A web page obviously has more, and in many ways more exciting, possibilities than its printed page counterpart. In making use of these possibilities, however, the web author gives up a certain amount of control over how the page will actually look on the user's machine. Speed of image appearance, quality of image, and arrangement on the screen; all these are out of the control of the author. They are relative to activity on the server, speed of data transfer, and the quality/size of the user's monitor; just to mention some of the variables. For this reason, the Transcript Comparison Page has been written first with horizontally arranged windows. This works best (for reasons explained below) for users with smaller monitors (under 17").

Users with larger monitors are invited to make use of a page with a vertical arrangement. This allows a side-by-side, line-by-line comparison (and is probably preferred):

Transcript Comparison Page (Vertical)

Textual Considerations

With transcripts, the authorial control mentioned above becomes editorial control. The attempt has been made to make these transcripts diplomatic - that is, "an exact, unemended reproduction of the original documents in all respects save for those differences in type, spacing, lining, and paging which results when in non-facsimile manner a printed or manuscript document is given new clothes."* In preserving as much of the original appearance as possible, the transcripted texts have been fixed with regard to line and word breaks. This has brought on the necessity, as noted above, for both horizontal and vertical comparison windows; so that lines can be viewed without side-to-side scrolling on any size monitor. The goal was to provide a rapid, accurate resource for the study of these texts in as faithful and accessable a manner as is possible. This also explains why page breaks and numbers where not included in the transcripts.

Guided by the idea that Whitman himself retained and exercised substantial, if not in some cases total, control over the typesetting of the printed "product," faithfulness to the printed text has been striven for: Whitman's textual control is deemed far more important than any possible by this editor. An example of this is found in line 3 of "A Child's Reminiscence," (1859). The possessive "boy's" is (presumably) mis-set as "boys's." In LG 1860, this is changed to "boy's." Whether this was Whitman's mistake or a typesetter's is a question that disappears if not maintained in these transcriptions. The integrity of the original demands that this presumed typo be left as is, and it has been. To edit out what is very likely a typographical error is to obfuscate the "evidence," and would, in fact, subvert the very goal this site attempts to achieve. As in life, we may learn as much, or more, from errors as otherwise. Enjoy.