adopts the disguise of
Inspector Doppler for the first half of the second act, fooling his
antagonist Andrew Wyke and (one hopes) the audience as well. Similarly
characters may first appear on stage anonymously and only have their
characters revealed later. Plays that deal with English historical
subjects will often alter the speech prefix assigned a character as
the title and status of that character changes, such as
Bolingbroke/Henry IV or Gloucester/Richard III. In each case the
contents encoded within the speaker tag will change, even
though the character itself remains constant. The device linking
together these shifting prefixes is the who attribute to the
sp tag. Asper, one of the three characters who act as a sort
of chorus in Jonson's Every Man Out of His Humour,
steps out his role as commentor at the beginning of the piece and into
that of Macilente, one of the lead roles in the play proper. His
opening speech of Act 1, Scene 1 might be tagged:
<sp who="Asper"> <speaker>Macilente</speaker>
<l>Viri est, fortunæ cœcitatem facilè ferre.</l>
<l>'Tis true; but, Stoique, where (in the world)</l>
<l>Doth than man breathe, that can so much command</l>
<l>His bloud, and his affection?</l> </sp>
Application of the constant who attribute allows researchers to
interrogate the linguistic aspects of a character across an entire
play, or in the case of play cycles,For example, the
famous first and second War of the Roses tetralogies of Shakespeare's
Henry and Richard plays. across multiple works.
The contents of a speechSee TEI P4, section
10.2.4. usually consist of prose or verse text in a variety of
arrangements; a prose paragraph is encoded as p while a line
of verse appears within the l tag. Furthermore, verse
organized in stanzas, verse paragraphs or other poetic structures can
be encoded within line-group lg tags. In the case of lines
and line-groups, the TEI supports a set of attributes to help editors
further define the characteristics of the subject text. Multiple
characters in a scene, particularly in early modern works, sometimes
share complete lines of verse. In such instances it is helpful to use
the part attribute to the l element, assigning the values
"I", "M" or "F" according to whether the line segment in question is
in the initial, medial or final position. This sequence from Act 1,
Scene 2 of Jonson's
The Alchemist consists of verse
lines shared between two characters, which the 1612 quarto and 1616
folio editions represent thus:
The printer has retained the visual integrity of the individual
verse line while using small caps to indicate speech prefixes and
distinguish between the speakers. Because typographical choice is
important to early printed drama, the rend attribute can be
especially useful in encoding such visual features. Common values
include italics for the italic face and sc for small caps. The
CEWBJ encodes the above passage:
<sp who="Face"><speaker rend="sc">Fac.</speaker>
<l part="I">This is his worship.</l> </sp>
<sp who="Dapper"> <speaker rend="sc">Dap.</speaker>
<l part="M">Is he a Doctor?</l> </sp>
<sp who="Face"> <speaker rend="sc">Fac.</speaker>
<l part="F">Yes.</l> </sp>
<sp who="Dapper"> <speaker rend="sc">Dap.</speaker>
<l part="I">And ha' you broke with him, Captain?</l> </sp>
<sp who="Face"> <speaker rend="sc">Fac.</speaker>
<l part="M">I.</l> </sp>
<sp who="Dapper"> <speaker rend="sc">Dap.</speaker>
<l part="F">And how?</l> </sp>
<sp who="Face"> <speaker rend="sc">Fac.</speaker>
<l>Faith, he do's make the matter, sir, so dainties,</l>
<l part="I">I know not what to say—</l> </sp>
<sp who="Dapper"> <speaker rend="sc">Dap.</speaker>
<l part="F">No so, good Captaine.</l> </sp>For a discussion of special language and character sets, see TEI P4, chapter 4.
When working with more highly structured poetry the lg
attribute type is used to identify the particular verse strategy
being described. Much of Jonson's verse plays are in blank verse with
a fairly loose metrical structure, and grouping these passages with
the type value verse paragraph usually provides enough analytical
information. However, along with the basic encoding of verse forms one
can also include information about the rhyme scheme and metrical
pattern using the rhyme and met attributes.See
TEI P4, section 9.4. Toward the beginning of Jonson's masque
Hymenæi the character Pan speaks in quatrains where the
first three lines contain three iambs and the fourth contains five. A
sample encoded quatrain would look like this:
<sp who="Hymen"> <speaker>HYMEN.</speaker>
<lg type="quatrain" rhyme="abab"
met="-+-+-+|-+-+-+|-+-+-+|-+-+-+-+-+">
<l>'Tis so: this same is he,</l>
<l>The king, and priest of peace!</l>
<l>And that his Empresse, she,</l>
<l>That sits so crowned with her owne increase!</l> </lg> </sp>
The immediate performance instructions that accompany the dramatic
speech acts fall under the general rubric of stage directions, and the
encoding strategies for this information spilt into two basic
categories. The stage tag is used to mark the non-verbal
stage directions included in a piece of dramatic text and employs the
type attribute, while the move tag signals the actual
movement of a character or characters on, off or around the
stage. This latter tag functions mainly as a supplement to the textual
stage directions, filling in where actual directions are lacking or
serving to help the reader keep track of the entrances and exits of
all characters. The move element is an empty tag and usually
employs three attributes: type (e.g. entrance or exit), who
(identifying the character in motion), and where (to further specify
the movement if necessary).
Toward the end of Jonson's
The Alchemist, the two
puritan characters Ananias and Tribulation are driven from the house
of Lovewit by Drugger the tobacconist. The 1612 quarto edition of the
play has no stage directions at all, while the 1616 folio (and
subsequent editions) include the marginal note, Drugger
enters, and he beats him away. Modern editions of the play
often add bracketed stage directions indicating the exit of the two
puritans, while the CEWBJ encodes the folio version of
the passage using a combination of stage and move <sp who="Ananias"> <speaker rend="sc">Ana.</speaker>
<l part="F">I will pray there,</l>
<l>Against thy house: may dogs defile thy walls,</l>
<l>And waspes, and hornets breed beneath thy roofe,</l>
<l>This seat of false-hood, and this caue of cos'nage</l> </sp>
<stage type="entrance action" rend="italic">
Drugger enters, and he beats him away.
<move who="Drugger" type="entrance"/>
<move who="Ananias" type="exit"/>
<move who="Tribulation" type="exit"/>
</stage>
<sp who="Lovewit"> <speaker rend="sc">Lov.</speaker>
<l part="I">Another too?</l> </sp>
<sp who="Drugger"> <speaker rend="sc">Drv.</speaker>
<l part="F">Not I sir, I am no <emph rend="italic">Brother</emph></l> </sp>
Speeches and stage directions make up the bulk of a play text,
which is in turn typically grouped into acts and scenes. For a play
presented on the popular stage, the use of numbered div
elements along with type and n attributes provides the necessary
structural framework, with the head element reserved for
header information contained within the text.See TEI
P4, section 10.2.1. The first scene in Jonson's
Poetaster might look like this:
<div0 type="act" n="1">
<div1 type="scene" n="1">
<head rend="italic"> Act I. Scene I.</head>
<stage type="characters" rend="sc">Ovid, Lvscvs</stage>
<!-- . . . --> </div1> </div0>
While Jonson's plays employ a vertical hierarchy, his masques and
entertainments are much more horizontally structured, consisting of a
mixture of speeches, songs, dances and prose commentary. In these
works the use of numbered div elements in a flat structure
may seem excessive; however, mixing numbered and unnumbered
div elements can cause processing problems, so the
CEWBJ employs numbered div elements throughout
the archive.
Beyond the body of the text a play will usually have one or more
related components, such as a prologue and epilogue, a description of
the set and lighting, information about a specific performance, and a
list of characters. This last section contains a variety of fairly
well structured items as well as referential links to the body of the
text itself (such as the who attribute to the sp element
discussed above), requiring a more detailed encoding
strategy.
Every Man in His Humour, the first play in
the Jonson folio of 1616, has both an initial cast of characters with
brief descriptions as well as a list at the end of the play of the
principall Comædians in the Lord Chamberlain's Men who acted the
piece in 1598. A partial list of the cast of characters for this play
might be encoded using the castList element for the basic
container and the role and roleDesc elements for the
individual entries:
<castList>
<role id="Knowell" rend="sc">Kno'well</role>
<roleDesc rend="italic">An old Gentleman</roleDesc>
<role id="EdKnowell" rend="sc">Ed. Kno'well</role>
<roleDesc rend="italic">His Sonne</roleDesc>
<role id="Brainworm" rend="sc">Brayne-worme</role>
<roleDesc rend="italic">The Fathers man</roleDesc>
<role id="Stephen" rend="sc">Mr. Stephen</role>
<roleDesc rend="italic">A countrey Gull</roleDesc>
<!-- . . . --> </castList>
Notice that the id attribute to the role element is a
unique identifier to which all references to that particular character
can be pointed, including the sp element. Likewise the list
of actors that follows the play in the 1616 folio can be encoded using
the castItem container and actor elements, with the
traditional identification of William Shakespeare as the performer who
first played Knowell included through the id attribute. In the case of
grouped characters the castGroup element serves to mark off a
subset of performers from the larger listing of characters. For
example, in the preliminary cast list for Jonson's
Epicoene, three members of a literary salon are listed
with a three-line bracket to the right that points to a single
description of all three characters, a structure that might be encoded
thus:
<castGroup rend="braced">
<castItem>
<role id="Haughty" rend="sc">Mad. Havghty</role>
</castItem>
<castItem>
<role id="Centaur" rend="sc">Mad. Centavre</role>
</castItem>
<castItem>
<role id="Mavis" rend="sc">Mrs. Mavis</role>
</castItem>
<trailer rend="italic">Ladies Collegiates</trailer>
</castGroup>
Each of the above examples presents a textual unit organized in a
fairly hierarchical fashion, an arrangement ideal for the structural
nesting principle at the heart of XML's design. However, in practice
literary works rarely conform to vertical hierarchies for very long,
instead evolving sophisticated linguistic patterns that overlap and
overlay in complex ways. The TEI Guidelines offer a number of
solutions to the problem of multiple hierarchies, for example using a
lattice of pointers and targets or linking elements with location
ladders, although none are completely satisfactory.See TEI P4, section 31 for a more detailed discussion of
this question. When dealing with performance works in which
intersecting structures are part of the fabric of the text, marking
the individual pieces in an aggregate fashion and employing the
join element to coordinate them all has proven especially
useful.See TEI P4, section 14 for a more detailed
discussion of this option. Toward the end of Jonson's
historical tragedy
Sejanus the title character is
denounced by Tiberius in a letter read before the Senate. The public
reading of the letter is interrupted a number of times in both stage
asides and public utterances, resulting in two concurrent, overlapping
structures—the speeches and the letter. The first portion of
this sequence is encoded:
<sp who="Arruntius"> <speaker rend="sc">Arr.</speaker>
<l part="I">O, most tame slauerie, and fierce flatterie!</l> </sp>
<sp who="Praecones"> <speaker rend="sc">Prae.</speaker>
<l part="F">Silence.</l> </sp>
<join targets="a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 a7 a8 a9 a10" result="letter"/>
<stage>The Epistle is read.</stage>
<sp who="Praecones">
<p id="a1">TIBERIVS CAESAR<lb/>TO THE <lb/>
SENATE<lb/>GREETING. </p>
<p>If you, Conscript Father, with your children, bee in health,
it is aboundantly well: wee with our friends
here, are so.</p>
<!-- . . . -->
</sp>
<sp who="Arruntius" type="aside"> <speaker rend="sc">Arr.</speaker>
<l>The lapwing, the lapwing.</l> </sp>
<sp who="Praecones"> <p id="a2">Yet, in things,
which shall worthily, and more neere concerne the maiestie of a
prince, we shall feare to be so cruell to our owne fame, as to neglect
them.</p>
<!-- . . . --> </sp>
<sp who="Arruntius" type="aside"><speaker rend="sc">Arr.</speaker>
<l>This touches, the bloud turnes.</l> </sp>
<sp who="Praecones"> <p id="a3">But wee affie in
your loues, and vnderstandings, and doe no way suspect the merit of
our SEIANVS to make our fauors offensiue to any.</p>
<!-- . . . --></sp>
Each section of the letter is assigned a unique identifier from a1 through
a10, and any program designed to process the text can reconstruct the
letter as a single unit by using the information within the
join element.
A strategy similar to join is used when representing
simultaneous speech and action in a stage play. Each component
receives a unique id and the overlapping relationship is declared with
the corresp attribute to the stage element.See TEI P4, section 10.2.6. For example, in the
middle of Jonson's comedy
Bartholomew Fair the ballad
singer Nightingale performs a song about cutpurses while a second
character is having his pocket picked and a third comments on the
unfolding scene. The 1631 folio edition of this play places the
commentary to the immediate right of the song with vertical braces to
indicate simultaneity, and the stage directions in the usual left
columnar position. These visual indicators can be translated into XML
thus:
<sp who="Nightingale" id="b1">
<speaker rend="sc">Nig.</speaker>
<l>But o, you vile nation of cutpurses all,</l>
<l>Relent and repent, and amend and be found,</l>
<l>And know that you ought not, by honest mens fall,</l>
<l>Aduance your owne fortues, to die abouve ground,</l>
<!-- . . . --> </sp>
<sp who="Winwife" id="b2">
<speaker rend="sc">Win.</speaker>
<p>Will you see sport? looke, there's a fellow gathers
vp to him, marke.</p> </sp>
<stage corresp="b1 b2" type="delivery">
Edgeworth gets vp to him, and tickles him in the eare
with a straw twice to draw his hand out of
his pocket.</stage>
The corresp attribute provides the processing instructions
needed to reconstruct the performance circumstances in whatever format
is required.
Jonson was perhaps the most typographically conscious playwright
of his time, working with London stationers to create a diverse group
of quite sophisticated publications. Scholars have shown that Jonson
contributed at every level to the design and printing of the 1605
quarto edition of
Sejanus, not only arranging the
complex mixture of text and commentary on the page but also selecting
the type and paper out of which the quarto was fashioned. Likewise the
justly famous folio Workes of 1616 show the author
participating (and meddling) throughout the long and complicated
volume. The challenges facing the project team, then, revolve around
the need to retain as much of the expressive information embodied in
the physical object as possible while at the same time enabling
scholars and students to generate new expressions.
The encoding strategies discussed above emerged out of the editors'
desire to achieve a balance between tradition and innovation, between
structure and freedom. On the one hand, the
CEWBJ will
provide access to a variety of visual representations of the source
documents, including the stylized format of the modernized print
edition, digital facsimiles of the source documents, and electronic
reconstructions derived from the XML-encoded original spelling
texts. On the other hand, users will be encouraged to move beyond the
received forms, employ emerging technologies to generate fresh
approaches, and imagine new ways of understanding the verbal icons
that have come down to use from the past.