George Gissing: The Definitive Bibliography (review)

The use of the word 'definitive' on the title-page of this bibliography invites the closest scrutiny. After a long-winded introduction, the section describing George Gissing's 'Books and Pamphlets' (Section A) occupies no fewer than 444 pages. The remainder of the book is taken up with descriptions of his contributions to books (Section B) and to periodicals (Section C being short stories, D poetry, E articles and reviews, and F letters to editors). Section G describes published collections of letters, and H posthumous 'selections' (including short single pieces extracted from larger works). There are three appendices, on the 'Modern Library' editions of two troublesome titles, on 'The Lost Works', and listing 'Works by Other Members of the Gissing Family'. Finally there is a 'Selected Index'.

In his introduction Pierre Coustillas is dismissive of Michael Collie's earlier bibliography of Gissing (1975, revised edition 1985), saying that 'when a nonspecialist tried to grapple with the comparatively large quantity of material that was still imperfectly apprehended, that is the early English, American, Continental and Colonial editions [. . .] the results [. . .] were deplorable' (p. xvii). These words, like 'definitive', invite odious comparisons, for Coustillas is himself a 'non-specialist' and his struggles with the same mass of material are, in the end, flawed. I presume he is accusing Collie of not being a Gissing specialist. This is certainly not something one could say of Coustillas, who has edited, translated, and examined the author's works over the course of four decades. Coustillas is, however, a 'non-specialist' in the field of descriptive bibliography, and herein lie the main flaws of his book. It is riddled with bibliographical inconsistencies and inexactitudes. Coustillas has not grasped the basic rules of collational formulae or the correct and consistent use of square brackets. He struggles to convey ideas that can be simply expressed in conventional bibliographical language (for example 'The second leaf of each signature is signed; thus, first leaf B; second leaf B2' (p. 10) could properly have been summarized as '$2 signed', and 'Spine, and boards at front and back, covered in maroon [. . .] cloth' (p. 13) could simply have been expressed as 'Full maroon [. . .] cloth'). At times he uses 'reissue' as a synonym for reprint or new edition, and 'edition' to refer to any new form of a book, be it a new edition, impression, or issue. Quasi-facsimile transcriptions are not usually contained within quotation marks, but preceded by a colon, making it unclear at times where the transcription ends (even this is inconsistent, and as early as p. 6 we find a title-page verso transcribed within quotes, but without the line-endings marked). On p. 199 the title of an advertisement is apparently transcribed, being preceded by a colon, although the text is either highly inaccurate or not intended to be in quasi-facsimile. These transcriptions make no distinction between full and small capitals. The author is particularly interested in binding variants, but regrettably refers to no colour standard and sometimes uses fanciful names for the colours he mentions ('coffee' (p. 128) and 'caramel' (p. 400) are, to my mind, flavours rather than colours). There is no discussion at all of the papers used to print Gissing's books, although it must be admitted that this is, for the most part, of small significance.

Structurally the bibliography attempts to impose order on a complex and chaotic publishing history, and only partly succeeds. Each first edition is generally described in depth, but for subsequent editions, reprints, and reissues the amount of detail varies considerably and seemingly with no rationale. There are some very odd individual descriptions: item A36 consists only of a note on the three forms of publication of the poem 'Hope in Vain', two in collected works and one as a pamphlet, concluding with a very brief description of the pamphlet. It would have been sensible for Coustillas to have included a separate list of sources; as it is, he is obliged...