0.1 Afterword  (Page 2/9)

So far as Crane’s book is concerned, the decisive event came sometime in mid-1894 when Copeland and Day agreed to bethe American distributor of Wilde’s new work, The Sphinx , designed by Charles Ricketts. Commenting on the arresting typographical design of the book, Ricketts observed that the “unusual length of the lines” of Wilde’s verse led him “away from theRenaissance towards a book marked by surviving classical traits, printing it in Capitals” (Ricketts 25), with a consequent allusion to Greek and Roman majascule lettering. In fact, thebook’s principal text was printed in small caps with the stanza headings in large cap roman numbers. The Black Riders volume has the same typographical design. Moreover, Copeland and Day’s rationale for choosing that design follows Ricketts soclosely that there must have been direct communication between the English and Americans about these two books.

Shortly after Copeland and Day began distributing The Sphinx , they were approached by John Barry, editor of the Forum magazine, about publishing a set of unusual prose poems by the young and relatively unknown writer Stephen Crane. Hamlin Garlandshowed Barry a sheaf of some thirty of Crane’s poems in early April 1894, and Barry was so impressed that he read some at the Uncut Leaves Society meeting of 14 April, and soon afterwards“fired them off to Copeland and Day (Garland, 195). The publishers agreed to take Crane’s work sometime during the next two or three months—the exact date is uncertain, but Crane wrote to themin the summer, perhaps August, asking whether the publication would be “all under way by early fall”: “I have not heard from you in some time [and]am in the dark in regard to your intentions” ( Correspondence I. 72).

At that point discussions began in earnest. During September and October 1894, Crane and hispublishers argued about whether some of the poems should be omitted as too incendiary. Protesting that the publishers’ proposed cuts would remove “all the ethical sense out of the book,” Craneargued that “It is the anarchy which I insist on” (letter of 9 September). As author and publisher wrangled about the precise contents of the book, other publication decisions were being made. Thereceived title was Crane’s suggestion, reflecting as it does Crane’s view that these works should not be called “poems” but “lines or pills” ( Correspondence I. 171 ). For their part, Copeland and Day wanted illustrations for the book, so on 19 October they sent Crane—along with a list of seven works they wanted removed—“a couple of drawings eitherof which might please you to be used by way of frontispiece for the book; one would be something illustrative, while the other would be symbolic in a wide sense” ( Correspondence I. 76).

Crane and his publishers came to an agreement about the book’s contents shortly after this letter fromCopeland and Day. A portion of the correspondence is clearly missing, however, for the next letter we have is from Crane to the publisher (30 October) enclosing “copy of the title poem.” Copelandand Day’s response (31 October) shows that Crane must have written to the publishers about the drawings they sent on 19 October: “as yet the drawings have not come to hand: neither new ones northose we forwarded you. Kindly advise us whether others are being made up.” Crane moved in a circle of artists and book illustrators in New York and he apparently suggested to his publishersthat one of them might illustrate the book—an event Crane tried to effect during the next several months. Crane’s friend Frederick Gordon was engaged in January to submit drawings for the coversand title page.