This page was created by Anonymous.
Literary Analysis
As the earlier sections of this book illustrate, the variations that occur in different versions of Summer (the MSS, the MME, the FAE, and the FBE) encompass the following categories: variations in punctuation and ellipses; variations in capitalization, italicization, and pluralization; variations in spelling based on the difference between American and British spelling conventions; variations in words and phrases––for example, change of word or word order and deletion or insertion of words or phrases; variations in sentences––for example, change in syntactic structure and deletion or insertion of sentences; and variations in paragraph and section breaks. While majority of the alterations in the FBE of Summer are done for greater consistency in terms of stylistic and spelling conventions and grammatical accuracy and for aligning the text with the original manuscript of Summer, some changes have the potential to influence readers’ understanding of this novel. The effects of the alterations can be divided into two categories: local effect and global effect. By local effect, I refer to the effects of the alterations in the FBE of Summer that are specific to a sentence or a situation in the text. This category of changes does not affect the overall interpretation of the characters or the plot. Global effect refers to the effect of the alterations in the FBE that can affect readers’ understanding of the characters or the plot.
Local Effects
While the majority of the alterations in punctuation have been made in the FBE either for grammatical accuracy and stylistic consistency or for aligning the text with the MSS or the EWPFAE, at certain points, the change in punctuation enhances the dramatic effect of a sentence or a scene. For example:
| MSS | MME | FAE | FBE |
| “See here,” he said at length, in a low voice, as though utterance were difficult, “there’s something I’ve been wanting to say to you. I’d ought to have said it before. I want you to marry me.” (34, YCAL MSS 42 box 12 f. 352) | “See here,” he said at length, in a low voice, as though utterance were difficult, “there’s something I’ve been wanting to say to you. I’d ought to have said it before. I want you to marry me.” (51, Feb 1917) | “See here,” he said at length as though utterance were difficult, “there’s something I’ve been wanting to say to you; I’d ought to have said it before. I want you to marry me.” (33) | “See here,” he said at length, as though utterance were difficult, “there’s something I’ve been wanting to say to you. I’d ought to have said it before. I want you to marry me.” (17) |
| . . . he had added, philosophically, looking at her new shoes, and at the red ribbon that Mrs. Royall had tied in her hair . . . (61, YCAL MSS 42 box 12 f. 353) | . . . he had added philosophically, looking at her new shoes, and at the red ribbon that Mrs. Royall had tied in her hair . . . (56) | . . . he had added philosophically, looking at her new shoes, and at the red ribbon that Mrs. Royall had tied in her hair . . . (56) | . . . he had added, philosophically, looking at her new shoes, and at the red ribbon that Mrs. Royall had tied in her hair . . . . . . (28) |
In the first example, the addition of comma after “at length” in the MSS, in the MME, and in the FBE intensifies the dramatic effect of Mr. Royall’s difficulty of utterance when he first proposes marriage to Charity. The difficulty of utterance is further intensified by the use of a period after “you” in the MSS, in the MME, and in the FBE, while the FAE uses semicolon after “you.” Also, inclusion of the phrase “in a low voice” in both the MSS and the MME, justifies the use of a comma and period in this situation to retain the effect of Mr. Royall’s inner conflict; one the one hand, as he mentions earlier in this section of the novel, he is terribly lonely and wants to find a companion in Charity. While on the other hand, he understands the brutality of forcing himself on a young woman whom his wife brought down from the Mountain and raised in his household.
The second one is an example of heightened mood since the use of two commas in the MSS and in the FBE, one after “added” and another after “philosophically,” is more consistent with Liff Hyatt’s philosophical mood. Hyatt’s philosophical mood is evoked by his observation of Charity’s shoes and red ribbon that reaffirms the difference between Hyatt and Charity, even though both of them come from the Mountain. Thus, the pauses are more aligned with the dual action in this scene––the action of looking at Charity and the action of philosophical thinking.
In addition, in some instances, commas are deleted to increase the tempo of the utterance where the emotional state of the characters demands that. The following example is taken from the section when Mr. Royall and Charity meet for the first time after the first proposal. Even though both of them are silent during the dinner, the omission of comma in the MSS, the MME, and the FBE heightens the tension between the two characters and draws our attention to the fact that this is not their regular “usual” dinner moment:
| MSS | MME | FAE | FBE |
| The next day when Mr. Royall came back to dinner they faced each other in silence as usual. (42, YCAL MSS 42 box 12 f. 352) | The next day when Mr. Royall came back to dinner they faced each other in silence as usual. (52, Feb 1917) | The next day, when Mr. Royall came back to dinner, they faced each other in silence as usual (40) | The next day when Mr. Royall came back to dinner they faced each other in silence as usual. (20) |
There are significant number of word and phrase level variations exist across the editions and many of the variations in the FBE are closer to the MSS and they enhance the dramatic intensity of a particular moment or a scene. For example, toward the end of Chapter 6, when Harney and Charity are preparing to return to North Dormer from the Mountain, some variations are noticeable in the following section:
| MSS | MME | FAE | EWPFAE | FBE | |
| Ch 6 Phrs Ins Word Change | Harney untied the horse & <fol> wrapped the horse-blanket about Charity, and they drove off through the falling rain, which was already beaded with sunlight. (99, f. 354) Note: Wharton started writing “folded” but later changed her mind and wrote “wrapped.” See <fol> in the above example | Harney untied the horse, and they drove off through the diminishing rain, which was already beaded with sunlight. (64, Mar 1917) | Harney untied the horse, and they drove off through the diminishing rain, which was already beaded with sunlight. (87) | Harney untied the horse, and they drove off through the diminishing rain, which was already beaded with sunlight. (87) | Harney untied the horse and folded the horse-blanket about Charity, and they drove off through the diminishing rain, which was already beaded with sunlight. (45) |
Compared to the renditions of this section in the MME and in the FAE, the renditions in the MSS and the FBE exemplify a perfect beginning of a Summer love story. And insertion of the phrase enhances the romantic intensity of this moment––on the one hand, there is “falling” or “diminishing” rain “beaded with sunlight;” and on the other hand, Harney’s chivalrous gesture of “wrapping” or “folding” the blanket about Charity. In the earlier scenes where we see Harney and Charity together, we do not see such intimate gesture on the part of Harney and insertion of this phrase makes his growing admiration for Charity clearer.
Similar to the variations in words and phrases, some sentence level alterations have been made in the FBE that provide greater insights into the action of the characters. For example, a sentence has been added to the following section in Chapter 17––this is a moment in the novel when Charity decides to leave the Mountain:
| MME | FAE | EWPFAE | FBE | |
| Ch 17 Sent Ins | . . . only one sensation had the weight of reality; it was the bodily burden of her child. But for it she would have felt as rootless as whiffs of thistledown the wind blew past her. Her child was like a load that held her down, and yet like a hand hat pulled her to her feet. She said to herself that she must get up and struggle on. . . . (32, Aug 1917) | . . . only one sensation had the weight of reality; it was the bodily burden of her child. But for it she would have felt as rootless as whiffs of thistledown the wind blew past her. Her child was like a load that held her down, and yet like a hand hat pulled her to her feet. She said to herself that she must get up and struggle on. . . . (264-265) | . . . only one sensation had the weight of reality; it was the bodily burden of her child. But for it she would have felt as rootless as whiffs of thistledown the wind blew past her. Her child was like a load that held her down, and yet like a hand hat pulled her to her feet. She said to herself that she must get up and struggle on. . . . (264-265) | . . . only one sensation had the weight of reality: it was the bodily burden of her child. That was an anchor holding her to earth; but for it she would have felt as rootless as whiffs of thistledown the wind blew past her. Her child was like a load that held her down, and yet like a hand hat pulled her to her feet. She said to herself that she must get up and struggle on . . . (139) |
Insertion of the sentence “That was an anchor holding her to earth” in the FBE provides more insights into Charity’s action from this point onward. The encounter with her dead mother and the sight of her grotesque dead body stirred her motherly instinct. Even though she does not reflect on the fact that her mother saved her from the degenerated existence of the Mountain by giving her up, but the encounter has significantly influenced her decision of fighting for life to save her child from a degenerated life––something that her mother has done in the past. And the insertion of that sentence, particularly the fact that her child is her “anchor” connecting her to earth, or in other words, to life, intensifies her mental, emotional, and physical efforts in getting up and struggling on for the sake of her child. These efforts culminate in her acceptance of Royall’s offer of returning to North Dormer as Mrs. Royall. And seeing the outline of the buggy driven by Mr. Royall right after this paragraph is a testament to this transformation in her, as for the first time in the novel, she feels relieved to see him. Since the MSS does not have last couple of chapters, we cannot say if this insertion was in the original MS or has been later suggested by Wharton.
Global Effects
In case of alterations that can have global effects include capitalization and lexical changes. Compared to the MSS, the MME, and the FAE, the FBE is more consistent in terms of the use of capitalization. For example, in a couple of places, the FAE uses lowercase “m” to refer to the Mountain (see p. 50 and 55), while the FBE consistently capitalizes “Mountain” throughout the text. Similar to the FAE, the MSS and the MME use both lowercase “m” and uppercase “M” (See the MSS, p. 7, f. 351 and p. 61, f. 353; and the MME, p. 8, Feb 1917). Also, there are some random capitalizations in the FAE; for example, the “Crimson Rambler” is capitalized in page 23 and 27 of the FAE, even though the MSS, the MME, and the FBE do not capitalize “crimson rambler” (See the MSS p. 21, f. 351; the MME p. 10, Feb 1917; and the FBE p. 11). Note that none of these inconsistencies regarding capitalization in the FAE have been corrected by Wharton in her copy of the FAE. However, due to the consistency in terms of overall usage of capitalization in the FBE, capitalization can have interpretive implications for the readers. For example, in all the instances where Mr. Royall is referred to as “Lawyer Royall,” the MSS, the MME, and the FAE use small cap for “lawyer,” while FBE consistently uses capital “L” for “Lawyer.” Thus, in the FBE, “Lawyer” becomes a part of Royall’s name and identity, since his profession gives him the status and power that he enjoys in North Dormer.
In addition, the word “court,” mentioned only once in the novel, is capitalized in the MSS (p. 79, f. 354), in the MME (p. 62, March 1917) and the FBE (p. 37), while the FAE uses small cap for “court” (p. 72). While the MSS, the MME, and the FAE capitalizes the pronouns that refer to both God and Christ in Mr. Miles’s recitation during Mary Hyatt’s funeral (See the MSS p. 174, f. 358; the MME p. 56, July 1917; and the FAE p. 255), the FBE does not capitalize those pronouns, except on page 136 where Charity refers to God as “Him.” In another instance, where Dr. Merkle refers to Charity’s marriage in Episcopal Church, the FAE capitalizes “’Piscopal” (287), while the MME and the FBE do not capitalize “’piscopal” (See the MME p. 42, Aug 1917; and the FAE p. 151; this section is not available in the MSS). However, note that the FBE capitalizes the full form of Episcopal on page 4. The last instance in the novel where an interesting capitalization can be seen is toward the end when Charity writes the final letter to Harney. Even though “post office” is not capitalized in the MME and in the FBE throughout the novel (See the MME p. 52, Feb 1917 and p. 53, July 1917; and the FBE p. 18 and 119), “Post Office” is capitalized in final two references in the MME and in the FBE (See the MME p. 42, Aug 1917; and the FBE p. 152). None of the references to the post-office in the MSS and in the FAE use uppercase “P” (See MSS, p. 36, f. 352 and p. 141, f. 358; and the FAE p. 36, 228, and 288). It is not certain how the final two references to post-office look like in the MSS, since last couple of chapters are missing from the existing manuscript. However, as illustrated by above-mentioned examples, the MSS and the MME are similar in terms of capitalization. Thus, we can assume that perhaps the final two references to post-office were capitalized in the MSS.
When seen separately, some of the examples of capitalization in the FBE can be attributed to the desire for aligning the FBE to the original MS of Summer and some can be attributed to the stylistic preference of the editor of Macmillan. However, seeing them as a cluster of capitalized words can provide us a deeper insight into Charity’s situation. Lawyer Royall, Court, the Mountain, and the final Post Office—together represent Charity’s perpetual entrapment in a pre-destined fate where Charity’s destiny is decided not by God, but by all these capitalized entities. Charity herself questions the existence of a merciful God after seeing Mary Hyatt’s dead body because, according to her, such a God cannot create a fate that Mary Hyatt has suffered. Seen from this perspective, Charity’s rebellion throughout the novel appears as a struggle between her fate and freewill. Her fantasy about Harney or about a life outside of North Dormer is constantly overshadowed by an acute awareness about her fate that is already sealed by her association with the Mountain. She repeatedly refers to the impossibility of the union between her and Harney, and her ultimate decision to free Harney off of any obligation in marrying her is also influenced by that sense of omnipresent inevitability.
Another example of global effect is the lexical variations that exist across the editions regarding Charity’s adoption, that can significantly influence our reading of Summer. In all instances where Charity’s adoption is mentioned, the MSS and the FBE use “Mrs. Royall,” while the MME and the FAE use “Mr. Royall.”
| MSS | MME | FAE | FBE |
| Occasion in her life, “My child, you must never cease to remember that it was Mrs. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (6, f. 351) | . . . occasion in her life: “My child, you must never cease to remember that it was Mr. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (8, Feb 1917) | . . . occasion in her life: “My child, you must never cease to remember that it was Mr. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (11) | Occasion in her life, “My child, you must never cease to remember that it was Mrs. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (5) |
| Charity could not recall the first sight of the house. She had been told afterward that she was ill of a fever when Mrs. Royall brought her down from the mountain; & she could only remember . . . (22, f. 351) | Charity could not recall her first sight of the house. She had been told afterward that she was ill of a fever when she was brought down from the Mountain; & she could only remember . . . (10, Feb 1917) | Charity could not recall her first sight of the house. She had been told afterward that she was ill of a fever when she was brought down from the Mountain; & she could only remember . . . (24) | Charity could not recall her first sight of the house. She had been told afterward that she was ill of a fever when she was brought down from the Mountain; & she could only remember . . . (12) |
| . . . commemorate Mrs. Royall’s disinterestedness in “bringing her down” . . . (22, f. 351) | . . . commemorate Mr. Royall’s disinterestedness in “bringing her down” . . . (10, Feb 1917) | . . . commemorate Mr. Royall’s disinterestedness in “bringing her down” . . . (24) | . . . commemorate Mrs. Royall’s disinterestedness in “bringing her down” . . . (12) |
| “. . . it was Mrs. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (32, f. 352) | “. . . it was Mr. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (51, Feb 1917) | “. . . it was Mr. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (31-32) | “. . . it was Mrs. Royall who brought you down from the Mountain.” (16) |
It is interesting that even though the original manuscript uses "Mrs. Royall," first two print editions of Summer, the MME and the FAE, change such an important information. Also, as the chart reveals, the MSS has one additional example of the information that Mrs. Royall brought Charity down from the Mountain (see the use of phrase in the second example of the chart). Even though in all the renditions of Summer, Mr. Royall informs Harney that he once brought a child down from the Mountain, this information appears to be a practical thing to do given the fact that Mrs. Royall was physically weak. Thus, the fact that Mrs. Royall brought Charity down from the mountain is a metaphorical expression that illustrates the fact that it was her intention to have Charity in their household (note that there is no information in the novel that can tell us whether she accompanied Mr. Royall in his journey to the Mountain or not).
Thus, the information that Mrs. Royall was instrumental in Charity’s adoption significantly shifts the relationship between Mr. Royall and Charity. In the MSS, this information is backed up by the fact that the “Royalls” did not legally adopt her (22, f. 351). However, in the MME, in the FAE, and in the FBE this information is presented in slightly altered form as these editions change “Royalls” into “he”––“he did not legally adopt her” (the MME 10, Feb 1917; the FAE 24; and the FBE 12). The presentation of facts regarding Charity in the MSS distances Mr. Royall from any kind of legal or emotional involvement that may show any fatherly instinct on his part. In fact, all the renditions mention that Charity knew that Mr. Royall is her guardian and her last name is not given by the Royalls but by the North Dormer community. Charity’s name and Miss Hatchard’s insistence that she has to be always grateful further highlights the fact that bringing her down was more of a charitable act on the part of Mrs. Royall that requires annual ceremonial commemoration.
However, all this additional information is overshadowed in the MME and in the FAE by the change of word from “Mrs.” into “Mr.” This change certainly shifts Mr. Royall’s role from a passive follower of his wife’s request to an active agent in Charity’s adoption. Additionally, this information can strengthen the incestual undertones in his feelings for Charity, even though at many points in the novel it has been made clear that his interest in Charity is the result of his terrible loneliness. In fact, when he first proposes to Charity, he himself mentions that he is a “lonesome” man.
However, the shift in information in the FBE once again changes the relationship dynamic between Mr. Royall and Charity. In addition to changing “Mr.” into “Mrs.,” the FBE also changes a word that is used by Julia Hawes when she sees Charity and Mr. Royall during the Fourth of July celebration. Notice the change of the word in the following chart:
| MSS | MME | FAE | EWPFAE | FBE |
| “. . . Here’s gran’pa’s little girl come to take him home!” (175, f. 359) | “. . . Here’s gran’pa’s little daughter come to take him home!” (64, May 1917) | “. . . Here’s grandpa’s little daughter come to take him home!” (150) | “. . . Here’s grandpa’s little darling come to take him home!” (150) | “. . . Here’s gran’pa’s little treasure come to take him home!” (77) |
While the MME and the FAE uses “daughter” to intensify the incestual undertones in Mr. Royall and Charity Royall relationship, and to a certain extent justifies Charity’s hatred for Mr. Royall, the FAE completely shifts that by changing “daughter” into “treasure.” On a sentence level, the word “treasure” intensifies the mockery that Julia intends to throw at Charity to drag her down to the status of a commodity in Royall’s household. However, on a narrative level, this change from “daughter” to “treasure” further emphasizes the fact that Mr. Royall did not possibly have any fatherly affection or love for Charity. Even Wharton’s preference for the word “darling” still has a strong incestuous undertone that the word “treasure” tones down.
Even though we do not know who exactly did initiate the change in the MME––Wharton or the editor of McClure’s Magazine, but it is certain that Wharton’s initial intention was to depict Mr. Royall as a complex character rather than a mere sexual predator. Hermione Lee argues that, “Mr. Royall, though banked down for a great deal of Summer (because we mainly see him through Charity’s eyes), is its most powerful and problematic character” (509). R. W. B. Lewis argues that Mr. Royall “is essentially a decent person, a kindly wreck of a man and still the most imposing figure in North Dormer, a sort of degraded god, and masterly characterization” (398). Lewis also informs us that in response to Berenson's admiration of Mr. Royall, “Edith exclaimed delightedly: “Of course he’s the book”” (397). Even though Wharton mentions in her letter to Macmillan that she could not correct the proof herself that resulted in several misprints in the FAE, it is very unlikely that Appleton made such a huge change (from "Mrs." to "Mr.") without Wharton's approval. Also, during a meeting, Dr. Donna Campbell mentioned that major changes usually needed to be approved by the author. Thus, we cannot say for sure if Wharton wanted to experiment with this change of information in the MME and in the FAE and then decided to go back to the original MS when she received mixed reviews on Summer after the publication of the FAE. Or was this change in the FBE a result of Macmillan’s business aspirations?
In his biography of Edith Wharton, R.W.B Lewis discusses how Summer evoked negative reactions among Wharton's contemporary reviewers:
Lewis also mentions that Wharton was "sternly reproved" by Sara Norton (Norton qtd. in Lewis 398). In her introduction to Summer, Laura Rattray mentions that one of the reasons for which Wharton’s contemporary reviewers criticized the novel was its incestuous undertones. Rattray quotes T. S. Eliot who predicts that Summer “will certainly be considered “disgusting” in America” (xvi). Such discomfort among the critics can lead us to interpret the FBE’s toning down of the incestuous undertones as one of Macmillan’s business policies. According to Towheed, “Macmillan’s contract terms for authors in the Anglo-American market improved not just with sales in either country, but also from the prospect that good sales figures there would translate into better sales in colonial markets, and vice versa” (“An Appreciative” 53). Towheed mentions that India was one of the biggest markets for McMillan (“An Appreciative” 53), while Frederick Macmillan’s letter to Wharton suggests that Macmillan also had a hold in the colonial market in Australia and began producing a colonial edition of Summer for literary markets in “Australia and elsewhere” (The Correspondence 190). Since the readership of the British Edition expanded beyond the Western literary culture, we can assume that this toning down of the incestuous undertones was perhaps Macmillan’s business move to make Summer more palatable for the colonial literary markets, especially in the East.a portion of the American literary press continued to bewail the fact, year after year, that one of country's most highly regarded writers (and a well-bred woman at that) persistently delved into subjects that gave offense to the genteel. (398)
Even though we do not know how Wharton perceived each of these alterations separately, her letter to Macmillan reveals her approval and appreciation of the FBE over the FAE of Summer. She says that “the English edition is so much better than the American edition that [she] prefer[s] to give it to [her] friends” (The Correspondence 195). Her faith in the quality of the editorial work of Macmillan and her approval of the first British Edition reinforce Jerome McGann’s claim that a literary piece is not a single author’s work, but a collaborative work of the author and the publishing industry (McGann qtd. in Williams and Abbott 85).
