Why he worked on two copies of the typescript is not known. Presumably he had them with him at different times and places, but other explanations are possible. In any case, the two sets of emendations are similar in character. Following suggestions made by the readers of the earlier typescript submitted to Harper, Wright worked hard to sharpen language, tighten episodes, and trim the narrator’s overt psychologizing of his protagonist, Fred Daniels. He had already taken on board many of those comments as he worked over the earlier typescript, but he now went further. Additional fragments related to Wright’s late working draft survive, but he did not complete another typescript.

To prepare a text of The Man Who Lived Underground that presents Wright’s vision for the novel, all the surviving typescripts of the novel have been consulted; indeed, comparison has been made of all versions of the novel and story, published and unpublished, along with numerous fragments, to determine the nature and cause of variant readings, correct typographical errors, and interpret Wright’s handwritten emendations. Wright never arrived at a final version of The Man Who Lived Underground, and it is not always possible to determine his intentions. Some revisions remained incomplete or provisional. Where it is uncertain whether Wright intended to include a passage or scene, or where the omission of material provisionally struck out by the author would cause a narrative gap requiring intrusive editorial intervention, the passage is retained. The textual notes found at loa.org/underground identify the most significant instances. On page 85 of the typescript, where Wright’s handwritten emendations begin and end on the respective copies, his revisions overlap in a single paragraph. Here, this text follows the revisions made to the carbon copy at the Firestone Library, since the revisions on page 85 of the ribbon appear more provisional. There are a relatively small number of typed changes to the ribbon copy, typically correcting typographical errors. In those instances where the emendations occur in the first eighty-five pages and are at variance with the carbon, the text follows the carbon. There is a single sentence on the first page of the ribbon through which Wright made a light pencil mark. The significance of this mark is discussed in the online textual notes.

In matters of spelling and punctuation, obvious errors have been corrected, and in a few instances Wright’s spelling has been emended for consistency. This text uses the modern closed-compound spelling of “someone” rather than the open-compound spelling “some one” (Wright was inconsistent on this point in his typescripts). This text consistently uses the spelling “hunh” rather than “huh,” following Wright’s usual spelling. Wright typically capitalized “mister” in his typescripts; however, the lowercase spelling is found in the final typescript of the short story version of his narrative (and in the text of the published story), and this text follows suit. In one other important instance, this text emends Wright’s spelling in the typescripts: The closed-compound spelling “aboveground” is used here, as it is in the text of the published short story, where the closed-compound spelling is intended as a counterpoint to “underground.” (So, for example, the text of the short story reads: “Emotionally he hovered between the world aboveground and the world underground.”)