Chapter 17
CHAPTER 17
But after the little matter at the mess Billy Budd no more found himself in strange trouble at times about his hammock or his clothes-bag or what not. While, as to that smile that occasionally sunned him, and the pleasant passing word, these were if not more frequent, yet if anything more pronounced than before.
But for all that, there were certain other demonstrations now. When Claggart's unobserved glance happened to light on belted Billy rolling along the upper gun-deck in the leisure of the second dog-watch exchanging passing broadsides of fun with other young promenaders in the crowd; that glance would follow the cheerful sea-Hyperion with a settled meditative and melancholy expression, his eyes strangely suffused with incipient feverish tears. Then would Claggart look like the man of sorrows. Yes, and sometimes the melancholy expression would have in it a touch of soft yearning, as if Claggart could even have loved Billy but for fate and ban. But this was an evanescence, and quickly repented of, as it were, by an immitigable look, pinching and shrivellingshrivelling] A common 19th-century spelling (OED). the visage into the momentary semblencesemblance of a wrinkled walnut. But Sometimessometimes catching sight in advance of the foretopman coming in his direction, he would, upon their nearing, step aside a little to let him pass, dwelling upon Billy for the moment with the glittering dental satire of a Guise. But upon any abrupt unforseenunforeseen encounter a red light would forthwould forth] HM seems to have inadvertently omitted his verb, and a check mark in the left margin next to these two words suggests that HM (or his wife ESM) was aware of the problem. Accordingly, HS emends with "would flash forth." However, HM might have supplied any verb here, and since "forth" as a verb has precedence in medieval usage, MEL retains "would forth," as does NN. from his eye like a spark from an anvil in a dusk smithy. That quick fierce light was a strange one, darted from orbs which in repose were of a color nearest approaching a deeper violet, the softest of shades.
Tho'Though some of these caprices of the pit could not but be observed by their object, yet were they beyond the construeingconstruing of such a nature. the AndAnd the thewsthews] In MS, ESM underlined HM's inscription of this word and added a question mark above it, presumably querying the word itself, its usage, or spelling. "Thews" is an archaic term referring to masculine musculature and strength that had a renewed currency in 19th-century British and American poetry. of Billy were hardly compatible with that sort of sensitive spiritual organization which in some cases instinctivlyinstinctively conveys to ignorant innocenseinnocence aan admonition of the proximity of the malign. He thought the Master-at-arms acted in a manner rather queer at times. That was all. But the occasional frank air and pleasant word went for what they purported to be, the young sailor never having heard as yet of the
"too fair-spoken
REVISION NARRATIVE, in two parts: "too fair-spoken man." // Part 1. // In stage B, HM originally recorded Billy’s naïve acceptance of Claggart’s purported “frank air and pleasant word,” inscribing his sentence, in ink, on two manuscript lines: “the young sailor / was not yet of those who distrust.” In stage Ba (or even later), he deleted the second line of the inscription, first in pencil then in ink, and added new language in ink, including a quoted phrase, above and below the deleted line so that his revised sentence read: the young sailor / not having heard as yet of / the “too fair-spoken man.” HM later revised “not” to “never.” (To view the revision in manuscript, click on the leaf image thumbnail.) The source of the quoted phrase, which has eluded scholars for decades, is from the long Spenserian poem titled “The Castle of Indolence,” by Scot poet James Thomson (1700-1748): “The wise distrust the too fair-spoken man” (canto 1, stanza xxi). Thomson’s line succinctly cautions the gullible against the sweet-speaking “wizard” of his poem, and in it, HM found an apt expression for Claggart’s “too fair-spoken” deceit and Billy’s lack of experiential wisdom to guard against it.
According to the OED, “fair-spoken,” as an adjective connoting flattery and insincerity, had some currency before and after Thomson’s poem. However, it was a rare usage. One instance (not cited by OED) occurs in Walter Scott’s 3 October 1827 Journal entry, in which Lord Londonderry is called “a little too fair-spoken, otherwise very pleasant.” Though Scott’s Journal was published the year before HM’s death, as he was revising Billy Budd, it seems clear that he drew his quoted phrase—“too fair-spoken man”—directly from Thomson’s poem, and probably from his own library. In 1861 and 1862, HM had purchased different editions of Thomson’s Poetical Verse (one as a gift for his sister Fanny, one for himself; Sealts 515 and 516, respectively). But how HM retrieved the passage during his revision of Billy Budd more than 25 years later involves a curious set of coincidences. (To continue to Part 2, click on "man.")
man."
REVISION NARRATIVE: "too fair-spoken man." // Part 2. //
In a sustained correspondence beginning in 1884, Scotsman James Billson reported the growing appreciation of HM’s work in Britain, and introduced the writer to another Scot poet, also named James Thomson (1834-1882), who had been particularly praiseful. Billson also sent a copy of Thomson’s 1880 The City of Dreadful Night, and Other Poems (Sealts 517), which HM greatly admired. Included in this volume is Thomson’s 1859 response to the earlier Thomson’s work, a sequence of twelve Spenserian stanzas, titled “The Lord of the Castle of Indolence.” Later in their correspondence, Billson also sent HM two books of essays by the second Thomson, one of which (Essays and Phantasies, Sealts 518) included “Indolence: A Moral Essay,” which HM singled out as being “admirably honest” (NN Corres 492).
Two James Thomsons—with quite different takes on art, despair, Indolence, and the artist—now sat, in 1885, next to each other in Melville’s library. It is unlikely that HM could resist comparing the two Scot poets, not only because of their shared name but also for their Indolence poems and essay, and it is certain that at some point HM came upon Thomson the First’s apt line about wisdom, distrust, and the “too fair-spoken man.”
But exactly when HM’s research into the two Thomsons unfolded is a matter of speculation. One likely scenario is that the comparison may have happened during his correspondence with Billson, which continued as he was beginning to write Billy Budd, first as a poem excluded from the collection of mariner monologues in his 1888 John Marr, but before he conceived of Claggart in his revisions to the novella, which began as early as March 1889. In this perhaps too-early timeframe, Thomson’s line still would have sparked interest if only because of its resonance with HM’s last prose fiction, his comic novel about knaves, fools, and “No Trust,” titled The Confidence-Man, published in 1857. Another scenario places the trigger moment soon after Henry Stephens Salt (another admiring British writer) sent HM a copy of his 1889 Life of James Thomson, in February 1890 (Sealts 435). Markings in this volume occurred only as he was continuing to revise Billy Budd. It may be, then, that HM held on to the phrase in mind until the perfectly serviceable word “distrust” concerning Claggart and Billy nevertheless proved inadequate, and in revising, he replayed Thomson’s phrase, the “too fair-spoken man.” (For full Sealts citations and Matthew Giordano’s discussion of Melville’s marking of “City of Dreadful Night,” see Melville’s Marginalia Online https://melvillesmarginalia.org/intro.aspx?id=43.)
Had the foretopman been conscious of having done or said anything to provoke the ill will of the official, it would have been different with him, and his sight might have been purged if not sharpened. As it was (no comma in MS)was, innocenseinnocence was his blinder.
So was it with him in yet another matter. Two minor officers–the Armorer and Captainthe Armorer and Captain of the Hold] HM seems to vary in the number and names of the officers mentioned. Originally, he set up a series of "Certain minor officers" —"armorer, Captain of the Hold, and others"—however, he tentatively removed the "armorer" in pencil. Later, he then re-specified them as "two minor officers" and inserted "and" between the deleted "Armorer" (now capitalized) and "Captain." However, HM neglected to restore "Armorer." MEL restores this second officer, as do HS and NN. of the Hold, with whom he had never exchanged a word, his position in the ship not bringing him into contact with them; these men now for the first began to cast upon Billy when they chanced to encounter him, that peculiar glance which evidences that the man from whom it comes has been some way tampered with and to the prejudice of him upon whom the glance lights. Never did it occur to Billy as a thing to be noted or a thing suspicious, tho'though he well knew the fact, that the Armorer and Captain of the Hold, with the ship's-yeoman, apothecary, and others of that grade, were by naval usage, messmates of the master-at-arms, men with ears convenient to his confidential tongue;.
But the general popularity thatofof] HM originally wrote "that our Handsome Sailor's manly forewardness ...," thereby signaling a dependent clause, but the necessary predicate does not materialize. Instead of "that," HS emends to "came from," creating a main clause. MEL emends to "of" to preserve the complex sentence structure, as does NN. our Handsome Sailor's manly forewardness upon occasion, and irresisableirresistableNote text: irresistible] Melville writes "irresisable." HS emends to "irresistible," but "irresistable" is an acceptable alternate spelling (OED), and MEL emends to it, as does NN. good nature indicating no mental superiority tending to excite an invidious feeling; this good will on the part of most of his shipmates made him the less to concern himself about such mute aspects toward him as those whereto allusion has just been made. (period in MS)made, aspects he could not so fathom as to infer their whole import (no period in MS)importaspects ... import.] HM composed the text for this dependent clause in pencil, in the bottom margin, and without an insertion device. MEL includes it here, as do HS and NN..
As to the afterguardsman, tho'though Billy for reasons already given necessarily saw little of him, yet when the two did happen to meet, invariably came the fellow's off-hand cheerful recognition, sometimes accompanied by a passing pleasant word or two. Whatever that equivocal young person's original design may really have been, or the design of which he might have been the deputy (no comma in MS)deputy, certain it was from his manner upon these occasions, that he had wholly dropped it.
It was as if his precocity of crookedness (and every vulgar villianvillain is precocious) had for once deceived him, and the man he had sought to entrap as a simpleton, had through his very simplicity ignominiously baffled him.
But shrewd ones may opine that it was hardly possible for Billy to refrain from going up to the afterguardsman and bluntly demanding to know his purpose in the initial interview so abruptly closed in the fore-chains. Shrewd ones may also think it but natural in Billy to set about sounding some of the other impressed men of the ship in order to discover what basis, if any, there was for the emissary's obscure suggestions as to plotting disaffection aboard. Yes, shrewd may so so thinkany shrewd one may so thinkany shrewd one may so think] Melville wrote "any shrewd one would so think," then deleted "any" and "one," inscribing "may so" above the line. The resulting text of this uncompleted revision is "shrewd may so so think." MEL emends the obvious double wording to "so." However, the uncompleted revision text "shrewd" poses a problem. In his paragraph, HM's repetition of "shrewd ones" establishes a pattern of plurals, but in the original text of his new sentence his singular subject—"any shrewd one"—indicates a strategic breaking of the plural pattern. HM's subsequent deletion of "any" and "one" is ambiguous: it might indicate an intention to return to the plural, or an intention to find an alternative singular form (such as "a shrewd one," etc.). As it stands, the revision site oscillates between plural and singular possibilities. HS and NN emend with "shrewd ones," thereby reinforcing the plural. MEL emends by restoring the singular "any shrewd one.". But something more, or rather, something else than mere shrewdness is perhaps needful for the due understanding of such a character as Billy Budd's.
As to Claggart, the monomania in the man—if that indeed it were—as involuntarily disclosed by starts in the manifestations detailed, yet in general covered over by his self-contained and rational demeanor; this, like a subterranean fire was eating its way deeper and deeper in him. Something decisive must come of it.