F. Scott Fitzgerald's "Babylon Revisited": A Long Expostulation and Explanation Thomas A. Larson, M.A.

Contents and Introduction

The variations and errata of the various texts of "Babylon Revisited" show how greatly texts may differ from volume to volume. These differences in the texts result from editorial decisions, editing and proofreading errors, typesetting mistakes, and their perpetuation in subsequent volumes. The following discussion notes some of these:

Some variations are simply the stylistic preferences of the editor. Variations in spelling indicate these decisions by the editor; see "travelled," "meagre," "sceptically," "pedalled," "focussing," and "travelling"; see also "check," "realize," and "recognized." The British texts all use "Good-bye"; the American texts do not have the e at the end of the word. Editors, however, are not always consistent in these spelling variations within the same text; note "traveled" and "travelling" (to double the l or not?) in Stories, Babylon Revisited, and Fitz Reader; and though realized is spelled with an s in place of the z in Bodley Head (164), the same text also has "realized" (Bodley Head 442:21) and "realizing" (Bodley Head 434:20).

Other editiorial decisions include matters of punctuation. Should quais and quai be italicized? The editions of Portable Fitz, Stories, Babylon Revisited, Bodley Head, and The Crack-Up all believe so; although the words are French in origin, they have been Anglicized, so italics are not needed. Sometimes hyphens are used in compound words and to separate an affix from its base; sometimes not: note the variations of "redirected," "armchair," and "dining room."

Editing errors abound in the texts, and mistakes would be missed by proofreaders as well: The article a is inserted before the word girl in the phrase "a boy and girl" in Stories, Babylon Revisited, Bodley Head, and The Crack-Up. The sentence "It won't happen again" is omitted from Stories and Babylon Revisited, and the sentence "It didn't seem any use working any more, so I quit" is omitted from Bodley Head and The Crack-Up. In Taps, 2nd, "questioningly" becomes "questionably."

Obvious typesetting mistakes include two in Taps, 2nd: First, having two she's in "Honoria and she she wanted"; the first she should be that, and second, having a c in place of the v in "I've." Babylon Revisited changes "when" to "where." Bodley Head moves the sentence that begins " 'Qu'elle est ...' " to the next line, but does not create a new paragraph in doing so; the sentence should have remained part of the previous paragraph in any case.

Examining the variations and errata reveals a relationship among them that would not otherwise be apparent. The 1935 Taps at Reveille, of course, appears first, and we could call that text the first generation. The 1945 Portable Fitz, appearing next, is necessarily second generation, having used Taps at Reveille as its source.

The 1951 Stories, though using some of the same stylistic changes in Portable Fitz, clearly returns to Taps at Reveille for its source, returning the double l to "travelling" and returning to the original spelling for "sanitarium"; Stories may be considered second generation as well. Unfortunately Stories has many other variations and errata in its text; unfortunate because later texts would use Stories as a source.

The 1960 Babylon Revisited obviously uses Stories as its source (its variations and errata being identical in nature) and adds three of its own errata, including one in which a hyphen is placed after the first o in tomorrow, simply because Stories placed an end-of-line hyphen in that spot (Stories 399:13-14). Babylon Revisited is a third generation text.

The 1960 Taps, 2nd returns to Taps at Reveille for its text, but it is a second edition, and while it does good things like returning to Taps at Reveille for its spellings of words such as travelled, meagre, and sceptically, Taps, 2nd does not make some needed emendations and creates other errata of its own. Note "hailed him!" and "bonne à toute faire" and the paragraph on typesetting mistakes above, in addition to other problems. Taps, 2nd is second generation.

The 1963 Fitz Reader returns to Taps at Reveille as well, and can be considered second generation, but Stories did have at least a minor influence which is noted through its use of "chi-chi."

The 1989 Short Stories is the best of all the texts. Returning to Taps at Reveille, and thus second generation, it makes necessary emendations to Taps at Reveille, and creates very few variations or errata of its own. The problems it has are dwelt upon in Chapter 2 of this study.

The first of the British texts, the 1951 Borrowed Time, also uses Taps at Reveille as its source and so is second generation, and again, because it returns to Taps at Reveille, it has retained spellings such as those mentioned above for the 1960 Taps, 2nd, but Borrowed Time retains other problems while creating additional ones. Note "to cross Bernaise" and "bonne de toute faire" and the missing comma after moment in "a moment seeing a faint" and two different spellings for sanitarium: "sanatorium" and "sanatarium." Other variations include British preferences for the spellings of "check" and "Good-by" in the text: "cheque" and "Good-bye." Note also the insertion of hyphens in the words "ill health," "armchair," "dining room," and four times for "Good night" with the hyphen, but once without (Borrowed Time 364:14).

The 1961 Bodley Head admits to using Stories (copyright page) but seems to have referred to another source as well, which could have been Borrowed Time (though we must also recognize the possibility that a text of "Babylon Revisited" in a general literature anthology may have had an impact as well); this other source was clearly not Taps at Reveille. Whatever the mix of sources for Bodley Head, it is minimally third generation. The unique mistakes found in Stories are recreated in Bodley Head. These errors include the article a placed before "girl" and the word else inserted after "Everything" in the sentence "Everything wore out." Other errata in Stories, however, are corrected in Bodley Head, such as the reinstating of the sentence " 'It won't happen again' " (Bodley Head 434:29); although, bemusedly, Bodley Head omits the sentence preceding it: "It didn't seem any use working any more, so I quit." Bodley Head also contradicts its own stylistic devices: the period after the title Mr. is omitted in all cases except one (Bodley Head 422:34).

The 1965 The Crack-Up uses Bodley Head as its source, making The Crack-Up fourth generation. Its copyright page cites Bodley Head, and in addition to variations and errata found in its source, The Crack-Up adds a few of its own. In addition to those items previously mentioned in the introductory paragraphs to this discussion, mistakes include an s added to "afterward" and "toward" and "cagy" becoming "cagey."

The only text of "Babylon Revisited" in a Fitzgerald collection for which I have not listed variations and errata is the Armed Services Edition of "The Diamond as Big as the Ritz" and Other Stories (New York: 1946. 55-78). I have not been able to locate a copy of it in libraries located in the proximity of southeastern Minnesota, southwestern Wisconsin, eastern Iowa, or northwestern Illinois in a search via the University of Minnesota's Gopher computer program via the Telnet. As the rarity of the text itself prevents an evaluation of it, I substitute here others' comments on the text of "Babylon Revisited" in the Armed Services Edition.

A history of the Armed Services Edition is not out of order here; the excerpt printed below is from an article by Paul H. North, Jr., that appeared in The American Book Collector in 1963. A brief note on "Babylon Revisited" appears toward the end of the same article, and this note would cause a minor controversy over consideration of the texts of "Babylon."

A CERTAIN series of paperbacked editions, first issued twenty years ago, in 1943, is providing an interesting problem for bibliophiles and bibliographers. The books are called "Armed Services Editions," and were issued by the Council of Books for Wartime (composed of representatives of the leading publishers), for the Army and Navy in World War II. The project was discontinued in 1947, and Editions for the Armed Services, A History (1948) gives much information on the project, listing the 1324 books issued gratis for the overseas armed forces. The government paid 6¢ each for the books; a 1¢ royalty was split by the author and the original publisher, when not in the common domain. Titles included fiction and non-fiction of all types, including classics. Over 120,000,000 volumes were issued. This was the largest book publishing project in world history, up to this time. It is certain that the writings of many authors received vastly greater attention because of these editions. It seems also incontestable that the trend toward a "Paperback Revolution" received the crucial boost from this project. No copies were ever sold anywhere, or "dumped." These books were made to be thrown away, to be read by about 6 service men, and to be passed from man to man. The paper used was strong, cheap, woodpulp. The covers were frequently copied from the dust-jackets of the original editions. Today these books are almost as extinct as the passenger pigeon. (35)

North goes on to say that these Armed Services Editions are notable for a number of reasons, including that "The texts should be assumed to be that of the best available published edition of the time." He then offers "Babylon Revisited" as an example, stating that its text "in "Diamond as Big as the Ritz", was taken from the final, revised version first printed in 1945, and not from various 1931 or 1935 versions" (36). This particular statement would be labelled as "Misinformation" by Matthew J. Bruccoli, who in the Fitzgerald Newsletter wrote the following:

In an inept article on Armed Services Editions, in the Summer 1963 issue of American Book Collector, P. H. North, Jr. states: "... 'Babylon Revisited' in Diamond as Big as the Ritz, was taken from the final, revised version first printed in 1945. ..." What 1945 final, revised version? What nonsense!(6)

(Bruccoli's opinion has in no way mellowed with time. In a letter to me after reviewing an early draft of this portion of the thesis, Bruccoli wrote "ASE [Armed Services Edition] has no authority." He added, "North was a nut, and Bill White was a hack scholar.")

North responded to Bruccoli's note in a second article on the Armed Services Editions in 1964, first stating that the editor of the Fitzgerald Newsletter has "attacked me as inept and nonsensical." (25). North then attempts to prove that The Portable F. Scott Fitzgerald was "the first printing containing the final changes" and that these changes were effected by Fitzgerald himself (25). Though Fitzgerald was dead by that time, North leads the reader to believe that Maxwell Perkins, Fitzgerald's editor at Scribner's, was behind the changes on behalf of Fitzgerald. North states that this is "uncharted Fitzgerald wilderness" (25), and therein lies his problem; he fails to understand the history of textual changes as far as Fitzgerald stories are concerned, and does not seem to grasp the fact that variations and errata may result far beyond the control of the author.

As far as the particular text of "Babylon Revisited" in the Armed Services Edition, North does state that the text of the 1945 The Portable F. Scott Fitzgerald was the one "carried also in the special Armed Services Edition" (25).

As a result of the controversy concerning North's comments on the Armed Services Edition, William White studied the various texts of "Babylon Revisited" to examine the problem and to reach some conclusions. Ironically, White's article on the subject, entitled "Mr. North, Mr. Bruccoli and Fitzgerald," immediately follows North's second article on the Armed Services Editions in The American Book Collector. In discussing The Portable F. Scott Fitzgerald, White lists the changes made in the text, and then states "I don't know who made the changes for the Portable Fitzgerald: it may have been Fitzgerald before he died, though this doubtful; it may have been Perkins before permission was given to Viking ... I doubt if either Dorothy Parker or John O'Hara actually editied the Portable. The changes were made, and not by the printer" (26). Though Perkins is mentioned as a possibility by White, I find this highly doubtful, especially in light of the fact that the paragraph Fitzgerald wanted deleted from "Babylon Revisited," and Fitzgerald clearly made that desire known to Perkins (see Chapter 2 of this study) still appears in the Portable Fitzgerald. I believe some editor at Viking probably made the changes.

At any rate, White does go on to say that the changes made in the Portable Fitzgerald are merely "editorial corrections" (26), and "that to refer to the Portable printing as a `final, revised version' is a pedantic overstatement" (26). White does not make any comment specifically on the Armed Services Edition in this article, but he would in later ones. In an article titled "The Text of `Babylon Revisited' " published in the Fitzgerald Newsletter in 1965, White has this this to say about the Armed Services Edition:

"The Diamond as Big as the Ritz" and Other Stories faithfully follows TAR, correcting only two errors and part of a third, and has four mistakes of its own--one of them an inserted short sentence, "His voice was soft," p. 65, col. 1, l. 1, which has no authority whatever. (170)

Note that White is contradicting North's earlier statement that the Portable Fitzgerald had been used for the Armed Services Edition by stating that it follows the text found in Taps at Reveille. An expanded article by White on the subject of the texts of "Babylon Revisited" appeared in 1966 in The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America in 1966, but as far as the Armed Services Edition is concerned, it merely repeated the information found in the excerpt from the Fitzgerald Newsletter quoted above.

The information found in this appendix demonstrates how editions may vary greatly in their texts, the resulting importance of determining which text is definitive or the most reliable, and the responsibility editors and publishers have to ascertain the text being used is authoritative and without the taint of later editors and editions. The text of "Babylon Revisited" has suffered more than it has improved with the variations and errata down through the years; only the most recent edition of it in Matthew J. Bruccoli's The Short Stories of F. Scott Fitzgerald has restored "Babylon Revisited" to a minimum of textual problems.

Bruccoli, Matthew J. "Misinformation." Fitzgerald Newsletter. Ed. Matthew J. Bruccoli. Washington, D.C.: NCR/Microcard Editions, 1969. 139. Originally appeared in Fitzgerald Newsletter No. 24 (Winter 1964): 6.

North, Paul H., Jr. "Another Note on the ASE." American Book Collector 15 (November 1964): 25.

----------. "Was There Gold in the World War II Duffle Bag?" American Book Collector 13 (Summer 1963): 35-36.

White, William. "Mr. North, Mr. Bruccoli, and Mr. Fitzgerald." American Book Collector 15 (November 1964): 25-26.

----------. "The Text of 'Babylon Revisited.' " Fitzgerald Newsletter. Ed. Matthew J. Bruccoli. Washington, D.C.: NCR/Microcard Editions, 1969. 169-171. Originally appeared in Fitzgerald Newsletter No. 28 (Winter 1965): 4-7.

----------. "Two Versions of F. Scott Fitzgerald's 'Babylon Revisited': A Textual and Bibliographical Study." The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 60 (Fourth Quarter 1966): 439-452.