Lost Manuscripts: The Works Of Literature That Could Have Been

Ernest Hemingway

First Posted: 2/03/2012 17:17 Updated: 2/03/2012 18:08

We all ache to know what could have been.

If only we'd caught that train, or took that job, or not acquiesced to that last flaming Sambuca... if only, if only.

In the case of some of the world's finest literary talents, the big 'if only' can often refer to the masterpieces they didn't publish - either because they were lost, stolen or burned in a fit of creative frustration.

For before the days of backed up computer files, automatic saves and 'cloud' stored documents, a writer's work was a tangible, vulnerable thing of paper and ink never more than a moment away from disaster.

Here we round up eight examples of the lost or sabotaged manuscripts we'd most be intrigued to discover...

William Shakespeare - Love's Labours Won
1  of  9
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
Had the script to Love's Labours Won survived, who knows how celebrated a playwright William Shakespeare could have become? OK, so the bard's reputation hasn't exactly suffered for one of his manuscripts going missing, but for scholars, it remains a fascinating mystery.

First mentioned in a list of Shakespeare's comedies in 1598 and then again in a separate record in 1603, historians can quite decide whether Love's Labour Won was indeed an original play - probably a sequel to Love's Labour Lost - or an alternative name for The Taming of the Shrew. We prefer to believe the former.

(PA)

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK CULTURE

We all ache to know what could have been. If only we'd caught that train, or took that job, or not acquiesced to that last flaming Sambuca... if only, if only. In the case of some of the world's...
We all ache to know what could have been. If only we'd caught that train, or took that job, or not acquiesced to that last flaming Sambuca... if only, if only. In the case of some of the world's...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 5
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
06:02 AM on 03/20/2012
Ruskin thought his new bride Effie was ‘deformed’ (masculine?) for having pubic hair when he saw her on their wedding night; it was thus never consummated. It was believed that he destroyed a cache of erotic artwork left to him by his mentor J.M.W.Turner who wanted them to be made public after his death. Apparently he just hid them away. Maybe it’s the things that artists wanted to have known posthumously that relatives, for good or ill, chose to suppress, that have had the most deleterious effect on history.
We presently think that sexual orientation and political affiliation give clues to an artists work. Such things may just be red herrings, tantalizing, but easily misunderstood between the respective ages in question. Even given the facts we don’t always draw the most reasonable conclusions. Diarists may have kept personal secrets; or perhaps they just didn’t want their processes and half formed thoughts and sketches available for strangers to paw over.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
J.L. Sirisuk
11:49 PM on 03/09/2012
This is very interesting. What a shame about Nikolai Gogol...Thomas Mann is not featured here, but he had been working on a book about Mozart when he died...ah, what could have been..
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
naschkatze
A free man creates himself.
05:13 PM on 03/04/2012
Not destroyed but never developed. I wish that Tolstoy had gone on to write The Decembrists after War and Peace. He began writing it before W & P, but wanting to trace the origins of the Decembrist revolution, he concentrated on the Napoleonic era. Pierre Bezukhov surely would have been a Decembrist.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tena
04:23 AM on 03/03/2012
I often struggle with the 'need to know' all things about all artists and why that matters at all beside the work they leave. The relation between the artist and the art is a more difficult philosophical problem than it might seem.

I tend to agree with Nabokov, who really didn't think anyone had any 'need to know' anything beyond the work, up to the point where I can't really live my belief, cause I want to know. I'm just like everybody else.

But I'll say this about Larkin's diaries: if he didn't want them read then that was his right and too bad for the researchers. I say that as a dedicated Pepysian who owns all of Pepys and has read it more than once - I love diaries. But every writer has the right to destroy things he or she doesn't want read.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Thismortalcoil
Science is the poetry of reality
02:50 PM on 03/04/2012
I think you and Nabakov make very valid points: time spent looking at the life of the artist is time that could often be better spent learning more from re-reading the work.