As early American scholars seeking to analyze the literary representations of unruly women, we must first understand the text as a material artifact, an object that circulated in and had meaning for specific readers who lived in a particular socio-cultural moment. By considering the text as an artifact, we draw closer to understanding how the text functioned in its original context. While we may be unable to travel to archives in Boston, New York, or Philadelphia, we can look at digitized or microfilm images of the original objects and learn about how particular texts looked, felt, and circulated. To that end, our initial research activities will introduce us to our chosen texts as material objects.
Question 1: When, where, and by whom was your text first printed?
Answer: When: Because the common place book was unpublished, there is no publication date. According to the scholars Blecki and Wulf, authors of the modern edition, the entries were compiled during the middle years of the American Revolution, between 1760 and 1770.
That is not to say that the contents were necessarily written between this time frame. Blecki notes the earliest poem is from 1704 and the latest, 1788. Wulf notes that “[s]ignificant clusters of material are dated between 1764 and 1769 and from 1773 through 1776” (38).
Where: Milcah Martha Moore resided in the Delaware Valley area in Pennsylvania, amongst Quakers (aka the Society of Friends).
By whom: Moore was the only known transcriber, but none of the entries were written by her. The three main contributors were Susanna Wright, Hannah Griffitts, and Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson.
There are 13 unidentified authors that are possibly men; the rest of the entries are by women. There are at least 16 distinct authors.
Not all of the content of the commonplace book is original prose and/or poetry. Reprints of original content by “noted intellectuals and prominent colonials, Quaker and non-Quaker, and people from many sides of the debate over the American Revolution” (xiii) are scattered throughout.
Speculation: The creation of a commonplace book speaks to me of commitment, passion for literary expression, creativity, generosity, and a keen mind.
Moore’s commonplace book was a creation meant for sharing and delighting in the works of her friends and family, to showcase their talents and to preserve their work. It’s a physical representation of her love for them (and their love for her). It’s obvious this book was a long-term commitment, requiring careful thought in terms of editorship.
Plus, the act of carefully handwriting 132 pages of prose and poetry, making sure it was legible for her intended audience, must have been exhausting. I know my handwriting is terrible and it would have taken a great deal of concentration for me to accomplish her feat.
I find it fascinating that the book was complied during the middle years of the American Revolution, perhaps when it felt to Moore and her friends and family that no end to the war or a happy solution was in sight. I am eager to begin reading through the entries to see the war through the lens of Moore, a Quaker and Loyalist.
My previous experience has always been through men’s writing – Franklin, Adams, Jefferson, etc. And most of those writings were strictly political.
Question 2: How often was your text reprinted? List all of the reprints. Do not confuse dates of publisher’s/printer’s birth and death with reprint dates.
Answer: A modern edition was edited by scholars Catherine La Courreye Blecki and Karin A. Wulf and published in 1997.
Blecki, Catherine L., and Karin A. Wulf, eds. Milcah Martha Moore's Book: a Commonplace Book from Revolutionary America. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State UP, 1997. Print.
The original commonplace book is located in the Edward Wanton Smith Collection, in the Quaker Collection Library at Haverford College, Pennsylvania. Its current status is “in house only” and there are no digitized copies of the original manuscript.
Moore, Milcah Martha. MS 955. Edward Wanton Smith Collection, Haverford College.
Speculation: What is most frustrating is the lack of a digitized copy of the actual manuscript. I haven’t contacted the Edward Wanton Smith Collections yet, but I do want to find out if the text is even available for scanning, photocopying and/or photography. Though Blecki and Wulf state that the text is in excellent condition, that doesn’t mean it will withstand the scanning or photocopying process.
The modern edition does contain a picture of the title page as well as a picture of two pages containing two poems, but it’s not the same as having an actual copy.
I should state though, that I am satisfied that Blecki and Wulf made an accurate and complete transcription based on the “Notes on the Text” section. This section describes their textual methodology, which “maintains the eighteenth-century character of the text as Moore transcribed it with as few modifications as possible, while offering a readable text for twentieth-century students and scholars” (xxiii).
Question 3: What was the actual size of your text in inches or centimeters? What information can you find about its physical presence, binding, etc.? Do you think it was expensive or inexpensive?
Answer: The actual size of the text is 7 x 9 inches. It was originally bound in calfskin, but was rebound in sheepskin in 1969, presumably by the Quaker Collection Library.
There are 132 leaves with entries on both sides of the paper. There are no torn pages or holes in the paper. Scholarly research by Blecki and Wulf has determined that Moore was the only transcriber, and they praise her “clear and regular” handwriting (xiv).
The text is in excellent condition, with the scholars reporting the only problem is “gradual fading of the ink” (xiv) that prevents the distinguishing between a comma and a period.
As to whether or not the process of creating a commonplace book was expensive or inexpensive, I turned to Cathy Davidson’s Revolution and the Word. She states, “[m]oreover the suspension of trade with England during the war greatly encouraged local industry – both native printing and the manufacturing of paper, press, ink, and type” (Davidson 74). The book was written mostly during the middle years of the Revolution, and therefore it stands to assume that previously expensive paper (that had to be imported from England) would decrease in price.
Even better, Moore’s location within the Delaware Valley places her at the hub of this native industry: “[f]urthermore, Pennsylvania was also a center for papermaking in America. There were over one hundred paper mills in the state by 1800 and just over two hundred by the time of the 1810 census” (Davidson 81).
Therefore, I am assuming that for Moore, who while not fabulously wealthy, paper was not the most expensive item on her grocery list. I would almost assume the most expensive part of the commonplace book production would have been the cover made of calfskin.
Speculation: The commonplace book was found amongst the papers of Daniel Smith (1792-1888), and donated by his great-granddaughter Sarah A. G. Smith in 1966 to Haverford College. Daniel Smith’s grand-mother was Margaret Hill Morris, sister of Milcah Martha Moore.
That the book was never thrown out, and was kept among personal belongings of family members for almost two hundred years speaks to its significance. This commonplace book, created by hand over a period of many years, was obviously loved, cherished and a keepsake of value.
I think it was very generous of Sarah Smith to donate her family’s heirloom so that the literary world, not just a private collector, could benefit from its contents.
Question 4: View the original title page using the digital database or microfilm. What is included there? Transcribe the exact words of all of the information listed on the title page. Or, make a PDF of this page if possible.
Answer: [Note: sometimes it is difficult to tell what letters are capitalized and which aren’t, so I guessed. Some words I was unable to figure out, and are marked with a question mark to indicate my confusion. See attached Stroup MMMB scans.pdf for title page actual]
SeTThe (?) . W. Reding. York
Susannah Wright
HSP – Has Poem To Exiles in Virginia by H. Grif (cut off)
Fidelia’s sisTer was Sarah griffitts .d July 19, 176 (cut off)
Martha Moore’s Book
[flourish]
Milcah Martha Hill
born Madeira
Married
Charles Moore
{her MoT (cut off)
Deborah d?
-dT Richard (cut off)
Sept. 29. 1 (cut off)
Amanda H. griffitts
p. 55
+24 – Aug. 4, 1761 birthday ____?
S.W.
Speculation: Considering the text is over 200 years old, the scan (or photograph) provided in the modern edition is very easy to read. There were only two words I was unsure of and I think that if I had time to study Moore’s handwriting and become familiar with her style, I would be able to figure out those words.
I think the best handwriting was reserved, at least on the tile page, for the title itself (“Martha Moore’s Book”) and it is garnished with a lovely yet simple flourish. It’s not that the rest of the text isn’t legible, it just looks less fancy and is a mixture of cursive and print, whereas the title is in cursive only.
The fact that Moore includes “Married Charles Moore” plus other ties of kinship, such as Heather and Sarah Griffitts (her cousins), reinforces the importance of kin amongst the Quakers. I am not sure, but I think the dates that have a “d” in front of them indicate dates of death, which could reflect the theme of mortality found within the manuscript itself.
Question 5: If there is more than one edition, compare the title pages. Note any differences here and keep PDFs of these pages, if possible.
Answer: N/A
Speculation: Because the commonplace book was a homemade journal, each production was a unique one. The commonplace books offer the opportunity of the creator and/or editor to explore different themes depending on what prose and/or poetry was included or excluded, thus creating a snapshot not only of the time period but also of the person creating the book.
Question 6: What miscellaneous front matter exists? Describe it:
- Frontispiece
- Engravings
- Preface
- Dedication
- Other
Keep PDFs of these pages.
Answer: Because there is no available digitized copy of the manuscript itself, I am unaware if any of these items exists within the book.
Speculation: Despite not knowing if there is a dedication or preface, it is telling that the first entry in the text is “An Essay on Friendship.” This commonplace book was meant for Moore’s friends and family, to be shared and read aloud, passed from person to person for their enjoyment. Perhaps this poem acts as a dedication, rather than a formal declaration.
Question 7: How long is your text? Is it broken into volumes and chapters or is it one big chunk? How many volumes and/or chapters? Is the print large and easy to read or dense, with many words on each page and lines close together.
Answer: The text is 132 leaves and contains 126 distinct entries. Out of these 126 entries, about 100 pieces are authored by women, with 13 left unidentified (possibly men or women wrote them).
The majority of the entries are poetry, or verse. Included are “mediations, exchanges of poems between women, and a paraphrase of a Quaker testimony” (xiii).
Verse themes include “contemplative, political, or comic” (xiii). The prose entries include “letters, a journal, and other brief prose pieces” (xiii).
According to Blecki, the text is divided into four informal sections. The first, MMMB 1-29, concentrates on “authorial and thematic unity” (67) and presents the poetry of Wright, as well as highlight the relationship between the Wright and Griffitts. The second, MMMB 30-47, presents the poetry of Griffitts.
The third, MMMB 48-70, contains all poetry except two prose selections and “opens up religious and social issues to voices outside Moore’s family” (67). The fourth, MMMB 71-126, presents the “tensions in the Quaker community” (68), which illustrates the colonists being drawn into the Revolutionary War.
A picture of two pages of the text, MMMB 81 and 82, reveal that Moore’s handwriting is clear and legible. The print that was present on the title page has vanished, replaced with cursive. There is enough space between the lines that the text doesn’t appear to be crowded. MMMB 82 has some notes in the margin, presumably written by Moore, but even those lines, though smaller, are still legible.
Speculation: While reading through the two essays by Blecki and Wulf to find my facts, I have fallen in love with Moore. She appears to be an amazing woman with extraordinary editorial skills, in addition to her mastery of letter writing. I most admire her abilities as an editor, because I too like to edit. I was involved in a literary magazine in high school my senior year, and for two years in college, I was involved with the production of “Scribbler,” our literary magazine.
I don’t think my own writing is that accomplished and I have never felt that burning need to express myself through writing, something that occasionally fills me with guilt. After all, English majors are supposed to want to write, and write well. Instead, I enjoy reading other people’s work and helping them improve it. I feel like I have a connection with Moore, a woman who died a 152 years before I was born. She gives me a sense of hope, I suppose.
Question 8: What back matter exists (following the end of a text, usually signified by the word “finis”)? Sometimes lists of subscribers or other works from this printer or bookseller are mentioned here.
Keep PDFs of these pages.
Answer: Because there is no available digitized copy of the manuscript itself, I am unaware if any of these items exists within the book.
Speculation: Despite not knowing about the back matter, I do know that many men and women were exposed to Moore’s book because of the research done by Blecki and Wulf. They state “[t]his book then, is part of a long conversation conducted in letters and verse among Moore’s circle of family and friends” (2). Not only was Moore exposing her friends and family to poetry and verse she found and liked, they were doing the same with her and each other. These surviving letters allowed Blecki and Wulf to fill in the background of Moore’s life and the society in which she lived, details necessary to know in order to decode the importance and significance of her commonplace book. It seems that the commonplace book was a more formal, organized, and condensed version of these “long conversations” via letters and gatherings (aka salons).
Question 9: Given all of the above, what might you wish to include as you think about creating a virtual/physical site for your project (your blog)?
Answer: I know that I want to include scans of the student produced commonplace books from Dr. Logan’s previous undergrad class, to show my audience how a modern reader approaches the medium of a commonplace book.
I am also extremely tempted to create my own commonplace book and make it public on the blog as well, especially recording my process of creation. How do I decide what pieces will be included and/or excluded? Do I make an actual journal or do I make it a blog? Is there a way to add video and music to a written journal?
Perhaps most importantly, will this project of my own commonplace book be too distracting in terms of completing my own research + blog? Knowing myself, perhaps, but I’ll have to make sure to keep myself in check.
Speculation: As I was reading through the essay by Wulf, I came across the following quote:
“Whether she was corresponding with someone across the Atlantic or simply across the Delaware River, the words she wrote reinforced bonds of intimacy and common knowledge” (22). (My emphasis).
I immediate wrote it down in my notebook, and I knew “Bonds of Intimacy” would be the name of my project and blog. Because I had already decided to pursue the idea of the lesbian continuum presence in early American literature (inspired by our class discussion of “From Monster to Martyr” by Ann G. Myles), I felt this would be a perfect description of my attempt to prove that this commonplace book is a physical representation of these women’s intimate bond and/or relationship.
I am looking forward to expanding my sphere of knowledge, as I have no experience in Queer Theory whatsoever. And in fact, I couldn’t help myself, I created my blog already:
http://bondsofintimacy.blogspot.com
Works Cited:
Blecki, Catherine L., and Karin A. Wulf, eds. Milcah Martha Moore's Book: a Commonplace Book from Revolutionary America. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State UP, 1997. Print.
Davidson, Cathy N. Revolution and the Word: the Rise of the Novel in America. Oxford (GB): Oxford UP, 2004. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment