Another Turn of the Screw: Prefaces in Swift, Marvell, and Genette

AnotherTurnoftheScrew: PrefacesinSwift, MarvellyandGenette JONROWLAND JNoussommesauseuild'uneépoqueparatextuelle,auseuild'unseuil, stationnésÃlafrontièred'unmomentexégétique,'dispositionnel'qui privilégielesmarges,s'yinstitue,s'enfaitpartie,"declaresRichardL. Barnett,rathergrandly,inhis"avant-propos"toarecentissueof L'EspritCréateurdevotedentirelytoaspectsof"paratextuality."'Forthe followingdiscussionofprefacesinSwiftandMarvell,Ihaveusedtermi- nologydevelopedbyGérardGenetteinhisaptlytitledSeuils(1987)2asa partofhis"paratextual"emphasis.Genettedefines"leparatexte"as"ce parquoiuntextesefaitlivreetseproposecommetelÃseslecteurs,et plusgénéralementaupublic"(7).Theparatextisa"seuil,"athresholdbetweentheinside("letexte")andtheoutside("lediscoursdumondesur letexte"[8]),comprisedof"épitexte"and"péritexte."The"épitexte"is "touslesmessagesquisesituent,aumoinsÃl'origine,Ãl'extérieurdu livre"(10);the"péritexte"isallmessages"autourdutexte"(10).HereI willdealmainlywithoneaspectofthe"péritexte,"thepreface,asitis describedbyGenetteinSeuilsandasitappearsinMarvell'sThe RehearsalTranspros'dandSwift'sATaleofaTub.^ Genettedefinestheprefaceas"touteespècedetexteliminaire(prélimi- naireoupostliminaire)"(150).Itis,bothbyvirtueofitsfunctionandits (usual)placementbeforethetextofthebook,athreshold(Genettetreats itasonlyoneofmany"thresholds,"liketitles,footnotes,endnotes, 129 130 / ROWLAND glosses,etc).Whilenotitselfaboundary,oratleastno"water-tight"(7) oneasGenetteremarks,itisfrequentlyconcernedwithestablishing interpretiveboundariesandguidelinesoutofwhichthereader,likethe modernwitinATale,iswarnednotto"straythebreadthofaHair,upon perilofbeinglost"(43).Evenifwechoosetoignoresuchboundaries,in asense,bythevery"choosing,"weadmitthatwecannotutterlyignore them.Thisisthereasonthatprefacersoftenseemtoattachsuchimpor- tancetowhattheysay,asiftheyfelttheyhadtosaysomethingandon thatsomethingdependedinterpretiveorderifnotthefutureofwestern civilizationtoo.Inasense,intheirsmallbutsometimesnot-so-modest way,prefacersarestavingoffinterpretivechaos;theyarereally,and perhapsunconsciouslybutbynomeansalwaysunconsciously,register- ingthefactthatifnotverymuchmorethansomeprefacedtextisat stake,verymuchmoreisatplay. Genette'suseofatermlike"seuils"forsuchthingsasprefacesindicates ,Ithink,themodernrealizationthatsuchthingsarenotdistinct fromtheirtextsbutmay,infact,bethetext.Theattemptonthepartof criticslikeGenettetosystematizesuchthingsfollowsnaturallyfromthe exploitationofthembysignificantmodern(orpostmodern)writers,to expandoutwardfromthetextand,asLuizFernandoValentesaysinan articleonGuimaraesRosa'sprefacestoTutameia,"openadialoguewith othertextsbytheauthor."4ForBorgestheprefaceinparticularrepre- sentsakindofideal:"Tocomposevasttextsisalaboriousanddiminish- ingextravagance;thatofexpoundinginfivehundredpagesanidea whoseperfectoralexpositiontakesafewminutes.Abetterdeviceisto pretendthatthosebooksalreadyexistandtoofferasummary,a commentary."5 InseveralcollectionsofprefacesfromHenryB.Wheatley's7"AeDedi- cationofBookstoPatronandFriend(1887)—whichhedescribesinhis own"Preface"as"thefirstinstanceofabookbeingentirelydevotedto thehistoryofthistopic"(v)—toGuyR.Lyle'sPraiseFromFamous Men:AnAnthologyofIntroductions(1977)6,acommonhallmarkofthe prefaceispreciselythisinterpretiveanxiety.Wheatley'sexamplesillus- tratewellhowthededicateeinaprefatorydedicationcouldbeusedto dispelanxietyinthereader,ifnotaltogetherinthewriter;clearlythe dedicateewasalsointendedtoinfluencethereadingfromthestart,if onlybygivingthewriter—andhisbook—apreliminaryrecommenda- tion.OneDr.Turner,dedicatinghisHerbaltoQueenElizabeth,remarks onjustthisfunction,somethinghisprinter—typically—suggested:"The Printerhadgevenmewarningetherewantednothingetothesettinge outeofmyholeHerbalsavingonlyaPreface,whereinImightrequire somebothmightyandlearnedPatrontodefendmylabouresagainst PrefacesinSwiftandMarvell / 131 spitefullandenviousenemiestoallmennisdoyingessavingtheirowne, anddeclaremygoodmindetohimthatIambounduntobydedicating andgevingthesemypoorelaboursuntohim"(52).HerbertGrierson,in ThePersonalNote(1946),acollectionofprefacesandpostfaces intendedtoillustrate"personalfeelings,whichhavebeenkeptincheckin theefforttobeobjectiveorconciliatory,"reprintsJonson'sdedicationof Volpone,inwhich,soundingaverySwiftiannote(ordoesSwiftrather soundaJonsonian?),Jonsonprotests,"Iknow,thatnothingcanbeso innocentlywritorcarried,butmaybemadeobnoxioustoconstruction; marry,whilstIbearmineinnocenceaboutme,Ifearitnot,"andcom- plains,"Applicationisnowgrownatradewithmany;andtherearethat professtohaveakeyforthedecipheringofeverything:butletwiseand noblepersonstakeheedhowtheybetoocredulous,orgiveleavetothese invadinginterpreterstobeoverfamiliarwiththeirfames,whocunningly andoftenuttertheirownvirulentmaliceunderothermen'ssimplest meanings."7 Theseprefaces,infact,providewhatGenettedescribesforusasdirections "howtoread"(194)—here,hownottoread.Therearemanyother instances,suchasDonne'sprefacetoBiathanatos(wherenotjudging harshlycanbeseenintermsofthesubject[suicide],thetreatment[Bia- thanatos],andChristiancharity),andJohnson'sfamous"Preface"toA DictionaryoftheEnglishLanguage(wherehe,too,wantscharityinthe reader,butalsosomefractionofthediligencethatwentintothewriting): "afewwildblunders,andrisibleabsurdities,fromwhichnoworkof suchmultiplicitywaseverfree,mayforatimefurnishfollywithlaugh- ter,andhardenignoranceintocontempt;butusefuldiligencewillatlast prevail,andtherenevercanbewantingsomewhodistinguishdesert; whowillconsiderthatnodictionaryofalivingtongueevercanbe perfect." Theideaoftheprefaceoccursoftenenough(andusuallyinvivid, metaphoricallanguage)in77ieRehearsalTranspros'dtobethematic,if notubiquitous,andinATaleofaTubprefatorypiecescomprisethefirst fiveparts(sixifyoucount"TheIntroduction"),plus"SectionV:A DigressionintheModernKind,"whichperformsfunctions"properina preface,"and"SectionX:AFurtherDigression,"whichactslikeapost- facealthoughitisonlythepenultimatesection.Suchexaggerated emphasisonthethresholdmaygive"Readerstrulylearned"ofATale pause,especiallyiftheyrequire(ordesire)noinstruction.Nodoubtthe "learnedreader"abovewouldbeappalledtoknowthatevenbefore Marvell'sdayitwaspossibletomakeacareeroutofreadingjustpre- faces,asMarvellsaysArchbishopLauddid,whenhisjobwas"tolook overEpistlesDedicatoryandPrefacestotheReader"and(anticipating 132 / ROWLAND Swift's"truecritic")"seewhatfaultmaybefound"(127).Inourday,itis stillpossibleforcriticslikeGérardGenette(Seuils,184)andJon Rowland(onthepresentoccasion)todoalmostthesamething,atthe riskofsoundingratherlikeSwift'shack,"Justcomefromperusingsome hundredsofPrefaces"(45). Yetintheseworkstheliminalpauseisforceduponus.77teRehearsal Transpros'dandATaleofaTubalmostpresentthemselvesasbooks onlyinthebookseller'ssenseofsomanyboundpaperobjectstobesold.8 Inthedeepersenseofbookasmetaphorforwisdomandknowledge,like theBibleorHomer'sepics,theydonotappeartobebooksatall,but self-consciousaccretionsoftheconventionsofwhichbooksaremade butwhichdonotmakebooks.Themostsalientoftheseconventions, andtheonewhichfinallycomestostand,Ithink,asametaphorforall theothers,isthepreface.AsGenetteremarks,"lapréfaceestpeut-être, detouteslespratiqueslittéraires[wemightsayrather,livresque],laplus typiquementlittéraire,parfoisaumeilleur,parfoisaupiresense"(270). 77ieRehearsalTranspros'disahostileparatext(anepitext)toawork claimingstatusasabookbyposingasaprefacetoanotherauthor's work,SamuelParker'sAPrefaceShewingwhatgroundsthereareof FearsandJealousiesofPopery(1672),prefixedtoBishopBramhall's VindicationofhimselfandtheEpiscopalClergyfromthePresbyterian ChargeofPopery.Marvell's"animadversions"onParker's"Preface," virtuallyareadingofitwithandthroughMarvell'seyes,9reallycom- prisesasatiricalprefacetoParker'sentireoeuvre,devaluingwhatParker gavevalueto,andworse,devaluingParkerhimself.Thevarious"lies" criticizedinParker's"Preface"discredithiminthemainbodyofhis otherworks;inGenette'sterms,theparatextismade—retroactively—to refutethetext:"IamsureourAuthorhaddiednootherdeathbutofthis hisownPreface...iftheswellingofTruthcouldhavechoak'dhim" (13). Theprefaceisalso,bothinMarvellandinmuchearlierpolemicists, closelyconnectedtotheissueofreligiousceremoniesinparticular,and religiousridiculeingeneral.Theprefacecanquitenaturallybeseenasa formalabuseinliterature,onthepartofthosewantingtoimposeformal abusesinreligiousmatters;moreover,asakindofdressingofthetextit prefaces,itnicelyconnectswiththesartorialnatureofsomeofthese abuses.Inhis"Preface"Parkerisseenasnotonlyadvocatingsuch abusesinreligionbutasturningthemintoabsoluterequirementsfor anyonewishingtobelongtothestatechurch.WhenoneMatthewParker (1504-75;formerlyArchbishopofCanterbury)seemstorebutSamuel Parker'spositionsuccessfully,thelatter'ssolution(Marvellsupposes) willbetowriteyetanotherpreface(116);oneimaginesParker'sprefaces PrefacesinSwiftandMarvell / 133 encrustingothermens'worksthewaytheceremoniestheyarewrittento defendencrustChristianity. InATaleofaTubtheprefacecomestorepresentthatawfulcondition inwhichliterarinessandtalkaboutliteraturehavecankeredliterature itself.Thedistancebetweenwhoistalkingandwhatheistalkingabout ultimatelycollapses.FromtheegotisticalParkerprefacingthevindicationofadeadbishopwhocomesincreasinglytoresembletheegotistical Parkerhimself,totheself-sufficientHackwritingaboutnothingbecause allhecanwriteaboutiswhatisinhimselfandheisempty,isashort albeittellingdistance. Theprefacealsoisemblematicofwhatisarguablythecentralthemeof ATale,therelationship(orwantofrelationship)betweencontainerand contained,or,inI.A.Richards'sterms,betweenvehicleandtenor.10The samethemeisexpressedinwhatWyrick(andothers)havediscussedas themainmetaphor,theclothesanalogy,effectivelyintroducedbythe prefacesofATale,withtheirinherentsartorialism."Clearlythenumer- ousprefatorypiecesofATaleemphasizethe"vehicular"sideofthings, whatmeansoverwhatismeant.Thistoocanbeseenasadevelopmentof thecontentiousliteratureoftheseventeenthcenturyand,certainlyin Parker'scase,oftheanxietyofpartisansnotjusttoshowthemeaningof theworkbutrathertodeterminehowthatmeaningcanbereappliedor enlistedtotheircause,mainlybyredirectingitinaprefaceorother paratext.Theriskofsuchaprocedureisthatwitheveryadditional "redirection"or'Vemeaning,"abitoftheoriginal—whichis,afterall, thepretext—getslost.Genettedescribestheemergenceofthepreface,itsgradualseparation fromthetext,asaprint-relatedphenomenon(152).Itis,moreover, linkedtothetranslationanddisseminationofclassicaltextsinthemod- ernera(243),andisthereforeanimportantmeansofculturalappropria- tionandassimilation.12Genetteremarksthatthisappropriationcouldbe opportunistic,achanceto"déborderquelquepeul'objetprétendudeson discoursauprofitd'unecauseplusvaste,ouéventuellementtoutedif- férente"(250). OpportunismispreciselywhatMarvellaccusesParkerof.Theimme- diatetargetofMarvell'ssatireisnaturallytheprefacegenre,forthe abovereasons,andbecausethebookheisattackingpresentsitselfasa preface.Marvellwonders"whethertheAuthormadehisPrefacefor BishopBramhal'sdearsake,orwhetherhepublishedtheBishop'sTrea- tiseforsakeofhisowndearPreface"(9).FromBuckingham'splay,TAe Rehearsal,MarvellborrowsthepointthatBayes'sprologuecould equallybeanepilogue:"IdonotseebutthePrefacemighthavepastas welforaPostscript,ortheHeadstalforaCrooper"(9).Thecomparison 134 / ROWLAND tothe"transposed"saddleofahorseleadstoacomparisontoananimal whosemotionmaybedirectedbytheheadorthetail,toillustratethe adventitious,opportunisticnatureofParker'spreface,thepublicationof whichoccasionedthepublicationofthebishop'sVindicationratherthan vice-versa.Marvellimaginestheopportunisticrelationship,initsarbi- trariness,aspotentiallyagameofleap-frogas,insubsequenteditions, theprefaceandthe"Vindication"propertradeplaces,nowParkerfirst, nowtheBishop.Thedisjunctionoftheprefaceandtheworkisfurther seenintheremarkthatitismerely"theTap-droppingsofhisDefence" (38).Inotherwords,theprefaceisnotmerelyunrelatedtoBramhall's work,butunrelatedtoBramhall'spreciselybecauseitisreallyathinly disguisedpostfacetoParker'slatestbook,ADefenceandContinuation oftheEcclesiasticalPolitie(1676). UnluckilyforParker,luckilyforMarvell,Bramhallinhis"Vindica- tion"hadidentifiedametaphorical"cursedBay-tree"(ametaphorfor insistenceontransformingindifferentopinionsintonecessaryarticlesof faith)asthe"causeofallourbrawlingandcontention"(99).Howgrati- fying,then,tocallParker"Bayes,"aftertheestablishedbuttofBucking- ham'sRehearsal.Thus,ironically,Marvellhimselfestablishesasthe basisfortherelationshipbetweenParker'sprefaceanditstext,one whichinsteadofallowingthe"Vindication"tosupportthepolicy advancedinthepreface,actuallysubvertsit—andbymeansofthepref...