Jennifer Formichelli wrote:
> I think a distinction should be made between commentary and editorial
> And of course, there is a difference between annotation
> and commentary. Any editor ought to distinguish between them.
Well, I'm an editor of sorts (website) but not professional so I may
be confused. Now that you've got me thinking about it this is how I
might differentiate using a TWL example.
Editorial matter - Translate "Poi s'ascose nel foco che li affina"
and say where it comes from.
Annotate - Give the story of the canto and mention where TSE and
others may have used it.
Commentary - Give an opinion of how the phrase and the allusion are
used in poem (in either an iterpretation or something slightly less
How'd I do? Guide me if you like.
> Here's my other question: I am rather uncertain that a volume of
> *commentary* is suitable for anyone less than rather familiar with
> what it is commentating on. How do you figure? And for editorial
> matter, well, I should think a beginner as well as a scholar might
> glean quite a lot from an excellent volume.
At my website I get to do all three and the reader can decide which to
even see by choosing which of several links to follow. Where I have
trouble is indicating what will be most productive for anyone but
especially for a beginner. Should I even bother with that? The
beginner can always ignore something too deep. In a book it would
probably be better to keep at the same level of difficulty if only to
be fair to see that the reader gets what he pays for. But the website
is free so that is a moot point. Any thoughts anyone?
P.S. Thanks for putting up with me bringing up up website so much
lately. I get very little feedback on it and next to no useful
criticism. I should be even more excited about this and probing more
but I've been in a mood where I've been having a hard time writing
and would have trouble keeping up my end.