Bornstein and the Reading of Literature

When I was in high school, we read Macbeth By William Shakespeare. It was mentioned that there was a debate between scholars that possibility someone else wrote and added in the witches and the infamous Double double boil and trouble scene to the play years later make it more sensational. 

 ALL.  Double, double toil and trouble;
    Fire burn, and caldron bubble.
 WITCH.  Fillet of a fenny snake,
    In the caldron boil and bake;
    Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
    Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
    Adder's fork, and blind-worm's sting,
    Lizard's leg, and owlet's wing,—
    For a charm of powerful trouble,
    Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.

This is an example of Bornstein’s thesis that you have to take all versions of the text into account, even if they may be forged or altered. When I think about these scenes from the play it gives me a different view and experience than if they had been excluded. On one hand, you want to have the purest possible text of what Shakespeare wrote, without any interference from some fame seeker trying to sensationalize the audience's experience. But if you don’t add these lines, you may be censoring Shakespeare himself just because the lines are a somewhat different in structure from the rest of the play. It will take out a huge amount of foreshadowing and the idea of a mythical evil taking over Macbeth’s soul along with his decisions as a part of the story. This can be seen as a loss for the text as a whole.
Whatever the truth may be about the author of these lines, scholars have decided to leave in the scenes of the witches that we enjoy today in the productions of Macbeth. The people that hold the historical records will be the ones to decide how literature is saved and how it will be viewed or censored from the public.