i
The first edition of Pamela (dated 1741) was published
by
Charles Rivington and John Osborn on November 6, 1740, the second on
February 14, 1741.[1] The latter had
been announced in the Daily Post and the Daily
Gazetteer as early as January 27. Aaron Hill had heard of it by
January 6.[2] On December 22
Richardson had asked Hill's daughters for suggestions and corrections, and
around this date he evidently told Hill that the style needed polishing.[3] He had also sent Hill a letter
which an
anonymous gentleman had written to Rivington on November 15,
commenting in a friendly and complimentary way on the book, but making
many suggestions for improvements.[4] The simplicity of the style had also
called
forth some adverse comment:
"The Language is not altogether unexceptionable, but in several Places
sinks below the Idea we are constrained to form of the Heroine who is
supposed to write it."
[5] But the
author of the letter "
To my worthy Friend,
the Editor
of PAMELA," printed at the beginning of the first edition of the
novel (and also in the
Weekly Miscellany for October 11,
1740), had demanded "
Pamela as Pamela wrote it; in her own
Words" — "in her neat Country Apparel"; and Hill also, for similar
reasons, objected on December 29 to polishing. "I don't indeed pretend,"
Hill adds, "to have consider'd with a critical Exactness, whether twere an
absolute Impossibility, by shortening here and there a Single Word or two,
to draw perhaps the
Energy a little, (very little) closer
—
without offering Profanation to y
e native Sweetness of the
Phrase, and
Sentiment. But what a trite and insignificant Refinement, That! amidst a
Mass of such
unprecedented Beauties!" (Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 37).
Nevertheless Richardson did polish considerably for the second
edition. There are 841 changes, and the vast majority of them are designed
to elevate or correct the language. The past tense of "run" is changed from
"run" to "ran" (often — Richardson hardly ever caught all his errors
or
changed them consistently), the past participle of "break" from "broke" to
"broken," that of "write" from "wrote" to "written." The objective case of
"who" becomes "whom"; "I sat out" becomes "I set out," while an
intransitive "setting" becomes "sitting"; "you was" becomes "you were."
In one place "look'd as silly" becomes "look'd . . . as sillily," only to be
changed back to "silly" in the 1801 text (12mo, I, 67; 1801, I, 66), when
Richardson's knowledge of grammar had advanced still further.
Contractions are expanded, "infinitely" becomes "greatly" or is omitted,
"said" frequently becomes "added," "says I" or "thinks I" becomes "said"
or "thought," "my old Lady" becomes "my late Lady."
Originally Pamela was "watched, and such-like, very narrowly," now she
is "watched very narrowly"; Pamela would still rather "rot" than accept
Mr. B.'s proposals, but it is "in a Dungeon" rather than "in a Dunghil"
(12mo, I, 14, 16, 252). The style becomes less colorful when Mr. B. kisses
Pamela "with frightful Eagerness" rather than "as if he would have eaten
me" and when she tells Mrs. Jervis "all that had passed" rather than "every
bit and crumb of the Matter" (12mo, I, 18, 22). In one place a misprint
creeps in, "Coachyard" for "Court-yard," which is followed in all of the
later
duodecimo editions, though corrected in the octavo and in the 1801 (12mo,
I, 111; 8vo, I, 140; 1801, I, 107).
Most of the suggestions of the anonymous gentleman are not
followed: Mr. B. does not become a baronet, though the objectionable word
"'Squire" is frequently changed to "Gentleman" or "Mr. B." (and still more
often changed in the eighth duodecimo and 1801 editions); but a long
discussion in Volume III on Mr. B.'s accepting a baronetcy is probably an
answer to the anonymous gentleman. Pamela's sufferings from Lady Davers
are not shortened, nor does she show more spirit with that lady. Mr. B. still
spans Pamela's waist with his hands (12mo, II, 216), as he continues to do
throughout all editions, though, according to the anonymous gentleman, that
"Expression is enough to ruin a Nation of Women" by tight-lacing. The
word "naughty" generally stays, though it is occasionally changed to
"wicked." Pamela does not discharge Mrs. Jewkes (this also is justified in
Volume III). Pamela's superstitions about marriage on Thursday remain
(12mo, II, 149). But "Curchee" is always changed to
"Curt'sy" or some similar spelling, and "voluntierly" becomes
"voluntarily." Pamela no longer drops down on her knees in a corner to
bless God after her wedding (12mo, II, 177), and she no longer calls her
husband "Master" through timidity (12mo, II, 197) — Richardson
adopts
almost the exact wording suggested by the anonymous gentleman, as he
does also when he changes "my dear lordly Master" to "my dear Lord and
Master" (12mo, II, 305). "Foolish thing that I am" was not altered
—
indeed it persists into the 1801 edition (12mo, II, 305; 1801, II, 238). But
he does change two passages which, in the anonymous gentleman's opinion,
were susceptible to interpretations as doubles entendres.[6]
Aaron Hill on January 6 had opposed any changes at all, and had
specifically opposed raising the style, giving Mr. B. a title, altering the
scene with Lady Davers, dismissing Mrs. Jewkes, or changing the passage
on Pamela's waist, the word "naughty," the phrase "foolish thing that I
am," or the so-called doubles entendres. The only objection
he
had supported was that to the excessive prayers and appeals to the Deity
— a "little Contraction" in these, he thought, might help to draw in
minds "fashionably Averse to the Subject," to their own benefit (Forster
MS XIII, 2, foll. 36-39, and Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 39). Though this
concession was retracted in Hill's letter of January 15,[7]
Richardson considerably abridged Pamela's piety — 85 mentions of
God
were either cut or altered by changing the word "God" to "Heaven."
Hill had mingled his advice with effusive praise and with some
sarcastic remarks on the rash anonymous gentleman, and Richardson
inserted his reply with several other letters of praise from him as an
Introduction to the second edition.[8]
It was this Introduction which was parodied in Shamela
Andrews and attacked and ridiculed in Pamela
Censured
(London, 1741, pp. 15-19) and which called forth other uncomplimentary
comments on Richardson's transparent puffery. One reverend gentleman
wrote to John Osborn in February, 1741: ". . . you were bewitched to Print
that bad stuff in the Introduction. . . . He [the writer of the letters] is too
full of himself, and too gross in his Praises of the Author. . . . He [the
author] wou'd do well to alter it, and make it shorter, besides, a Gentleman
who seems to have intended well and honestly, is very ungratefully used,
and it has given Offence" (Forster MS XVI, 1, fol. 46).
The third edition appeared on March 12, 1741. It had 59 changes,
none of them of much moment, but several of such a nature as to make it
seem likely that they are by Richardson: "you was" to "you were," "let you
and I" to "let you and me," "says" to "said," "broke" to "broken," "wrote"
to "written," "run" to "ran." Two are certainly misprints, which were
carried on into all subsequent duodecimos and the octavo: "desiring to
interpose" for "desiring me to interpose" and "all my Scruples" for "all his
Scruples" (12mo, II, 52, 126; 8vo, II, 25, 115). The first phrase was
dropped and the second misprint corrected in the 1801 edition (II, 20,
86).
The fourth edition, published on May 5, 1741, had 48 changes. 14
of them were in the Introduction, where Hill's remarks about the
anonymous gentleman were considerably softened. On April 21 Hill
had reluctantly given Richardson permission to substitute "unguarded" for
"silly" as applied to Mr. Williams, in deference to the objections of certain
clergymen (a change made in this edition) and to make other alterations in
his letters in deference to the "sordid taste" of the age (Barbauld, I, 72-73).
Earlier, on April 13, Hill had written that he had unwillingly made a few
corrections on the proof of Richardson's "beautiful work," as Richardson
had repeatedly urged ("a word, here and there") and would go on if
Richardson insisted (Barbauld, I, 68-69). The few real changes in the text
may, therefore, have been Hill's. The change of "lac'd Head, and
Handkerchief" to "lac'd Cambrick Handkerchief" (12mo, II, 117) is almost
certainly a deliberate change, as are "run" to "ran," "thinks" to "thought,"
and "how kind and how good he behav'd" to "how kindly he behav'd"
(12mo, II, 24). Several of the others may well be misprints.
The second major revision was that for the fifth edition, published on
September 22, 1741. There are 950 changes, 45 of them retrenching
redundancies and excessive praises in the introductory letters. Some of the
other changes may have been suggested by Dr. Newton or Aaron
Hill.[9]
Most of the changes in the fifth edition are changes of phrasing,
rather than grammatical changes or changes of single words, as in the
second edition, the octavo, and the eighth duodecimo: "I must
he and him him now; for he has lost his
Dignity
with me" to "May-be, I he and him him, too
much:
But it is his own Fault, if I do. For why did he lose all his Dignity with
me?" (12mo, I, 17); "a Condition so much superior to what I could do for
her" to "could raise her to" (12mo, II, 122); "as far as one Holiday will go;
for that I can get Leave for" to "Leave to make, on such an Occasion"
(12mo, I, 39). When Mr. B. looks through a keyhole and spys Pamela
stretched out in one of her fits, the fifth edition adds that she was on her
face (12mo, I, 31) — possibly to avoid what Pamela
Censured (p. 31) called "a Posture that must naturally excite
Passions
of Desire" which could not be contemplated except "by one in his
grand Climacteric without
ever wishing to see one in the same Situation." The anonymous author of
this pamphlet attacked Pamela for indecency and for its
immoral
tendency, but this appears to be the only objection which Richardson tried
to obviate before his final revision. One nice touch is added when Pamela
is trying her hand at hard work by scouring a pewter plate: "I see
I could do't by Degrees; tho' I blister'd my Hand in two Places" becomes
"It only blister'd my Hand in two Places" (12mo, I, 94). Richardson had
evidently gone over his book carefully.
There are two added passages of some length, on Pamela's reading
(12mo, I, 143) and her proposed correspondence with Miss Darnford
(12mo, II, 333). Pamela's verses on leaving Bedfordshire (12mo, I,
112-114) and the "Preface by the Editor" are extensively revised. And there
are the usual grammatical changes: "without" (conj.) to "except," "who" to
"whom," "broke" to "broken," "run" to "ran," "learns me" to "teaches
me."
On October 23, 1741, a French translation of Pamela
was
published in London. According to the preface (I, [x]), "Cette
Traduction a été faite avec la participation de l'Auteur, qui
a eu la
bonté de nous fournir un petit Nombre d'Additions & de
Corrections.
Et comme on aime à connoitre le Caractére de ceux dont
il est fait
mention dans un Livre qu'on lit, l'Auteur a bien voulu nous communiquer
les Portraits de quelques personnes dont il parle dans cette Histoire. Ces
Portraits n'ont point été inserez [sic] dans les
cinq
Editions qu'on a faites de l'Original, parce que l'Auteur s'en est
avisé
trop tard." This translation had been advertised in the Daily
Post as "in the Press" as early as March 27, 1741, and is based not
on the fifth edition but on the earlier ones. It does not have the additions on
Pamela's reading and her correspondence with Miss Darnford. Indeed it
seems to be based on the second edition — "une coëfure
& un moucheoir" is previous to the "Cambrick Handkerchief" of the
fourth edition (II, 138; 12mo, II, 117), and the French does not follow the
third edition's misprint "my Scruples" (II, 148; 12mo, II, 126). In a few
passages, however, it resembles the fifth edition: it adopts a change in the
order of listing the various articles of clothing which Mr. B. gave Pamela
(I, 14; 12mo, I, 12); the banks of the pond, "guilty" in the fourth and
"perilous" in the fifth, are "dangereux" in the French (I, 173; 12mo, I,
231). "Il me laissa monter dans ma chambre" is like the fifth edition's "left
me to go up to my Closet" rather than "I went up to my Closet" (II, 91-2;
12mo, II, 78). Pamela's parting verses, given not where they belong in
other editions but later, are a very free translation, but seem more like the
revised version. In many places where the French is like the fifth edition,
the exigencies of French grammar probably forced a similar change. The
translator substituted other
words freely for "said" so that he often has a reading like the fifth or like
the octavo, but he also has "écriai" or "reprit" where the fifth
retains
"said," so that these probably mean nothing. There are five to ten other
passages where the
French resembles the fifth edition and the octavo in ways which grammar
probably does not account for, but all are minor and might be coincidental.
There must really have been a "
petit Nombre" of additions
and
corrections.
The most striking addition, indeed the only very striking one, is the
passage describing some fine ladies who come to see Pamela (I, 67-72)
("les Portraits de quelques personnes"). Aside from several
variations of "said" and from one new paragraph break (II, 259), it is the
only thing in the French translation which resembles the octavo and not the
fifth edition. It may well have been written before the fifth was published
and not adopted because it would have meant too great a change in
pagination.
This passage is also the most considerable change in the octavo,
which was advertised as just published in the Daily Post of
May
8, 1742. It was called the sixth edition and was issued with the third edition
of Volumes III and IV, first published on December 7, 1741. In a letter to
William Warburton of November 17, 1742, Richardson says that it "has
received a good many Alterations from the former" (Forster MS XVI, 1,
fol. 89). But these alterations are fewer in number (633) than those in the
fifth edition, and only five of them are important: the fine ladies passage,
the omission of the introductory letters and substitution of a detailed table
of contents,[10] the omission of the
conclusion (part of which was made superfluous by Volumes III and IV),
a change in timing made necessary by the discovery that in the earlier
editions two dates had overlapped (8vo, II, 233; 12mo, II, 222), and the
inclusion in Volume I of several papers which had been
in Volume II so that the break between the volumes occurs at a more
crucial moment — Pamela's leaving the Lincolnshire house.
Most of the other changes are of a single word: "kissed" to "saluted,"
"said" to "added," "replied," etc. (there are a great many of these), "durst"
to "dared," "tho'" to "altho'," "naughty" to "wicked," "on" to "upon," "in"
to "into."
Grammatical changes continue: the past tense of "bid" is "bad" not
"bid"; "where" becomes "whither," "there" "thither," "broke" "broken,"
"you was" "you were." Many unnecessary adjectives ("poor," "great,"
"all") are cut.
The changes of the octavo were not followed in the sixth, seventh,
and eighth duodecimo editions. It is perhaps not surprising that the more
extensive ones were not, since they would have meant re-pagination, but it
is hard to see why Richardson, who was his own printer and was
meticulous where his own works were concerned, did not take the trouble
to correct at least the grammatical mistakes he had discovered while
preparing the octavo edition. Perhaps his work on Clarissa
decreased his interest in Pamela for a while, or perhaps he
had
lost the copy on which he had marked his changes. When he came to revise
for the edition published in 1801, however, he did use the octavo as a
basis. The text of the octavo is usually regarded as the standard text of
Pamela. Though its importance as a revision has been
somewhat
exaggerated, probably because of its splendid format and because the
dropping of the introductory letters and the addition of the fine ladies
passage
have been known to scholars for some time, its use for the revision shows
that Richardson did regard it as the best text available.
The duodecimo edition of Pamela published in October,
1746, was also called the sixth edition. It had 26 changes from the fifth
edition, and most of these are insignificant — 9 are changes of
"farther"
to "further." But even here the change of "it was me" to "it was I" (12mo,
I, 234) was probably Richardson's, as well as the omission of the final "it"
in "thou hast a Memory . . . that nothing escapes it" (12mo, II, 15) and of
the "-ing" on "singing" in "My Master has just now been making me play
upon the Spinnet, and singing to it" (12mo, II, 154). The first of these
changes is not adopted in the 1801 edition, the second passage is reworded,
and the third change is adopted (I, 256, 307; II, 112). One entry is changed
from Wednesday to Thursday (12mo, II, 354), probably by oversight, since
the next entry is also Thursday.
The evidence about the publication of the seventh duodecimo edition
is almost impossible to reconcile. A note in the Bodleian (MS. Don. c. 66,
pp. 18-19) listing amounts Rivington owes Richardson shows that 300
copies of the duodecimo Pamela, Volumes I and II, were
delivered to Rivington between December 3, 1746, and June 3, 1749; 144
more copies of these volumes (whether in octavo or duodecimo is not
stated) were delivered up to January 18, 1753. On September 19, 1753,
Richardson wrote to Mrs. Chapone that he had
to send her a second-hand set of
Pamela, "for the Fire I was
afflicted with last Year, consumed all the First & Second Vols. that
were
left in my Hands of the last Impression. But to make some Amends, they
will be in the largest Edition; and with Cuts." (Forster MS XII, 2, fol. 89).
Since he is sending her a copy in octavo "to make some Amends," he must
have intended sending a duodecimo — that is, the sixth edition of
1746.
But an advertisement in the back of Volume IV of
Sir Charles
Grandison, published in November, 1753, advertises
Pamela in octavo and "in Four Volumes 12 mo. The Sixth
Edition."
Pamela in duodecimo is advertised in the
Public
Advertiser for March 19, 1754. This may refer to the sixth or to the
seventh edition in duodecimo — Sale has discovered no
advertisement of
the seventh and its date of publication is uncertain. But the height of
confusion is reached in Richardson's letter to Stinstra of November 26,
1755: "I have
actually retouched Pamela: But there being a Number of the
3
d and
4
th Volumes of that Work in hand, more than of the
1
st and
2
d. I only printed as many of the two latter, as would
make perfect
Setts; and was therefore obliged to keep the two former as they
were."
[11] Since Stinstra is asking
about Richardson's elaborate revision (the one ultimately published in
1801), it is hard to believe that Richardson is referring to the seventh
duodecimo edition, with its few minor changes, as "retouched." The
wording implies that Richardson had some Volumes I and II of the edition
in question, though fewer than of Volumes III and IV. An unrecorded
octavo seems out of the question, since the 1742 octavo was reissued as late
as 1772. One possible explanation, somewhat less improbable than others
that suggest themselves, is that Richardson discovered some unburned
copies of the 1746 duodecimo, reissued them with some of his Volumes III
and IV, and
printed the seventh duodecimo edition to issue with the rest of the Volumes
III and IV on hand (the "seventh" edition was published with the "fifth" of
Volumes III and IV — a third issue of the second), and was
deliberately
obscure in his letter to Stinstra because his revision had bogged down or he
was unsure what he was going to do with it.
This seventh duodecimo edition is dated 1754 and has only 35
changes from the sixth duodecimo, over half of them of "farther" to
"further," "ingrateful" to "ungrateful," or "an" (before "h") to "a." None
of them can be said to be certainly by Richardson, though a
"broken" for "broke" and an "if she please" for "if she pleases" sound like
him. The readings of the seventh duodecimo are followed in the
eighth.
This edition (dated 1762) appeared three and a half months after
Richardson's death, on October 28, 1761. Early in March, 1761, one of
Richardson's daughters had written to Lady Bradshaigh: ". . . the four
Vols. of Pamela being almost out of Print, and a new Edition called for,
and being delighted to hear, that your Ladiship has remarked upon that
Piece and Clarissa, he [Papa] directs me to express his earnest Wishes, that
you will favour him with the Perusal of your Observations, with Liberty to
add to new ones of his own such of your Ladiship's, as may make
ye
future Edition more perfect than otherwise it can be. The Employment will
be, my Papa says, a great Amusement to him."[12] On March 13 Lady Bradshaigh
wrote that
she was sending the volumes so that Richardson could look over "what I
have scroled in the Margin of your two Histories."[13]
It is likely that the proposed "future Edition" was the one which
appeared as the "eighth," and the nature of the revisions in this edition
supports this view. There are 251 changes, 27 of them in the introductory
letters (the praises are further toned down and considerable cuts are made)
and 19 in the conclusion (there are two large cuts, one of them of material
which Volumes III and IV had long ago made superfluous).
The other changes are slight but follow a definite pattern; most of
them deal with matters of propriety: gold trimming on clothes becomes
silver (12mo, I, 82; II, 351); attendant servants are no longer mentioned
(12mo, II, 354, 359). Mr. B. calls his steward Longman rather than Mr.
Longman. Young ladies are no longer addressed or referred to as "Miss"
alone. The word "Spouse" generally becomes "Master" or "Mr. B.," and
more "'Squires" are removed. In the scene between Pamela and her former
fellow-servants, their names are no longer enumerated (12mo, II, 345-346).
The words "may-hap" and "Maiden" are fairly consistently changed. The
elimination of superfluous elegance and the new words of address especially
sound like
Lady Bradshaigh.
[14] If they are the
result of her comments, they are Richardson's last literary activity.
This does not mean, however, that some of the changes in the eighth
duodecimo edition were not written earlier. Some of them are identical with
changes in the 1801 edition. This may not always prove that Richardson
used one revision to revise the other — "may-hap" and "Spouse," for
instance, are also eliminated in the 1801 edition, but not always in the same
way. If Richardson felt that such words were objectionable, the same result
could easily have been obtained without comparison of the two
revisions.
"Bite" could have become "Trick" (1801, I, 65; 12mo, I, 66) and
"take a Dinner" "dine" (1801, II, 285; 12mo, II, 355) in both texts without
any comparison, but the number of such similarities, as well as a few where
the similarity would be an unlikely coincidence ("when" for "while" [1801,
II, 234; 12mo, II, 301] and "chose that Name" for "chose that" [1801, II,
290; 12mo, II, 362]), makes it seem likely that there was some influence
of one on the other, though variations in other passages make it certain that
one was not used as a basis for the other.
A probable explanation would be that Richardson began to mark
changes for a new duodecimo edition in the margin of the seventh while he
was working on the more extensive revision, and at the same time used
them in that revision, but that at the very end of his life he made further
changes in the margin for a new duodecimo edition which were never
incorporated in the revision published in 1801.
