TWAIN-L Archives

Mark Twain Forum


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mac Donnell Rare Books <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Wed, 8 Apr 2020 11:54:06 +0000
text/plain (61 lines)
Good question. I looked at that earlier and contemporary papers put them 
in Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids. No mention of Muskegon.

Mac Donnell Rare Books
9307 Glenlake Drive
Austin TX 78730

You can browse our books at:

------ Original Message ------
From: "JULES AUSTIN HOJNOWSKI" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 4/8/2020 5:41:32 AM
Subject: Re: Mark Twain in Muskegon, MI

>Are there any newspapers from that time from around that area that might have better info?
>Get Outlook for Android<>
>From: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Benjamin Griffin <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 6:26:05 PM
>To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Mark Twain in Muskegon, MI
>The plot thickens. Through the decency of the HathiTrust Library, which has
>given the UC Libraries emergency access to online texts, I've been able to
>see In digital copies of the earliest printings of this lost letter.
>In Cyril Clemens's *Mark Twain, the Letter-Writer *(1932), the dateline is
>simply "*Michigan, Dec. 1884*." When Cyril Clemens printed this letter
>again in the *Mark Twain Quarterly *in 1941, the dateline had grown to
>read: "*Muskegon, Michigan, December 4, 1884*."
>There are two possibilities. Either Cyril returned to the manuscript letter
>and transcribed it more fully than he had before, OR [a strong nudge here]
>he supplied "Muskegon" and "4" out of his own erratic brain. Since both
>"December 4" and "Muskegon," as Scott points out, make no sense, I think
>it's clear these details are mere invention. Later, no doubt, some well
>meaning person made a "correction" from 4 to 14, on the grounds that at
>least Clemens was *near *Muskegon on the latter date. Unluckily, they
>"corrected" without getting all the facts. (I think it's right to emphasize
>again that, for the letters of years we haven't edited yet, MTPO
>information isn't as refined as it will be later.)
>So much for Mark Twain's phantom side-excursion to Muskegon! (Rabbit hole?
>. . . What rabbit hole?)