“
Even though many historical editors have practised critical editing in the sense that they have normalised or regularised certain features of their texts, and have not simply produced diplomatic transcriptions, many of them have not been able to see the value of the further step that literary editors have taken when dealing with multiple texts of a single work, the step of emending one text with variants from another. Not having progressed beyond this elementary stage in the process of thinking about editing, they have not been in a position to enter into the more sophisticated discussions of historicism in critical editing. It is an unfortunate fact that what historians have published on the subject of editing has not contributed to the development of editorial theory.
- G. Thomas Tanselle, Textual Criticism Since Greg: A Chronicle 1950 - 1985, p.112
Apparently, the rivalry between historical editors and literary editors got nasty in the mid-1980s. The search for the most esoteric pwnage in history continues.
I was entertained for days (literally) when I read this. This is the difference between you and me.
