Conceição Pereira

CLEPUL - FLUL
PAPER PRESENTED AT
6th Conference on Translation Studies in Portugal – 6-7 May 2010
International Conference on Translation in 19th- and 20th-century Anthologies and
Collections -Processes and criteria of anthologisation
NOT PUBLISHED

Anthologies of Nonsense

ABSTRACT
Anthologies of poetry, whether they contain a single genre or cover a particular
period of time, have a strong tradition in the UK and in the USA. This paper will focus on
anthologies of nonsense literature written in the twentieth century. The first such
anthology was collected by Carolyn Wells in 1902 and includes mainly eighteenth and
nineteenth century English language authors. I will consider ten other nonsense
anthologies, spanning from the beginning to the end of the twentieth century. All of these
anthologies include texts written by authors from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,
but they present different periods of time; one begins with Aristophanes, others with texts
by twelfth, fifteenth or sixteenth century authors, and only one does not include texts
belonging to the oral tradition. In some anthologies nonsense is viewed as a very old
phenomenon or as having always existed. On the contrary, the anthologies that only
include texts from the nineteenth century onwards argue that nonsense literature began in
the Victorian period with Edward Lear. The notion of nonsense as typically British is
common to all anthologies, even those published in French and German. It is also
relevant that in every volume an introduction is included, often along with a preface or
afterword.
Taken as a whole, the nonsense selections in these anthologies imply an overall
definition of the genre, which implies the formulation of an inaccurate theory of nonsense.
Such a theory is unable to produce a suitable definition of nonsense as a concept or as a
genre. This generalization explains the diversity of texts chosen by the collectors of
nonsense anthologies as well as the few repetitions of authors and texts, except for
Edward Lear and Lewis Carroll. I will explore the consequences of such diversity of
authors and texts for the construction of the genre of nonsense, along with a description
of the theories implied in the introductions. I will also mention a recent anthology of Indian
nonsense published in English and the project in process of an anthology of world
nonsense.

1
 Anthologies of Nonsense

Anthologies of poetry, whether they contain a single genre or cover a particular

period of time, have a strong tradition in the UK and in the USA, and anthologies of
nonsense are not an exception to this rule. The first such anthology was collected by
Carolyn Wells in 1902 and includes mainly eighteenth and nineteenth century English
language authors. I will consider ten other nonsense anthologies, spanning from the
beginning of the twentieth century to 2004. Nine of them were published in English, one in
French and another in German. I will also mention a recent anthology of Indian nonsense
published in English as well as a project in process of an anthology of world nonsense.
For practical purposes I will refer to all the anthologies by the names of the editors.
All these anthologies include texts written by authors from the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries, but they present different periods of time; one begins with
Aristophanes, a few others with texts by twelfth, fifteenth or sixteenth century authors.
In general, the texts chosen by the editors of the anthologies are poems originally
written in English, although Geoffrey Grigson and Paul Jennings have also selected prose
texts and texts written by French and German authors that have been translated into
English.
The two foreign editors, Robert Benayoun and Hans Halbey have also included
texts by French and German authors, but English and American authors have a strong
presence: Benayoun presents texts that are all translated into French; as for Halbey,
some texts appear in the original English version, and others are translated into German.
In nine of the anthologies considered, the oral tradition is also represented with texts
Some authors, like Shakespeare, Keats or Dickens, not usually connected with nonsense,
are all to be found in some of these volumes.
The insertion of illustrations and the type of images chosen differ from volume to
volume. Some anthologies, undoubtedly intended for children, like the ones edited by
Louise Guiness, and Hans Halbey, which is explicitly aimed at readers of all ages (from
nine to ninety nine), present most of the texts with illustrations. These can be either the
ones that originally illustrated the text, or were expressly made for the volume in question.
Halbey’s anthology, for instance, has only illustrations drawn by Rotraut Berner; so poems

2
that we usually associate to certain poems, like Edward Lear’s limericks, are
accompanied by new illustrations.
William Cole’s and Quentin Blake’s anthologies, not explicitly intended to young
readers, present only original drawings, like Halbey’s. In what Cole’s book is concerned,
the author of the illustrations is Tomi Ungerer; as for Blake’s selection, the images were
drawn by him.
Other anthologies, such as those published by Jennings, Grigson and Haughton,
only include texts, even when the original poems, like Lear’s limericks, or Carroll’s poems,
were firstly printed with their own illustrations. Davies and Benayoun show a different
perspective, for the images included are not supposed to illustrate texts, but rather to work
in an autonomous way and are thus classified as visual nonsense.
The genesis of some of these books can be explained by the particular
relationship their editors have established with nonsense, through illustration, criticism,
translation or authorship. Blake works as an illustrator and he himself explains that when
he began collecting poems for his anthology he already had collected a rich source of
verses taken from books of several authors he previously illustrated; Furthermore, Blake
is also an author included in Guiness’ volume who selected one of his illustrated poems to
be a part of her anthology. Wells is another author represented in Cole’s volume; she is a
critic too, since she had already written an essay on nonsense before publishing her
anthology. The same applies to Benayoun who wrote a book on nonsense before editing
his collection of nonsense texts and illustrations. Benayoun has, in addition, translated
some poems, as well as Halbey that is also an author. Moreover, Halbey, Jennings and
Reed have included their own poems in their anthologies.
Taking into account what has been said, prior to analyzing any prefaces or
introductions, it is possible to put forward some hypotheses as far as nonsense theories
are implied in the organization and selection of the texts.
The protracted period of time considered by Reed, Jennings, Grigson, Davies and
Haughton implies that nonsense is viewed as a very ancient phenomenon, as something
that has always been there. Reed dedicates his book to Noah, and defends the theory
that the survival of the human beings of the Arch was exactly due to nonsense.

3
 Those anthologies that comprehend solely texts from the nineteenth century on
commonly share the theory that nonsense owes its origins to Edward Lear, and as a
genre it dates from that moment. This is particularly evident in what concerns the
selection of poems by Lear and Carroll in all anthologies, with the exception of Cole’s.
However the exclusion of these two authors is deliberate and re-instates them as the most
representative authors of nonsense, since he accounts for his decision by stating that
these authors are so very well known as nonsense writers in hundreds of books that he
used the space he had for texts that cannot be found anywhere else. It is also clear that
the notion of nonsense as being traditionally British prevails in all anthologies, even when
they include poems written in other languages, or by non-English authors, who, anyway,
are always very few when compared to the number of texts originally written in English.
Only two of these authors, Benayoun and Haughton, didn’t select anonymous
texts or the ones from the oral tradition, and by itself this is in agreement with the authors
who defend that nonsense owes its origin to the oral tradition, namely to nursery rhymes.
Haughton and Benayoun have a different perspective and conceive nonsense as an
erudite genre, so their option not to include anonymous texts or from an oral tradition is
justified.
The anthologies are organized according to different models. Some of these
books, such as the ones of Wells, Reed and Cole, have a very simple structure, and the
poems are sequenced in an arbitrary manner. Jennings, Davies and Guinness chose
alphabetical order; whereas some others preferred a chronological or thematic
presentation. This is the case of Benayoun, editor whose chronological structure is the
most sophisticated of all, because he groups the authors by periods like “The origins” or
“The Golden Age”. Blake´s option was to organize by subject and he selected various
thematic chapters as “The World Turned Upside Down”, “A Recipe for Indigestion”,
“Portraits from Life” or “The Dedicated Traveler”. Halbey, openly confessed how difficult it
was to organize the poems after collecting them; he begins his book with a section with
poems suitable to children and then he has another six related with poetry forms like the
limerick, word play or types of rhyme; he also includes two thematic chapters (one about
animals, the other about travels). Finally, not knowing what to do with the remaining
poems he inserted them in a chapter he called “Nonsense a la carte”.

4
 In itself, this procedure in the type of structure to present the selected texts in
anthologies of nonsense is not that different from other kinds of anthologies, namely of
poetry: the alphabetical and chronological organizations are mostly to be found in
anthologies of poetry in general, which may select a specific century or movement; the
arbitrary or thematic presentation are most often found in anthologies of poetry for
children.
All the above mentioned anthologies have an introduction, and sometimes a
preface or afterword. This means that such editors give the reader their definition of
nonsense, although the selection criteria are not always mentioned. However, in a long
introduction, Haughton mentions the criteria that presided over his anthology and begins
by stating the paradoxical nature of this task. Haughton defends that enjoying nonsense
poetry implies taking pleasure in certain types of language which are usually treated as
minor. Consequently, he intends precisely to show that nonsense and poetry are strongly
connected exactly for the reason that nonsense is not a special case of poetry; on the
contrary he thinks that nonsense clarifies the fact that poetry is itself a special case. He
claims that his Chatto Book of Nonsense Poetry is intended to make it manifest to readers
how the interaction between nonsense and poetry has been built along the centuries. The
selection of many authors not normally associated with nonsense seems, thus, to be
justified. In some cases he even classifies texts by such authors as linguistic oddities.
In spite of the large time span of his anthology, and despite also the fact that Lear
and Carroll are not regarded as the absolute forerunners of nonsense, Haughton
assumes that these two authors are, in fact, the two central nonsense authors and that
they were influential in what many nonsense writers are concerned.
As for Jennings, he did, like Haughton, select authors previous to the nineteenth
century. He begins with Aristophanes, as Reed does, and immediately after he presents
Shakespeare. In the volume’s introduction, no selection criteria are stated, although
Jennings underlines that nonsense allows for a different perception of reality and it
doesn’t have to be necessarily comic, which is confirmed by the actual collected texts.
Although he believes that nonsense has always been around, he shares the opinion that
Lear and Carroll are fundamental and influent authors. As for Grigson, he also
emphasizes the relevance of Lear and Carroll in his introduction; he characterizes

5
nonsense as sophisticated playing, as both inconsequent as it is universal. He considers
two types of nonsense: verbal nonsense, defined as a language with invented words; and
situational nonsense, generating implausible situations. He sees nonsense as a genre
that may begin by being parody, or connected to satire, but that ends up by becoming an
autonomous genre. Reed admits that nonsense can sometimes be parodic, but never
essentially satiric. Having a different point of view with respect to the universality of
nonsense, he nonetheless claims that besides one or two Greek authors, nonsense is
essentially British and American.
The difficulty in establishing with exactitude the boundaries between nonsense
and other genres makes it complicated to select texts for a nonsense anthology. Blake
solved the problem acknowledging that he cannot guarantee that all he selected is
actually pure nonsense. Haughton, in turn, wants to prove that poetry and nonsense are
connected by means of a selection of poems intended to show that nonsense and poetry
interact.
The complexity involved in the elaboration of anthologies of nonsense is similar to
the difficulty faced when the definition and constitution of a genre characterized by its
huge heterogeneity are at stake. In other words, taking into account all the texts that are
included in nonsense anthologies, one realizes that the genre can only be vaguely
defined, and therefore any theory must be a generalizing one.
Such theory is not able to define nonsense strictly as a concept or as a genre,
making it too generic and not adding much to the texts it pretends to label. This
generalization may explain the diversity of texts anthologized and the repetitions of texts
and authors. Considering all the anthologies here cited, excluding the consensus as far as
Lear and Carroll are concerned, there are, in fact, not that many repetitions. Besides
these two writers, the most representative authors are Hillaire Belloc (1870-1953), Gelett
Burgess (1866-1951), Spike Milligan (1918-2002), G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936), Samuel
Foote (1720-1777), Max Beerbohm (1853-1914), Walter de la Mare (1873-1953) and W.
M. Thackeray (1811-1863).
Even though Guinness, Davies e Blake define nonsense and explain their criteria
of selection, they present personal and practical reasons and not theoretical ones as their
first criterion. Guinness says she chose the poems using her favorite nonsense

6
anthologies, as well as the poems she used to recite her siblings to keep them amused;
Davies, who defines nonsense as “something that makes no sense, but raises a smile”,
confesses that after a first huge selection, his option was to include the texts that were the
most appealing to him; as for Blake, he began his selection by the texts he had illustrated
before.
Probably the personal criteria invoked by these anthologists make perfect sense,
since anthologies have, in fact, a specific authorship, evident in the texts’ choice, even
when no personal motives are called upon for the collection published.
In short, the analysis of the anthologies cited shows the difficulty of trying to built a
consistent theory of nonsense, one that would allow embracing all the texts and
illustrations published in nonsense anthologies.
In two recent anthologies, one of Indian nonsense, and another of world
nonsense, still in progress, the precise delimitation of nonsense as a literary genre is one
of the priorities.
In The Tenth Rasa, An Anthology of Indian Nonsense, Michael Heyman, defines
nonsense as a genre with specific devices and effects. He presents Indian nonsense as
having an ancestral origin, but takes also into account the British influence. In other
words, he defends that nonsense has always existed, but he admits the relevance of
English speaking authors. He hopes that The Tenth Rasa “was the final nail in the coffin
of that idea that nonsense did not exist outside the Anglo-American tradition.” (not
published correspondence).
Michael Heyman, together with Kevin Shortsleeve are working on an Anthology of
World Nonsense. They intend to prove that nonsense is universal and also to make a
contribution to the definition and recognition of nonsense as a literary genre by means of
a representative corpus of texts with diversified national origins. For the purpose, the two
editors have been travelling around the world and have created a blog that allows us to
follow the travels and their recollecting of nonsense. Last summer they travelled along
Eastern and Northern Europe and next summer they will be travelling through Africa. And
this is how Michael Heyman summarizes the purpose of his anthology:

7
 The Anthology, I hope, will serve our field in two main ways: to show how
nonsense creation is a fundamental human drive, across all cultures, and as such,
shares certain characteristics, particularly in the subversion of language, logic, and
power. At the same time, like a living thing, it has evolved in endless variations
across the globe, as it has emerged from and adapted to cultural and linguistic
variables. Just how far does it push boundaries? Just how much can it
question? In how many myriad ways can it delight? We're guessing that a survey
of world nonsense will begin to answer these questions and expand our
understanding of nonsense in ways that we can't even imagine right now. (not
published correspondence).

References

Benayoun, Robert, (ed.). 1986. Les Dingues du Nonsense de Lewis Carroll à Woody
Allen, s-l: Balland.

Blake, Quentin, (ed.). 1994. The Penguin Book of Nonsense, London: Penguin Books.
Cole, William (ed.). 1968. Oh, What Nonsense!, London: Mammoth.

Davies, John (ed.). 1981. Everyman’s Book of Nonsense, London: J M Dent and Sons.

Grigson, Geoffrey (ed.). 1977. The Faber Book of Nonsense Verse with a Sprinkling of
Nonsense Prose, London: Faber and Faber.

Guinness, Louise, (ed.). 2004. The Everyman Book of Nonsense, London: Everyman
Library.

Halbey, Hans (ed.). 2001. Schmurgelstein so herzbetrunken, Verse und Gedichte für
Nonsense-Freunde von 9-99, München: Verlag.

Haughton, Hugh, (ed.). 1988. The Chatto Book of Nonsense Poetry, London: Chatto and
Windus.

Heyman, Michael (ed.). 2007. The Tenth Rasa, An Anthology of Indian Nonsense. New
Delhi: Penguin Books.

Heyman, Michael and Shortsleeve, Kevin. 2010. Jabberwokabout: Travels with

Nonsense. http://jabberwokabout.blogspot.com/

Jennings, Paul (ed.). 1977. The Book of Nonsense, London: Futura Publications Limited.

Reed, Langford (ed.). 1926. A Book of Nonsense Verse, New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.

8
Wells, Carolyn (ed.). 1902, A Nonsense Anthology. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
http://www.rickwalton.com/folktale/wells.htm