1 Byron's Correspondence with John Murray, 1: 1811-1816 [Work In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Byron’s Correspondence with John Murray, 1: 1811-1816 [work in progress ] Edited by Peter Cochran Update June 2012. I’m grateful to Paul Curtis for his contributions. My thanks to David McClay, Rachel Beattie, and their colleagues at the National Library of Scotland. I am also very grateful to John and Virginia Murray for permission to quote (where necessary) texts from Byron’s Letters and Journals, ed. Leslie A. Marchand (John Murray 1973-1994). This is referred to as BLJ. LJM: The Letters of John Murray to Lord Byron . Ed. Andrew Nicholson, Liverpool University Press, 2007. Peach: Annette Peach: Portraits of Byron (Walpole Society reprint) 2000. Smiles: Samuel Smiles. A Publisher and his Friends: Memoir and Correspondence of the late John Murray with an Account of the Origin and Progress of the House, 1768-1843 . 2 vols. London John Murray 1891. The Byronic Hero The Byronic Publisher Most of the items in this section which are sent from London are not letters posted but notes delivered by hand. Whether Byron’s address is 4, Bennet Street, 2, The Albany, or 13, Piccadilly Terrace, he and Murray are within five minutes’ walk of one another. That most of the messages are so brief is tribute to the fact that their contents are the tip of an iceberg, the submerged part of which consisted of regular meetings and conversations. When Byron is out of town, his letters lengthen: and when in the two next sections he’s left the country, they lengthen a lot. Byron never addresses his publisher as “Dear Murray” while he’s in England, and when he’s on the continent he doesn’t do so until 1822, when their relationship is starting to break up. On May 1st 1814 he writes “Dear Murray” by mistake, but then deletes it and overlineates “Dear Sir” without bothering to start a fresh sheet. Murray meanwhile often employs the tone of Horatio (or, worse, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern) addressing Hamlet (“My honoured Lord” – “Your poor servant ever”). One can see why Murray said of Byron, “I very often wished he would go away”. Very sad is the letter in which Murray asks Byron when his wedding is – the letter is written on January 2nd 1815. Byron almost gives Murray a heart attack at least three times – when he gives the copyright of The Corsair to R.C.Dallas, with apparent freedom to negotiate with someone else for it (see Murray to Byron, December 30th 1813); when he orders Murray to withdraw The Giaour and The Bride of Abydos and destroy them (see Byron to Murray, April 29th 1814); and lastly when, having ripped up the cheques which Murray has given him as an advance for The Siege of Corinth , he demands that the money be given to the dreadful William Godwin (see Murray to Byron, late January 1816). 2 While Byron is in London, Murray is to him not a friend but a professional functionary – it’s amusing to see how, as soon as he leaves town and thus the publisher’s vicinity, he becomes friendly and loquacious. How far Murray acts as his muse / critic is open to debate. In late 1813 it seems as if Byron has been asked for “some reflections” of an ethical nature to be put into the mouth of Selim in The Bride of Abydos , and similarly it appears (see Byron to Murray, June 27th 1814) that he improves the battle in Lara on a hint from Albemarle Street; but it’s not clear that either suggestion – neither of which is documented – comes from Murray himself, as opposed to one of his numerous Tory advisors. It’s possible to deduce how Byron’s texts of this period got into print. For example, six typesetters are employed to convert the manuscript of The Siege of Corinth into a proof; Hodgson, Gifford, or anyone who’s around and whose skill at “pointing” Byron trusts, then punctuate the poem; Byron loses his temper over the result, makes amendments, has new ideas, asks for a revise, or an errata page: and the result goes public, only to meet as often as not with another furious authorial reaction (or, in the case of The Giaour , with whole new sections). Systematic it isn’t – and is backed by no editorial theory at all! How would a well-trained, well-grounded modern academic editor cope with the emergencies of Albemarle Street, 1813? The possibility that Byron had a very low opinion of the poems he wrote for Murray while in London, and was as surprised by and ashamed of their success then as he was later, should be considered: see Byron to Murray, December 2nd 1813. On January 2nd 1816, Byron returns, torn into pieces, three cheques totalling 1,500 guineas which Murray has given him for The Siege of Corinth , in part to extricate him from the financial chaos which has enveloped him since his first term at Cambridge. To the uncharitable, it looks as if the publisher is anxious to save one of his two principal milch-cows (the other being Mrs Rundell, authoress of the cookbook). However, when we gather that Murray has also offered to sell all Byron’s copyrights, 1 and to buy much of his library so that he may have it back, we know that the timid, conservative, market- conscious, unctuous, two-faced, happily-married John Murray has finally succumbed, as everyone did, to the charms of his “mercurial” author, recognised him for the self-destructive child that he is, and that, as everyone did and still do, he has fallen in love with him. 1811 Byron to Murray, from Newstead Abbey, August 23rd 1811: (Source: text from NLS Ms.43487; LJ II 1; BLJ II 78-9) Byron’s first known letter to Murray. He dislikes the idea of Gifford reading Childe Harold . Newstead Abbey. Notts. August 23 d. 1811 Sir, A domestic calamity in the death of a near relation 2 has hitherto prevented my addressing you on the subject of this letter. – My friend M r. Dallas has placed in your hands a manuscript poem written by me in Greece, 3 which he tells <you> me you do not object to publishing. – But he also informed me in London that you wished to send the M.S. to M r. Gifford. – Now, though no one would feel more gratified by the chance of obtaining his observations on a work than myself there is in such a proceeding, a kind of petition for praise, that neither my pride 1:2 or – whatever you please to call it – will admit. – Mr. G. is not only the first Satirist of the day, but Editor of one of the principal Reviews. – As such, he is the last man whose censure (however eager to avoid it) I would deprecate by clandestine means. – You will therefore retain the M.S. in your own care, or if it must needs be shown, send it to another. – Though not very patient of Censure, I would fain obtain fairly any little praise my rhymes might deserve, at all events not by extortion & the humble solicitations of a bandied about M.S. – – I am sure a little consideration will convince you it would be wrong. – – If you determine on publication, I have some smaller poems 1:3 1: Smiles I 137. I do not find this massive gesture of generosity otherwise documented. 2: His mother, who died on August 1st 1811. 3: CHP I and II. It is not clear whether Dallas has given Mu. B.’s own Ms, or his (Dallas’s) copy, from which he has already deleted some offensive material. 3 (never published) a few notes, & a short dissertation on the Literature of the modern Greeks (written at Athens) which will come in at the end of the volume. – – And if the present poem should succeed, it is my intention at some subsequent period to publish some selections from my first work; – my Satire, 4 – another nearly the same length,5 & a few other things, with the M.S. now in your hands, in two volumes. – But of these hereafter. – You will apprise me of your determination. – I am, Sir, your very obed t. humble Serv t. Byron Mr. Murray &c. & c. & c. Murray to Byron, from 32, Fleet Street, London, September 4th 1811: (Source: not yet found in NLS Ms.43494; LJM 3-4) Murray’s first known letter to Byron, answering the previous item. His tone, and his anxiety to ensure orthodox content and above all a good sale, will be characteristic. London Septr. 4. 1811 Wednesday My Lord An absence of some days passed in the country, has prevented me from writing earlier in answer to your obliging Letter – I have now, however, the pleasure of sending under a separate cover, the first proof sheet of your Lordships Poem – which is so good as to be entitled to all your care to render perfect</ionate> – besides its general merits, there are parts, which I am tempted to believe, far excel anything that your Lordship has hitherto published, and it were therefore grievous indeed, if you do not condescend to bestow upon it, all the improvement of which your Lordships mind is so capable; 6 every correction already made is valuable, and this circumstance renders me more confident in soliciting for it your further attention – There are some expressions too concerning Spain & Portugal – which however just, and particularly so at the time they were conceived, yet, as they do not harmonize with the general feeling, they would so greatly interfere with the popularity which the Poem is, in other respects, so certainly calculated to excite, that, in compassion to your publisher, who does not presume to reason upon the subject, otherwise than as a mere matter of business, I hope your Lordships goodness will induce you to obviate them – and, with them, perhaps, some religious feelings which may deprive me of some customers amongst the Orthodox – could I flatter myself that these suggestions were not obtrusive I would hazard another, in an earnest solicitation that your Lordship would add the two more promissed Cantos, – and complete the Poem – – it were cruel indeed not to perfect a work which contains so much that is excellent – your Fame my Lord demands it – you are raising a Monument that will outlive your present feelings, 7 and it should therefore be so constructed as to excite no other associations than those of respect and admiration for your Lordships Character and Genius.