La Ponctuation du théâtre imprimé au XVIIe siècle (review)

Apart from those who make minor modifications, scholars preparing critical editions of early modern texts tend to follow one of two radically different principles with regard to punctuation: out-and-out modernization in order to offer the reader maximum clarity, or faithful reproduction of the original. In recent times, the latter has won favour among editors of seventeenth-century theatre, thanks to a renewed interest in the baroque voice and classical eloquence, reflected in influential works by Forestier, Green and particularly Chaouche (see FS, LVII (2003), 79–80), who maintained that the original punctuation was intended as a guide to declamation, since it indicated the pauses that an author wished to be made by the actors. However, the opening chapters of Alain Riffaud's welcome and painstaking study convincingly demonstrate the fragility of the premises on which this theory is founded, while the remainder of his volume shows it to be disproved by a careful examination of numerous play texts, including variant editions of an individual work and variant states of the same edition. It is in this detailed scrutiny, informed by the principles of material bibliography and a thorough knowledge of printing practices, that the major originality of Riffaud's work lies. In addressing the two fundamental questions of who was responsible for the punctuation and what function it fulfilled, he compares editions of a single work or of works by a single author that were brought out by more than one publisher or printer; within a single edition he contrasts different gatherings produced on different presses; he studies lists of errata, authors' and publishers' declarations, extant manuscripts of plays, and much other data capable of casting light on the complex relationships between authors, publishers and print-shop workers (compositors, correctors, etc.). From this methodical investigation overwhelming evidence is provided that playwrights were generally indifferent to punctuation, the use of which in published texts is attributable largely to the printers. While some of the latter were as negligent as the authors, others are shown to have treated punctuation and other aspects of layout more diligently and consistently; and among the best practitioners Riffaud is able to identify certain shared principles which guided the use of individual punctuation marks. These principles are revealed to be syntactical, concerned with facilitating the reader's ready comprehension of meaning. Not that typographers were unmindful of the theatrical dimension, as Riffaud shows in a fascinating chapter on the insertion of stage directions and the development of ellipsis marks to denote interrupted dialogue. IWt is simply that none of his multiple angles of enquiry provides the slightest evidence that punctuation of play texts was dictated by oratorical rather than syntactical considerations. Clearly written and liberally illustrated by helpful facsimile extracts, this is a work which future scholars preparing 'scientific' editions of seventeenth-century plays cannot afford to ignore – even though the advice proffered in the concluding chapter, regarding the criteria by which decisions should be made about the retention, modification or modernization of the original punctuation, will make the editorial task appear more daunting.