The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 22.0024 Thursday, 27 January 2011
Date: January 22, 2011 12:28:08 AM EST
Subject: Collier, MND, and The Oxford Shakespeare
Can anyone offer a compelling argument for The Oxford Shakespeare's decision to emend Bottom's speech in
1.2, where he promises to "move stones" (Oxford Shakespeare 1.2.24) rather than to "move storms" as he
does in Q1 (1600), Q2 (1619), and F (1623)?
That the editors made the change without any clear textual warrant for doing so is somewhat baffling, but
it is even more puzzling when one considers that the basis for the emendation appears to be Collier's
forged MS annotations to the Second Folio.
Don't we risk confusing students and readers of Shakespeare by giving editorial sanction to a
"correction" produced by a forger?
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions expressed on it are the sole
property of the poster, and the editor assumes no responsibility for them.