Conclusions
As the previous sections indicate implicitly, this re-orientation to
"orientations to text" was also inspired in part by possibilities recently
developed for electronic editing. The flexibility of digital media removes
some of the narrow bands constraining a scholar's use of orientations:
combinations are now possible that before tended to confuse the work. We
began with the notion that an orientation to texts helps one identify the
character or nature of the work one is studying and to focus attention on
various aspects of a work's inspiration, creation, production, and
reception–aspects that help us understand the work as an event or
series of events in history. Those understandings of the work also help to
give a perspective to editorial activity. In the digital world, one is
always working at one remove from the primary materials, which is a
disadvantage one can too easily forget, but the advantages are great. A
digital scholarly edition does not need to be organized exclusively for the
purpose of establishing a single edited text produced according to the
priorities of one particular orientation. Several edited texts can be
presented as equal alternatives serving different goals. This implies that
it is perhaps even more important for editors than it already was to be
aware of the distinctive elements and priorities of different orientations.
What the concept of orientations also shows is that, important as edited
texts are, the object of textual study and of digital presentation does not
need to be an edited text. A scholar's orientation to text can organize the
facts about the work such that process rather than
product is the main focus. An awareness of
orientations to text can therefore be useful, not only to the individual
scholarly editor who tries to be consistent in his or her approach to
reading and editing, but also to editors as a community of scholars with an
openness to understanding and respecting other editors' approaches and
priorities.
