Prefaces to Fiction by Various
V >>
Various >> Prefaces to Fiction
The Augustan Reprint Society
PREFACES TO FICTION
Georges de Scudery, Preface to _Ibrahim_ (1674)
Mary De la Riviere Manley, Preface to _The Secret
History of Queen Zarah_ (1705)
Jean-Baptiste de Boyer, Marquis d'Argens, _The Jewish
Spy_ (1744), Letter 35
William Warburton, Preface to Volumes III and
IV (1748) of Richardson's _Clarissa_
Samuel Derrick, Preface to d'Argens's _Memoirs of
The Count Du Beauval_ (1754)
With an Introduction by
Benjamin Boyce
Publication Number 32
Los Angeles
William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
University of California
1952
* * * * *
GENERAL EDITORS
H. RICHARD ARCHER, _Clark Memorial Library_
RICHARD C. BOYS, _University of Michigan_
JOHN LOFTIS, _University of California, Los Angeles_
ASSISTANT EDITOR
W. EARL BRITTON, _University of Michigan_
ADVISORY EDITORS
EMMETT L. AVERY, _State College of Washington_
BENJAMIN BOYCE, _Duke University_
LOUIS I. BREDVOLD, _University of Michigan_
CLEANTH BROOKS, _Yale University_
JAMES L. CLIFFORD, _Columbia University_
ARTHUR FRIEDMAN, _University of Chicago_
EDWARD NILES HOOKER, _University of California, Los Angeles_
LOUIS A. LANDA, _Princeton University_
SAMUEL H. MONK, _University of Minnesota_
ERNEST MOSSNER, _University of Texas_
JAMES SUTHERLAND, _University College, London_
H.T. SWEDENBERG, JR., _University of California, Los Angeles_
INTRODUCTION
The development of the English novel is one of the triumphs of the
eighteenth century. Criticism of prose fiction during that period,
however, is less impressive, being neither strikingly original nor
profound nor usually more than fragmentary. Because the early
statements of theory were mostly very brief and are now obscurely
buried in rare books, one may come upon the well conceived "program"
of _Joseph Andrews_ and _Tom Jones_ with some surprise. But if one
looks in the right places one will realize that mid-eighteenth
century notions about prose fiction had a substantial background in
earlier writing. And as in the case of other branches of literary
theory in the Augustan period, the original expression of the
organized doctrine was French. In Georges de Scudery's preface to
_Ibrahim_ (1641)[1] and in a conversation on the art of inventing a
"Fable" in Book VIII (1656) of his sister Madeleine's _Clelie_ are
to be found the grounds of criticism in prose fiction; practically
all the principles are here which eighteenth-century theorists
adopted, or seemed to adopt, or from which they developed, often by
the simple process of contradiction, their new principles.
That many of the ideas in the preface to _Ibrahim_ were not new even
in 1641 becomes plain if one reads the discussions of romance
written by Giraldi Cinthio and Tasso.[2] The particular way in which
Mlle. de Scudery attempted to carry out those ideas in her later,
more subjective works she obligingly set forth in _Clelie_ in the
passage already alluded to. There it is explained that a
well-contrived romance "is not only handsomer than the truth, but
withal, more probable;" that "impossible things, and such as are low
and common, must almost equally be avoided;" that each person in the
story must always act according to his own "temper;" that "the
nature of the passions ought necessarily to be understood, and what
they work in the hearts of those who are possess'd with them." He
who attempts an "ingenious Fable" must have great
accomplishments--wit, fancy, judgment, memory; "an universal
knowledge of the World, of the Interest of Princes, and the humors
of Nations," and of both closet-policy and the art of war;
familiarity with "politeness of conversation, the art of ingenious
raillery, and that of making innocent Satyrs; nor must he be
ignorant of that of composing of Verses, writing Letters, and making
Orations." The "secrets of all hearts" must be his and "how to take
away plainness and driness from Morality."[3]
The assumption that the new prose fiction could be judged, as the
Scuderys professed to judge their work, first of all by reference to
the rules of heroic poetry is frequent in the next century--in the
unlikely Mrs. Davys (preface, _Works_, 1725); in _Joseph Andrews_ of
course, where the rules of the serious epic and of the heroic
romance are to aid the author in copying the ancient but, as it
happens, nonexistent comic epic; and in Fielding's preface to his
sister's _David Simple_ (1744). Both Richardson and Fielding were
attacked on epic grounds.[4] Dr. Johnson's interesting and
unfriendly essay on recent prose fiction (_Rambler_ No. 4) adopted
the terminology familiar in the criticism of epic and romance and
showed that Johnson, unlike d'Argens and Fielding, did not intend
to give any of the old doctrines new meanings in a way to justify
realism. Johnson laughed a little in that essay at the heroic
romances; but like Mlle. de Scudery, whose _Conversations_ he drew
on for a footnote in his edition of Shakespeare (1765),[5] he
believed that fiction should be "probable" and yet should idealize
life and men and observe poetic Justice. Many other writers on prose
fiction borrowed the old neo-classic rules, and they applied them
often so carelessly and so insincerely that one is glad to come
eventually on signs of rebellion, even if from the sentimentalists:
"I know not," wrote Elizabeth Griffith in the preface to _The
Delicate Distress_ (1769), "whether novel, like the _epopee_, has
any rules, peculiar to itself.... Sensibility is, in my mind, as
necessary, as taste, to intitle us to judge of a work, like this."
The theory of prose fiction offered by the Scuderys was, on the
whole, better than their practice. The same remark can be made with
even greater assurance of _The Secret History of Queen Zarah, and
the Zarazians_ (1705) and the other political-scandalous "histories"
of Mary De la Riviere Manley. For in spite of the faults of _Queen
Zarah_, the preface is one of the most substantial discussions of
prose fiction in the century. Boldly and reasonably it repudiates
the most characteristic features of the heroic romance--the vastness
produced by intercalated stories; the idealized characters, almost
"exempted from all the Weakness of Humane Nature;" the marvelous
adventures and remote settings; the essay-like conversations; the
adulatory attitude; and poetic Justice. _Vraisemblance_ and
_decorum_, we are told, are still obligatory, but the probable
character, action, dialogue will now be less prodigious, will be
closer to real life as the modern English reader knows it. Thus Mrs.
Manley announced a point of view which was, at least in most
respects, to dominate the theory and invigorate the practice of
prose fiction throughout the century.
A significant phase of Mrs. Manley's discussion is the emphasis upon
individual characterization and, in characters, upon not only the
"predominant Quality" and ruling passion of each but also upon the
elusive and surprising "Turnings and Motions of Humane
Understanding." Here one should recognize the influence of
historical writing rather than of poetry. As Rene Rapin had made
clear in Chapter XX of his _Instructions for History_ (J. Davies's
translation, 1680), the historian writes the best portraits who
finds the "essential and distinctive lines" of a man's character and
the "secret motions and inclinations of [his] Heart." But Mrs.
Manley's remarks go beyond Rapin's in implying faith in a sort of
scientific psychology, especially of "the passions." Other writers
showed the same interest and worked toward the same end. Thus Henry
Gally in his essay on Theophrastus and the Character was so carried
away by a notion of the importance of the Character-writer's knowing
all about the passions that he allowed himself to say that only by
such a knowledge could a Character be made to "hit one Person, and
him only"[6]--the goal obviously not of the Character-writer but of
the historian and the novelist. The authors of _The Cry_[7] (1754)
regarded the unfolding of "the labyrinths of the human mind" as an
arduous but necessary task; indeed they went on to declare that the
"motives to actions, and the inward turns of mind, seem in our
opinion more necessary to be known than the actions themselves." It
was Fielding's refusal, in spite of the titles of his books, to
write like an historian with highly individualized and psychological
characterizations that caused his admirer Arthur Murphy to admit in
his "Essay" on Fielding that "Fielding was more attached to the
_manners_ than to the _heart_."[8] He thought Fielding inferior to
Marivaux in revealing the heart just as Johnson, according to
Boswell, preferred Richardson to Fielding because the former
presented "characters of nature" whereas the latter created only
"characters of manners." The author of "A Short Discourse on Novel
Writing" prefixed to _Constantia; or, A True Picture of Human Life_
(1751) went so far as to say that prose fiction may teach more about
the "sources, symptoms, and inevitable consequences" of the passions
than could easily be taught in any other way. The increasingly
subjective and individualized characterization in English fiction
was well supported in contemporary theory.
_The Jewish Spy_, translated from the _Lettres Juives_ (1736-38) of
Jean-Baptiste de Boyer, Marquis d'Argens, is an early example of
citizen-of-the-world literature and contains in its five volumes a
"Philosophical, Historical and Critical Correspondence" dealing with
French, English, Italian, and other matters. The work had a European
vogue, and there were at least two English translations, the present
one, issued in 1739, 1744, and 1766, and another, called _Jewish
Letters_, published at Newcastle in 1746. (The Dublin edition of
1753 I have not seen.) Though d'Argens's purpose in Letter 35 may
have been to advertise his own novel, what he had to say is
interesting. Like many others, he could scoff at the heroic romances
and yet borrow and quietly modify the doctrines of _Ibrahim_ and
_Clelie_. He proposed a still more "advanced" _vraisemblance_ and
_decorum_--psychological analysis tinged with cynicism rather than
idealism; gallantry but against the background sometimes of the
modern city; a plainer style; and only such matters as seemed to
this student of Descartes and Locke to be entirely reasonable.
Fielding's chapter in _Tom Jones_ (IX, i) "Of Those Who Lawfully
May, and of Those Who May Not, Write Such Histories as This" could
be taken as an indication that he knew not only what Mlle. de
Scudery thought were the accomplishments of the romancer but that he
had read d'Argens's words on that subject too. Both d'Argens and
Fielding believed that in addition to "Genius, Wit, and Learning"
the novelist must have a knowledge of the world and of all degrees
of men, distinguishing the style of high people from that of low.
They agreed that a writer must have felt a passion before he could
paint it successfully. Much more goes into the making of a novel,
they sarcastically pointed out, than pens, ink, and quires of paper.
D'Argens, like Fielding, relished reflective passages and could
approve, more readily than Mrs. Manley, of "an Historian that amuses
himself by Moralizing or Describing." D'Argens's list of the
features to be found in good history and good fiction shows him to
be a thoroughgoing rationalist and separates his ideal from that of
young readers, who, according to the preface to _The Adventures of
Theagenes and Chariclia_ (1717), wish to hear of "Flame and Spirit
in an Author, of fine Harangues, just Characters, moving Scenes,
delicacy of Contrivance, surprising turns of action ... indeed the
choicest Beauties of a _Romance_."
The two novels that d'Argens recommended had different fortunes in
England. D'Argens's book, _Memoires du Marquis de Mirmon, ou Le
Solitaire Philosophe_ (Amsterdam, 1736) was never translated into
English and apparently was not much read. But Claude Prosper Jolyot
de Crebillon, the younger, was extolled by Thomas Gray and Horace
Walpole, quoted by Sarah Fielding,[9] and had the honor, if one can
trust Walpole, of an offer of keeping from Lady Mary Wortley
Montagu. His _Egaremens du Coeur et de l'Esprit_ (1736-38) was
translated in 1751[10] and is the novel which Yorick helped the
_fille de chambre_ slide into her pocket. Crebillon was damned,
however, in _The World_ (No. 19, May 10, 1753) in an essay that,
oddly enough, reminds one of d'Argens's Letter 35. The work referred
to in the third footnote on page 258 is _Le Chevalier des Essars et
la Comtesse de Berci_ (1735) by Ignace-Vincent Guillot de La
Chassagne. The last footnote on that page refers to G.H. Bougeant's
satire, _Voyage Merveilleux du Prince Fan-Feredin dans la Romancie_
(1735).
The preface which William Warburton was invited by Richardson to
supply for Volumes III and IV of _Clarissa_ when they first appeared
in 1748 has never, I think, been reprinted in full. Richardson
dropped it from the second edition (1749) of _Clarissa_, probably
because he relished neither its implication that he was following
French precedents nor its suggestion that his work was one "of mere
Amusement." In the "Advertisement" in the first volume of the second
edition he insisted that _Clarissa_ was "not to be considered as a
_mere Amusement_, as a _light Novel_, or _transitory Romance_; but
as a _History_ of LIFE and MANNERS ... intended to inculcate the
HIGHEST and _most_ IMPORTANT _Doctrines_."[11] Warburton, offended
in turn perhaps, thriftily salvaged more than half of the preface
(paragraphs 2 to 6) to use as a footnote in his edition of Alexander
Pope,[12] but he there made a striking change: not Richardson but
Marivaux and Fielding were praised as the authors who, with the
extra enrichment of comic art, had brought the novel of "real LIFE
AND MANNERS ... to its perfection."
The important principle of prose fiction which Richardson and
Warburton recognized--that there is power in a detailed picture of
the private life of the middle class--had been suggested earlier.
Mrs. Manley could not voice it, at least not in _Queen Zarah_, where
the Duke and Duchess of Marlborough, Godolphln, and Queen Anne were
to be leading characters. But her sometime-friend Richard Steele
could. Having laughed in _The Tender Husband_ (1705) at a girl whose
judgment of life was seriously--or, rather, comically--warped by her
reading of heroic romances, Steele made a positive plea in _Tatler_
No. 172 for histories of "such adventures as befall persons not
exalted above the common level." Books of this sort, still rare in
1710, would be of great value to "the ordinary race of men." The
anonymous preface to _The Adventures of Theagenes and Chariclia_
seven years later attributed to Heliodorus's romance the value of
suggesting rules "for conducting our Affairs in common Actions of
Life." In 1751 when the new realism was a _fait accompli_, the
author of _An Essay on the New Species of Writing Founded by Mr.
Fielding_ declared roundly (p. 19) that in the new fiction the
characters should be "taken from common Life." A good argument in
favor of books about "private persons" was offered in the preface to
the English translation of the Abbe Prevost's novel, _The Life And
Entertaining Adventures of Mr. Cleveland, Natural Son of Oliver
Cromwell_ (1741): "The history of kingdoms and empires, raises our
admiration, by the solemnity ... of the images, and furnishes one of
the noblest entertainments. But at the same time that it is so well
suited to delight the imagination, it yet is not so apt to touch and
affect as the history of private men; the reason of which seems to
be, that the personages in the former, are so far above the common
level, that we consider ourselves, in some measure, as aliens to
them; whereas those who act in a lower sphere, are look'd upon by us
as a kind of relatives, from the similitude of conditions; whence we
are more intimately mov'd with whatever concerns us." A comparison
of the first two paragraphs of this preface and the first four
paragraphs of Johnson's _Rambler_ No. 60, if it does not discover
the source of part of Johnson's paper, will at least reveal how the
defender of the fictional "secret history" and a famous champion of
intimate biography played into each other's hands. Johnson's
appearing to follow the defender of French fiction here is all the
more interesting when one recalls his alarm in _Rambler_ No. 4 over
the prevailing taste for novels that exhibited, unexpurgated, "Life
in its true State, diversified only by the Accidents that daily
happen in the World." Indeed if it were not for Fielding himself,
one might imagine from Johnson's unsteady and generally
unsatisfactory criticism of prose fiction that the old neo-classical
principles were completely out of date and useless.
Samuel Derrick, the editor of Dryden and friend of Boswell for whom
Johnson "had a kindness" but not much respect, the "pretty little
gentleman" described by Smollett's Lydia Melford, translated the
_Memoirs of the Count Du Beauval_ from _Le Mentor Cavalier, ou Les
Illustres Infortunez de Notre Siecle_ ("Londres," 1736) by the
Marquis d'Argens. Only the second paragraph of Derrick's preface
came from d'Argens, but the drift of the Frenchman's ideas toward
"le Naturel" is well sustained in Derrick's praise, no doubt based
on Warburton's, of writers who present scenes that "are daily found
to move beneath their Inspection." There are ties with the doctrines
of 1641 even in this preface, but the transformation of
_vraisemblance_ and _decorum_ was sufficiently advanced for the
needs of the day.
Benjamin Boyce
Duke University
NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION
[1] Most scholars attribute the preface to Georges de
Scudery, but it seems impossible to say whether he collaborated with
his sister in writing the romance itself or whether the work was
written entirely by her.
Cogan's translation of _Ibrahim_ and the preface appeared first in
1652.
[2] See the texts in Allan H. Gilbert's _Literary
Criticism: Plato to Dryden_ (N.Y.: American Book Co., 1940) and the
discussion in A.E. Parsons' "The English Heroic Play," _MLR_, XXXIII
(1938), 1-14.
[3] _Clelia. An Excellent New Romance. The Fourth Volume
... Rendered into English by G.H._ (1677; Part IV, Book II), pp.
540-543.
[4] See _An Apology for the Life of Mr. Bempfylde-Moore
Carew ... The Sixth Edition_, p. xix; _Critical Remarks on Sir
Charles Grandison_ (1754), p. 20.
[5] IV, 184. The footnote could have come, contrary to the
assertion of Sir Walter Raleigh (_Six Essays_ [Oxford, 1910], p.
94), from either the original French (_Conversations sur Divers
Sujets_ [Paris, 1680], II, 586-587) or the English translation
(1683, II, 102). In both editions, the passage appears soon after
the dialogue on how to compose a romance. I am indebted to Dr.
Arthur M. Eastman for help in tracing Raleigh's vague reference.
[6] _The Moral Characters of Theophrastus_ (1725), pp.
31-32.
[7] Jane Collier and Sarah Fielding.
[8] The "Essay" was written in 1762, but I quote it as it
appeared in the third edition (1766) of _The Works of Henry
Fielding_, I, 75.
[9] James B. Foster, _History of the Pre-Romantic Novel in
England_ (N.Y.: Modern Lang. Assoc., 1949), p. 76.
[10] _The Wanderings of the Heart and Mind: or, Memoirs of
Mr. de Meilcour_, translated by M. Clancy. Clara Reeve maintained in
1785 that Crebillon's book was never popular in England and that
"Some pious person, fearing it might poison the minds of youth ...
wrote a book of meditations with the same title, and _this_ was the
book that _Yorick's fille de Chambre_ was purchasing" (_The Progress
of Romance_ [N.Y.: Facsimile Text Society, 1930], pp. 130-131).
[11] Richardson said that he dropped Warburton's preface
because _Clarissa_ had been well received and no longer needed such
an introduction. A fourth explanation of the natter and much other
relevant information were presented by Ronald S. Crane, "Richardson,
Warburton and French Fiction," _MLR_, XVII (1922), 17-23.
[12] _The Works of Alexander Pope_ (1751), IV, 166-169. The
footnote is on line 146 of the Epistle to Augustus ("And ev'ry
flow'ry Courtier writ Romance").
IBRAHIM,
OR THE
ILLUSTRIOUS
BASSA.
* * * * *
The whole Work,
In Four Parts.
Written in French by _Monsieur de Scudery_,
And Now Englished
by
Henry Cogan, Gent.
* * * * *
London,
Printed by _J.R._ and are to be sold by _Peter Parker_, at his Shop
at the _Leg_ and _Star_ over against the Royal Exchange, and _Thomas
Guy_, at the Corner-shop of _Little-Lumbard street_ and _Cornhil_,
1674.
_IBRAHIM, or The Illustrious Bassa_
THE PREFACE
I do not know what kind of praise the Ancients thought they gave to
that Painter, who not able to end his Work, finished it accidentally
by throwing his pencil against his Picture; but I know very well,
that it should not have obliged me, and that I should have taken it
rather for a Satyre, than an Elogium. The operations of the Spirit
are too important to be left to the conduct of chance, and I had
rather be accused for failing out of knowledge, than for doing well
without minding it. There is nothing which temerity doth not
undertake, and which Fortune doth not bring to pass; but when a man
relies on those two Guides, if he doth not erre, he may erre; and of
this sort, even when the events are successefull, no glory is
merited thereby. Every Art hath its certain rules, which by
infallible means lead to the ends proposed; and provided that an
Architect takes his measures right, he is assured of the beauty of
his Building. Believe not for all this, Reader, that I will conclude
from thence my work is compleat, because I have followed the rules
which may render it so: I know that it is of this labour, as of the
Mathematical Sciences, where the operation may fail, but the Art
doth never fail; nor do I make this discourse but to shew you, that
if I have left some faults in my Book, they are the effects of my
weakness, and not of my negligence. Suffer me then to discover unto
you all the resorts of this frame, and let you see, if not all that
I have done, at leastwise all that I have endeavoured to doe.
Whereas we cannot be knowing but of that which others do teach us,
and that it is for him that comes after, to follow them who precede
him, I have believed, that for the laying the ground-plot of this
work, we are to consult with the Grecians, who have been our first
Masters, pursue the course which they have held, and labour in
imitating them to arrive at the same end, which those great men
propounded to themselves. I have seen in those famous _Romanzes_ of
Antiquity, that in imitation of the Epique Poem there is a principal
action whereunto all the rest, which reign over all the work, are
fastned, and which makes them that they are not employed, but for
the conducting of it to its perfection. The action in _Homers
Iliades_ is the destrustion of _Troy_; in his _Odysseas_ the return
of _Ulysses_ to _Ithaca_; in _Virgil_ the death of _Turnus_, or to
say better, the conquest of _Italy_; neerer to our times, in _Tasso_
the taking of _Jerusalem_; and to pass from the Poem to the
_Romanze_, which is my principal object, in _Helidorus_ the marriage
of _Theagines_ and _Cariclia_. It is not because the Episodes in the
one, and the several Histories in the other, are not rather beauties
than defects; but it is alwayes necessary, that the Addresse of him
which employes them should hold them in some sort to this principal
action, to the end, that by this ingenious concatenation, all the
parts of them should make but one body, and that nothing may be seen
in them which is loose and unprofitable. Thus the marriage of my
_Justiniano_ and his _Isabella_, being the object which I have
proposed unto my self, I have employed all my care so to doe, that
all parts of my work may tend to that conclusion; that there may be
a strong connexion between them; and that, except the obstacle which
Fortune opposeth to the desires of my _Hero_'s, all things may
advance, or at leastwise endeavour to advance his marriage, which is
the end of my labour. Now those great Geniusses of antiquity, from
whom I borrow my light, knowing that well-ordering is one of the
principal parts of a piece, have given so excellent a one to their
speaking Pictures, that it would be as much stupidity, as pride, not
to imitate them. They have not done like those Painters, who present
in one and the same cloth a Prince in the Cradle, upon the Throne,
and in the Tombe, perplexing, by this so little judicious a
confusion, him that considers their work; but with an incomparable
address they begin their History in the midle, so to give some
suspence to the Reader, even from the first opening of the Book; and
to confine themselves within reasonable bounds they have made the
History (as I likewise have done after them) not to last above a
year, the rest being delivered by Narration. Thus all things being
ingeniously placed, and of a just greatness, no doubt, but pleasure
will redound from thence to him that beholds them, and glory to him
that hath done them. But amongst all the rules which are to be
observed in the composition of these works, that of true resemblance
is without question the most necessary; it is, as it were, the
fundamental stone of this building, and but upon which it cannot
subsist; without it nothing can move, without it nothing can please:
and if this charming deceiver doth not beguile the mind in
_Romanzes_, this kinde of reading disgusts, instead of entertaining
it: I have laboured then never to eloigne my self from it, and to
that purpose I have observed the Manners, Customs, Religions, and
Inclinations of People: and to give a more true resemblance to
things, I have made the foundations of my work Historical, my
principal Personages such as are marked out in the true History for
illustrious persons, and the wars effective. This is the way
doubtless, whereby one may arrive at his end; for when as falshood
and truth are confounded by a dexterous hand, wit hath much adoe to
disintangle them, and is not easily carried to destroy that which
pleaseth it; contrarily, whenas invention doth not make use of this
artifice, and that falshood is produced openly, this gross untruth
makes no impression in the soul, nor gives any delight: As indeed
how should I be touched with the misfortunes of the Queen of
_Gundaya_, and of the King of _Astrobacia_, whenas I know their very
Kingdoms are not in the universal Mapp, or, to say better, in the
being of things? But this is not the only defect which may carry us
from the true resemblance, for we have at other times seen
_Romanzes_, which set before us monsters, in thinking to let us see
Miracles; their Authors by adhering too much to wonders have made
Grotesques, which have not a little of the visions of a burning
Feaver; and one might demand of these Messieurs with more reason,
than the Duke of _Ferrara_ did of _Ariosto_, after he had read his
_Orlando, Messer Lodovico done diavolo havete pigliato tante
coyonerie_? As for me, I hold, that the more natural adventures
are, the more satisfaction they give; and the ordinary course of the
Sun seems more marvellous to me, than the strange and deadly rayes
of Comets; for which reason it is also that I have not caused so
many Shipwrecks, as there are in some ancient _Romanzes_; and to
speak seriously, _Du Bartas_ might say of these Authors,