When I edited A Clergyman’s Daughter in 1982–3, it was known that a proof copy of the novel existed but attempts to see it failed. It recently came to light and is now in the possession of Mr Richard Young. I am deeply grateful to him for allowing me to see it and for providing the following commentary and readings:
The proof appears to be a late stage of the novel’s development. It would seem that most of the re-writing of this work was done in manuscript prior to the production of the extant proof. Nevertheless the proof does contain a number of late changes. The most significant of these is to change the character of Mr Blifil-Gordon, the Conservative candidate, so as to remove any trace that he is a Jew who had converted to Roman Catholicism. This was undoubtedly for fear of libel. Below I give the location of this proof text by page and line (e.g. 13/19) followed by the proof’s reading in bold; then after the square bracket the equivalent Collected Works reading. Pagination and lineation are the same for the Complete Works and Penguin Twentieth-Century Classics editions.
13/19: Catkin Palm ] Catkin and Palm
19/21: But Mr Blifil-Gordon the proprietor of the sugar beet refinery ] But Mr Cameron the Secretary of the Knype Hill Conservative Club
33/27: Even more Jewish in appearance than his father ] Given to the writing of sub-Eliot vers libre poems
38/29: And to think that that scum of the ghetto ] And to think that that low born hound
38/31: For the beastliest type the world has yet produced give me the Roman Catholic Jew ] And that suit he is wearing is an offence in itself
123/26: Lord Snowdon ] Lord Snowden
125/22: Consideration of your a ] Consideration, your a
232/2: Peg’s Paper ] Get hold of – all these filthy (Peg’s Paper goes between ‘of’ and ‘all’)
289/31: English Review] London Mercury
As for A Clergyman’s Daughter, when editing the Complete Works in 1982–3, I was unable to inspect this proof and I am very grateful to Mr Richard Young, who now owns these proofs, for generously providing this commentary and information:
It is both known and obvious that many changes were made to this novel at the proof stage (more so than for A Clergyman’s Daughter – see 10.1.35). A large number of these changes were restored in the preparation of the Collected Works edition by examination of the files of Victor Gollancz. This proof reveals significant further changes relating mainly to the quoting of product names and contemporary advertisements in the novel which were obviously changed or omitted at a late stage. As Orwell was very sensitive to this ‘mutilation’ it would be good if these readings could be restored. Below I give the locations of this proof text by pages and lines (e.g. 19/22) followed by the proof’s reading in bold; then after the square bracket the equivalent Collected Works reading. Pagination and lineation are the same for the Complete Works and Penguin Twentieth-Century Classics editions.
19/22 and 21/19: Q.T. Sauce ] QT Sauce
25/1, 26/10, 57/6 and 26, 271/7 and 28: Rose of Sharon Toilet Requisites Co. ] Queen of Sheba Toilet Requisites Co.
26/14 and 27/12: Kissprufe Naturetint ] Sexapeal Naturetint
144/32, 145/7 and 20, and 146/1: Riverside Hotel ] Ravenscroft Hotel
222/27: The shop was in the desolate stretch of road south of Waterloo Bridge ] The shop was in the Waterloo Road
224/29: A cut-price undertaker ] A smartish undertaker
262/18: Have a Camel ] deleted after Flick, flick
263/1: the following paragraph appears after Flick, flick. Guinness is good for you! Night-starvation – let Horlick’s be your guardian. She said ‘Thanks awfully for the lift’ but she thought ‘Poor boy, why doesn’t somebody tell him?’ How a woman of thirty-two stole her young man from a girl of twenty. Silkyseam – the smooth sliding bathroom tissue. Halitosis is ruining his career. Now I’m school-girl complextion all over. Kiddies clamour for their Breakfast Crisps. Pyorrhea? Not me! Are you a Highbrow? Dandruff is the reason.
This proof version contains the Horlick’s night-starvation line and the other ads are in a different order to the CW text. I guess that the order given here is the original reading.