I am posting this book review on behalf of Errol Sull, the reviewer.

Barbara

~~~~~

COMPARATIVE BOOK REVIEW:

Twain, Mark.  _Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_.  Edited by Victor Fischer
and Lin Salamo.  The Mark Twain Library Edition.  University of California
Press, 2001.  Pp. 588.  Softcover, 5 3/8 x 8 1/2, 218 illustrations, 5
maps.  $14.95.  ISBN 0-520-22838-3. Also available in hardcover.  $45.00.
ISBN 0-520-22806-5.

Twain, Mark.  _The Annotated Huckleberry Finn_.  Edited by Michael Patrick
Hearn. W. W. Norton & Company, 2001.  Pp. 480.  Hardcover, 8 3/4 x 10 1/4.
$39.95.  ISBN 0-393-20039-8.

Many books reviewed on the Forum are available at discounted prices from
the TwainWeb Bookstore, and purchases from this site generate commissions
that benefit the Mark Twain Project. Please visit
http://www.yorku.ca/twainweb

Reviewed for the Mark Twain Forum by:
Errol Sull

Copyright (C) 2002 Mark Twain Forum. This review may not be published or
redistributed in any medium without permission


Can a book really be judged by its cover?  The two most recent editions of
_Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_ (both featuring new material found in the
first half of the original manuscript, discovered in 1990) certainly
present a contrast at first glance. There is Michael Patrick Hearn's latest
annotated edition published by Norton (2001) with its richly attractive
cover with raised print, a patina-like green with wonderfully colored
reproductions of Edward Kemble's illustrations of Huck, Jim, and Miss
Watson. And it is a heavy and large (nearly 9" x 11") hardbound book, with
excellent quality paper. Very glitzy, indeed, as far as annotated editions
go.

The second text covered in this review is the paperback edition (there is a
hard cover edition as well), published by University of California Press
(2001) and edited by Victor Fischer and Lin Salamo, editors of the Mark
Twain Project of The Bancroft Library.  This is The Mark Twain Library
edition, or reading edition, and looks like many standard paperbacks: about
6" x 9" with a rather plain cover that has a border of black, and an ivory
background over which the name of book, Twain's name, and the words "The
Only Authoritative Text" appear (more about this later.) The only "glitzy"
part of this book's cover is Kemble's woodcut of Jim and Huck that leads
off chapter 12 of the novel.

The Mark Twain Library edition, edited by Fischer and Salamo, precedes the
scholarly edition (The Works of Mark Twain edition) which is scheduled to
appear later in 2002. This is important to note as this reader's edition
does not call attention to, list, or otherwise identify all of the hundreds
of changes in the text that resulted from Twain's intentions, as contrasted
between the text found in the original first half of the manuscript and
what was actually published. These issues will be discussed in detail in
the upcoming scholarly edition.

If glitzy is what you are after, then hands down the Hearn book is going to
be your choice. But we all know that a book's ultimate value as an
annotated text has nothing to do with its looks, and so we must strip away
the covers, forget about the quality of paper in each, and go for the heart
of the matter: which edition, after all, is better for the reader trying to
really understand Twain's mind and intent in _Adventures of Huckleberry
Finn_?

We begin with what is commonplace in all annotated texts nowadays: The
introduction to the annotated text. In the Hearn text, it is at times
overpowering--153 pages! Certainly thorough in showing the history and
development of the novel, it is a wandering trip through most of Twain's
relatives, Olivia's influence on his writing (and Twain's reaction to it),
the financial decisions involved in publishing the novel, Kemble's
involvement in the novel, Twain's and others' efforts at marketing the
novel, reactions to the novel's publication, Twain's further literary
efforts to capitalize on _Huckleberry Finn_, the impact of the novel on
Americana (both while Twain was alive and after his death), and a
dissection of the novel. This is not an introduction for the faint-hearted
or time-pressed scholar.

Hearn certainly has made an attempt at thoroughness, but sometimes I found
it an introduction with the kitchen sink thrown in as well. The
illustrations are excellent and range from illustrations of Twain's
colleagues, caricatures, a stereoscope card, a photo of illustrator Edward
W. Kemble, ephemera, sheet music covers, and numerous other photos.
Information about Twain's marketing of the novel (both pre- and
post-publication) with an eye to the bottom line was extremely well written
and fascinating. Hearn's report on the reaction to the novel's publication
was also well executed. Yet I found that the biographical information at
times wandered too far; and that the dissection of the novel (with an
emphasis on the criticism of the novel as being "as formless as the mighty
Mississippi itself") would be better left for a separate text or should
have been included in an expanded stand-alone "Introduction, Part II."

The introduction to the Fischer and Salamo text is a blink of the eye in
comparison--only nine pages. The Foreword in the Fischer and Salamo edition
contains some information never before published, like the dedication Mark
Twain wrote and then decided not to publish (p. xix). There is also the
revelation that the infamous "Notice" signed "Per G. G., Chief of
Ordinance" most likely referred to the Clemens's butler George Griffin.
Here we also get a brief discussion of Huck's voice, the humor of the
novel, and its place in American literature told through several long
quotes by well-known writers. This a wise approach, but I must admit to
being drawn into the Hearn introduction, if only because of the balance it
presents of Twain the businessman and 19th Century America not being ready
for this novel by Twain the literary genius.

Next to be considered is how each text handles the "missing"
passages--those passages found in the first half of the manuscript that
either had not previously appeared in any _Huckleberry Finn_ edition or
were sometimes included in a shortened form. Of these, there are three that
have elicited the most scrutiny, speculation, and critical commentary:
Jim's "Ghost Story" (Chapter 9); the Raftsmen's passage (Chapter 16); and
the Camp Meeting passage (Chapter 20).  It is interesting to note how the
Hearn and University of California edition edited by Fischer and Salamo
editions differ on their handling of these three passages:

Jim's "Ghost Story" passage--Both editions include this passage in appendix
form, and each includes many annotations. The Hearn edition identifies it
as "Jim and the Dead Man" (p. 447).  The Fischer and Salamo edition
identifies it as Jim's "Ghost Story" (p. 463). What I especially like about
the Fischer and Salamo edition is that there is an introduction to the
passage (where the material might have come from, why Twain wrote it, and
why he might have left it out of the published text), as well as showing
Twain's revisions of the passage, with his first or second choice, and then
the final choice included in the passage. There are also two reproduced
photos of the original manuscript, one showing the beginning of the
passage--the other showing Twain's revisions of Jim's dialect. A definite
plus for the Fischer and Salamo edition.

Raftsmen's passage--This passage presents a major contrast between the two
editions. Hearn selects to leave it out of the novel's text but includes it
in Appendix B along with the original illustrations by John Harley that
appeared with the text when Twain published it in _Life on the
Mississippi_. Hearn gives a nice explanation as to why the passage was
originally left out of the published work and some additional history on
the passage. Fischer and Salamo include the passage within the novel's text
along with the Harley illustrations. A reader not familiar with the history
of the passage would not realize the text was never included in the
original first edition unless he or she consults the annotations at the
back of the book where Fisher and Salamo discuss the history of the
Raftsmen's passage in their extensive annotations.

Pokeville Camp Meeting passage--Of the three, this offers the most complex
differences between the two editions. In Hearn's work he includes the
passage as it was published, opting to include the original manuscript
differences in the annotations. I found this to be clumsy at times, for
there are so many annotations that I often had to turn two or three pages
ahead to read them, then turn back again to continue reading the novel.
What was also interesting: while the Camp Meeting passage is recognized as
one of the major "new passages" from the first half of the manuscript (due
to the extensive differences between the manuscript version and the
published version), Hearn makes no special note of this, and thus the
reader would not know of this passage's special importance through his
annotations.

In the Fischer and Salamo edition, the Pokeville Camp Meeting passage is
truly showcased for the reader.  First, it appears in a special section at
the end of their work, entitled "Three Passages from the Manuscript." Here,
as in Jim's "Ghost Story" passage, there is an introduction, followed by
Twain's revisions of the passage, with his first or second choice, and then
the final choice included in the passage. These are presented with the
original manuscript text (and its revisions) on the left side of the book,
and the published page or final proof (with final revisions) on the right
side. There are also two photos of pages from the original manuscript.
Another definite plus for Fischer and Salamo.

An additional passage from the manuscript in the Fischer and Salamo edition
that is extensively discussed in a special section at the end of the book
deals with a revised passage from Chapter 19 wherein "Huck Describes
Sunrise on the River."  A careful comparison of various layers of revised
text illustrates how Twain struggled to obtain what has been described as a
"truly vernacular style."

Finally, we come to the many annotations presented throughout each text.
Hearn wastes no time in giving us these, with 227 presented in the
introduction alone! As noted above, the introduction is uneven, and with so
many annotations to the introduction one must be prepared to spend at least
a morning or afternoon for a complete reading. In the Fisher and Salamo
text there are no annotations to the nine-page introduction.

Now I will admit to liking the wealth of annotations that Hearn includes in
his edition. I've lost count as to the various editions of _Huckleberry
Finn_ I've read, yet this easily contains the most background information
I've seen. With this said, I quickly add that one area I would have liked
to have seen more of is in the actual writing of the novel--what Victor
Doyno's _Writing Huck Finn_ (1991) focuses on. To the credit of Fischer and
Salamo, they add 32 pages of manuscript revisions and thoughts on same at
the end of their text. As Twain was known for his diligent and nearly
maniacal attention to word and phrase detail, it is curious that Hearn for
the most part overlooks this.  The Fischer and Salamo text also contains
notes on the ownership issue of the first half of the manuscript, the
textual composition and illustrations, manuscript facsimiles, maps (for a
better understanding of where events in the novel take place), and a
glossary.

What perhaps is the greatest visual difference between these two texts is
in the manner the annotations are presented. Hearn gives his in a split
text manner (i.e., the novel continues on one half of the page, with the
annotations in the other half,--the only exception being in the middle of
or at the end of some chapters when the annotations are so many that they
run beyond the end of a page or the chapter and thus take up full pages.
The Fischer and Salamo annotations are presented by page number and line
number in one section at the end of the book.  As a scholar, I enjoyed
Hearn's "live time" annotations, as I did not need to continually thumb to
the back of the text to look up an annotation. And it did away with my
having to wonder whether there WAS an annotation that went with a certain
passage--if not, I could read uninterrupted, concentrating on the novel.

However, the Hearn approach to annotations does present a problem for me,
and I suspect it would to others who also teach the novel. I like my
students to discover ideas and possibilities and historical contexts on
their own as much as possible before I have them "get the scoop" through
the annotations. This is impossible with Hearn's approach, as the student
cannot help but see, and thus read, the annotation right next to the text
of the novel.

Of course, he or she who uses either or both books in the classroom will no
doubt raise the question: is there much change over previous editions as a
result of the discovery of the first half of the _Huckleberry Finn_
manuscript? In a word--Yes. In the Fischer and Salamo text, it departs from
the previous University of California (1985) text nearly 100 times in its
wording and nearly 1,100 times in its spelling, punctuation, and other
details. Additionally, the annotations have been markedly revised. Always
warmly received in the classroom, this University of California edition
glows even brighter now.

As for Hearn, many of the annotations that appeared in his first edition
(1981)--an edition "roundly criticized for the large number of inaccurate
and misleading annotations" have been corrected, revised, and/or expanded,
this resulting (as with the Fisher and Salamo edition) from the
availability of new Twain material (including letters) and added history of
the manuscript, as well as an increase in the banning of the novel. While
Hearn sometimes overwhelms the reader with his annotations, there is much
new material, and even the previously published annotations are at times
given new meaning or illumination when contrasted against other new
annotations--a nice bonus at times, indeed.

To be certain, one can find fault with some of Hearn's annotations. Given
the breadth and quantity of them, this is to be expected. For example, one
can argue that at times Hearn does not always give primary sources for his
annotations or that his illustrations of water craft are of an
inappropriate time frame. (Hearn insists these are not errors but rather
can be acceptable as there is no definitive date as to when _Huckleberry
Finn_ takes place, and thus the steamboat illustrations may certainly be
true to the time span of the novel.)

But I must ask the question: with all the information provided by Hearn,
does a slippage here or there lessen the thoroughness of his work? The
answer is no. It is only when these flaws become so many in nature, or of
such significance as to mar their intended purpose, that a loud protest
must be made. In my opinion, such instances do not occur in Hearn's text.
As with any author, it is hoped that through the "uh-ohs" discovered after
publication of a new edition, and input from readers, these minor errors
will be corrected in future editions.

As for "The only authoritative text" that appears on the Fischer and Salamo
cover, it is just that. The University of Californian edition edited by
Fisher and Salamo is the only text to rely exhaustively on the available
documentary evidence (not limited to original manuscript alone, but also
including changes Twain made on the typescript he sent to the printers) to
ascertain, at every point, how Mark Twain wanted his text to read, not just
in words but also in its punctuation, spelling, and emphasis on words.
Hearn does not go this far--his text being essentially a reprint of the
first American edition (1885).

The Fisher and Salamo text contains hundreds of words and other minor
details that Twain wanted his text to contain, but which were not included
in what he published, or for that matter what anyone else has published,
including Hearn, the Random House edition edited by Victor Doyno (1996), or
the previous University of California 1985 or 1988 texts (from which the
Fischer and Salamo text departs in at least 100 words and 1,000 lesser
details).

Hearn makes few attempts to alter the text of _Huckleberry Finn_ so that it
adheres to Twain's intentions, even when he has good evidence that the text
he prints is in error. For instance, on p. 132, note. 7, Hearn says "Blair
and Fisher persuasively argued in the 1988 University of California edition
that the typist skipped two sentences that should be here." Hearn then
quotes the missing sentences in his note, but leaves the actual text
unchanged from the way it appeared in the first edition.

Hearn acknowledges utilizing the Fischer and Salamo edition (in its proof
form) for many of the changes throughout his own book. The result of this
"coming through the back door" by Hearn is that his edition benefits
greatly from the primary research that went into and is published in the
Fisher and Salamo edition.

Ultimately, a decision on which text is the better cannot be based upon a
cover. As often is the case when two (or more) annotated texts of the same
novel are published fairly close together, each will get more attention for
the strengths and weaknesses of the other. I am glad for this as it allows
more pressure on the editors to get their texts better the next time
around. If not, we just might end up selecting one on the strength of its
cover. But then Twain the businessman would probably love that.