 | |  |
Critical editing has often been justified, if sometimes complacently, by its parallel with the restoration of discoloured and damaged paintings. But the complacency is easily pricked by a conundrum editors are fond of quoting: if the Mona Lisa is in the Louvre, where is Hamlet? The question teases the listener into thought about the existential status of the literary as opposed to the plastic arts—of the basically different relationships of the 'work', in each case, to the physical object.[1] The present essay examines some of the practices and assumptions of modern art conservation for the—often refractory—light they throw on traditional editorial beliefs about the boundaries and constitution of the literary work.
| | |