Fwd: Re: Up Stream

Madaline Reddy mac-reddy at sbcglobal.net
Tue Nov 14 12:27:34 EST 2006

Well, then, I am glad I posted! A brief comment can
bring forth a wealth of stunning information. Thank
you. I will read his book. There must be a good reason
why Theodore Dreiser has autographed copies of his

--- J B Krygier <jbkrygier at owu.edu> wrote:

> Begin forwarded message:
> From: Gordon Neavill <aa3401 at wayne.edu>
> Subject: Re: Up Stream
> To: modlib at algol.owu.edu
> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 21:22:38 -0500 (EST)
> I guess I must be one of the five people Toby is
> referring to. Here's  
> the scoop on Up Stream:
> The evolution of ML printings of Up Stream is more
> complex than  
> indicated in the Toledano Guide. Lewisohn's
> autobiographical volume  
> was originally published by Boni and Liveright in
> 1922. The B&L  
> plates were too large for the ML's format, so when
> Cerf and Klopfer  
> decided to add it to the ML in 1926 they had to
> reset the text. When  
> Lewisohn found out that the book was being reset, he
> asked to make  
> revisions in the text -- something that wouldn't
> have been possible  
> if the ML had been able to use the original plates.
> The revisions, he  
> told Klopfer, were of great moral and literary
> importance to him.  
> Most of the passages he rewrote concerned his wife
> Mary, from whom he  
> had separated since the book was originally
> published. He removed a  
> number of references to his wife in the ML edition
> and rewrote  
> others. For example:
> B&L text: "My father was, characteristically, aglow;
> he saw visions  
> of grandeur. My mother's womanly and solitary heart
> yearned over  
> Mary. So Mary and I were married and we all settled
> down in an old,  
> roomy house in Queenshaven. The house overlooked the
> bay and from our  
> study windows Mary and I watched the horned moon
> float over the  
> silken swell of the dark waters and listened to the
> tide...." (B&L,  
> p. 135)
> ML text, 1st printing: "My father was,
> characteristically, aglow; he  
> saw visions of grandeur. Mary, furthermore, insisted
> that we must be  
> married to save her honor and her very life. I was a
> gentleman still  
> and a Southerner. I tried to hope many things to
> still the fatal  
> monitions within me.... We all settled down together
> in an old house  
> overlooking the bay. But Mary's responsibilities to
> her family robbed  
> her of the power, even though she had had the will,
> to be my wife or  
> -- despite her age, the daughter of my parents. . .
> . She was a  
> middle-aged woman who had insisted on marrying a man
> not much older  
> than her oldest child. She acted like Dora
> Copperfield.... Something  
> indomitable must have been in me that I did not go
> under ... a  
> strength and a faith
." (ML 1st printing, pp.
> 159-60)
> Mary Lewisohn threatened to sue the ML for libel
> after she saw the ML  
> edition. She objected specifically to the passage,
> "Mary,  
> furthermore, insisted that we must be married to
> save her honor and  
> her very life."
> The second ML printing in November 1927 omitted the
> passage quoted  
> above and the following passage from the new
> introduction Lewisohn  
> wrote for the ML edition:
> "I say this in all humility and say it in order to
> record the fact  
> that the general texture of Up Stream remained free,
> has always been  
> free, of the unveracity that marked a small number
> of passages now  
> changed or expunged. Why, in my ardent search for
> the truth of  
> things, did I deliberately falsify one element in my
> life and draw  
> falsely one character? Through a mistaken
> kindliness? Yes. But more  
> through shame -- shame of the all but unbelievable
> physical and moral  
> facts. . . . That blot on the book has now been
> wiped out. . . . If  
> Up Stream is still worthy of being read; if it is
> worthy of being  
> remembered -- let it be read and remembered in the
> form in which it  
> is now definitively printed here. . . ."(1st
> printing, p. xi)
> The introduction occupies pp. vii-xii in the first
> printing. The  
> omission of the passage quoted above results in the
> introduction  
> appearing in the second printing on pp. vii-xi. But
> Mary Lewisohn was  
> not satisfied with the changes in the second
> printing. Three days  
> after the second printing was released, the ML
> agreed to drop the  
> introduction altogether and substitute the original
> Boni & Liveright  
> text for the revisions supplied by Lewisohn. The
> introduction was cut  
> out of all remaining copies of the second printing.
> The table of  
> contents which listed the introduction is also
> removed in all copies  
> I’ve examined. The stubs of four leaves remain
> visible. In  
> bibliographical terms, these copies constitute the
> second state of  
> the second printing.
> This should have settled the matter, but somebody
> made a huge blunder  
> when the third ML printing was made in July 1928.
> The third printing  
> retained Lewisohn’s introduction in violation of the
> settlement with  
> Mary Lewisohn. The three leaves containing the
> introduction were cut  
> out of the book, apparently before any copies were
> distributed. A  
> newly printed leaf with the note required by the
> ML’s agreement with  
> Mary Lewisohn, was pasted to the stub of one of the
> cancelled leaves.  
> The note reads: "The Modern Library announces with
> this definitive  
> edition, the final form of UP STREAM corrected to
> correspond with the  
> original text published by Boni and Liveright,
> 1922."
> There is a bibliographical puzzle with the third
> printing that I  
> haven’t resolved. In some copies the final gathering
> consists of 14  
> leaves with a fall 1928 ML list on the last two
> leaves (pp.  
> [301-304]). In others the final gathering consists
> of 16 leaves with  
> the fall 1928 list on pp. [301-304] followed by two
> blank leaves (pp.  
> [305-308]). It's unlikely that there would have been
> two separate  
> printings with fall 1928 lists both requiring the
> cancellation of  
> Lewisohn’s introduction. The printer may have
> realized during the  
> print run that the introduction had been included by
> mistake and that  
> a newly printed leaf would have to be added to the
> book with the  
> statement about the "definitive edition" quoted
> above. The printer  
> may have removed the plates for the final during the
> print run,  
> substituted two identical plates containing the
> statement "The Modern  
> Library announces with this definitive edition . .
> ." for the two  
> blank leaves, repositioned the plates on the press,
> a!
>   nd completed the printing with enough copies of
> the leaf that would  
> have to be tipped in to replace the introduction
> that had been  
> printed by mistake. This is the only explanation
> I’ve been able to  
> think of, but I’ll have to check with some printer
> friends to see if  
> this hypothesis is plausible.
> The fourth printing in spring 1929 appears to have
> been 
=== message truncated ===


More information about the ModLib mailing list