Bibliography and Textual Criticism by Fredson BowersReview by: Robert A. TibbettsThe Library Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Jul., 1966), pp. 262-263Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4305681 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 10:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheLibrary Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 10:29:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

262 THE LIBRARY QUARTERLY

Delgraves' Les Haultin, 1571-1623 (Geneva, 1960) being a good and an important example.

Finally, an observation regarding the study of the history of music-printing: scanning the Davidsson list, one notes that almost all of its contents have been the work of musicol- ogists. Most bibliographers, historians of ty- pography, and librarians either have been un- interested in music or unable to read its no- tation; or they have preferred to remain over- awed at the mystery by which the printed page is transformed into the lively events of the concert hall and opera house. Inevitably, musical content has received far more atten- tion than bibliographical form. The history of music-printing, for all practical purposes to- day, is but one aspect of that series and events through which the music of neglected masters finds its way to editors and performers. How- ever important and engaging these studies may be, it is not inappropriate here to point out -that the larger social and cultural implica- -tions of music-printing are still unexplored and that little is known of the technical prob- lems involved in printing music by various processes. Signs today that point to a broader approach to the subject are much to be wel- comed.

DONALD W. KRUMMEL

The Newberry Library Chicago

Bibliography and Textual Criticism. By FRED- SON BOWERS. (The Lyell Lectures, Oxford, 1959.) Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964. Pp. xii+207. $5.60.

In an earlier series of lectures, Textual and Literary Criticism (Cambridge, 1959), Fred- son Bowers discussed the role of textual bib- liography as it prepares the ground for the work of the literary critic. In the present volume, he has carried the process a step earlier and considered at length the proper uses and limitations of bibliographical analy- sis as applied to textual problems. Bibliography and Textual Criticism is not intended to be a systematic treatise on the relationship of ana- lytic bibliography to the recovery of an au- thor's work but, rather, "an attempt to look into the operation of the bibliographical mind as it approaches some problem of text" (p. viii). The many examples used are taken from Shakespeare and other Elizabethan drama- tists, and several references are made to Charl-

ton Hinman's two-volume study of The Print- ing and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare (Oxford, 1963)-yet unpublished when these lectures were being prepared for the press.

Following a general consideration of ana- lytical and textual bibliography and the nature and treatment of bibliographical evidence, Bowers discusses the interpretation of this evidence under three descending orders of authority: demonstrable, probable, and pos- sible. The final chapter applies the methods presented to the study of a specific bibliograph- ical problem-the nature of the compositors' copy for Folio Othello, whether manuscript or an annotated quarto.

A very important distinction is made be- tween the nature of evidence itself and the nature of whatever interpretation may be drawn from it. A large part of the suspicion with which bibliography has been regarded by some critics has resulted from a failure in the past to recognize and insist upon this distinc- tion. The bibliographical evidence of changing physical characteristics within a text under study, coupled with other bibliographical evi- dence that the whole matter was set by one compositor, will lead to the bibliographical conclusion that the changes reflect some dif- ferences in the copy from which the composi- tor was setting. It is a critical judgment, how- ever, which decides that these differences in the copy reflect the collaboration of two au- thors. Bibliographical interpretation can point to the physical peculiarities of the copy behind the print. It cannot explain the causes of these characteristics.

To the degree that a relationship can be established between the phenomena for which an explanation is needed and the mechanical process that produced them, a bibliographical solution for a textual problem can be found. Within these limitations, moreover, "when the evidence of analytical bibliography can be made available, literary and historical judg- ment must be limited by bibliographical prob- abilities and must never run contrary to me- chanical findings" (p. 29), and "when bibliog- raphy in its pure state can operate at the level of demonstration, and bibliographical and critical judgment clash . . . the critic must accept the bibliographical findings and some- how come to terms with them" (pp. 155-56). On the other hand, Bowers points out that "a limitation is placed on bibliographical reason-

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 10:29:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REVIEWS 263

ing not to interfere beyond its authority with the appropriate exercise of the critical judg- ment" (p. 59; italics mine).

The amount of authority that can be as- signed to a bibliographical interpretation of evidence is dependent on the "postulate of normality." According to this postulate, the investigator must assume, unless there is over- whelming specific evidence to the contrary, that a given book was produced under the normal routine conditions of the printing trade in general and the particular shop involved. This, of course, relies on extensive knowledge of the printing trade as it was practised at the date of the book under consideration, and such knowledge may be modified as new evi- dence requires (e.g., it can no longer be as- sumed that seriatim setting was an invariable practice in the seventeenth century). Further- more, the primary use of the postulate should be as a check on the interpretation of evidence and not as a part of that evidence itself. To the extent that it is used as a part of the evidence the resultant bibliographical interpretation must be demoted within the three orders of authority.

Regarding these three orders, Bowers cau- tions that there are no fast lines of demarca- tion separating them from one another and that all intermediate shades can be found. In- deed they are perhaps better described as a continuum on which demonstrability is at the top and possibility at the base, with varying degrees of probability between. A case is de- monstrable when a clear explanation of the facts can be made based solely on these facts and not inconsistent with the postulate of normality. It has been lowered to the rank of probability when at some critical point the interpretation must be based on knowledge of the printing trade, and it has become mere possibility when a considerable part of the interpretation must be so founded. The lower on the scale bibliographical judgment falls, the greater reliance should be placed on criti- cal judgment. The entire discussion of biblio- graphical reasoning must be followed with acute logical analysis, and the illustrative ex- amples are most helpful in this respect. They also attest to Bowers' advice that one of the keys to sound bibliographical work is simplic- ity. He has said that repeatedly the most in- genious solutions (which usually fall lowest on the scale of authority) are produced by those who overlook the simple answer in con-

structing an elaborate set of possible circum- stances.

Bibliography has been criticized as too mys- terious in its operations, and it has been casti- gated for taking a callous attitude toward critical judgment. Such feelings should be dis- pelled by these lectures. Although bibliograph- ical reasoning must put aside critical consider- ations while working in its pure form, its ulti- mate goal is the recovery of the best possible text for the literary criitc to work with. The mysteries involved are nothing other than sound logical reasoning. This book must be- come a part of the basic reading of anyone who would claim to understand or practice it.

ROBERT A. TIBBETTS

University of Chicago Library

Alphabetical Subject Indication of Informa- tion. By JOHN METCALFE. ("Rutgers Series on Systems for the Intellectual Organiza- tion of Information," Vol. 3.) New Bruns- wick, N.J.: Graduate School of Library Service, Rutgers University, 1965. Pp. vii+ 148. $3.50.

Compared with the proponents of other sys- tems designed to facilitate the retrieval of information, subject catalogers seem, on the whole, an inarticulate-even apologetic-lot. Their reticence to come to the defense of a system which over a long period of use has been found to function satisfactorily in a wide range of applications probably results in part from the subject catalogers' neglect to produce systematic expositions of the theoreti- cal bases of their craft. Such neglect doubtless reflects a vast underlying complacency as to the real position of subject cataloging vis-a- vis the proposed alternatives; while the pro- ponent of the unconventional system points to his treatises, programs, formularies, tables, diagrams, and flow charts supporting his method, the subject cataloger merely contem- plates the thousands of working libraries in America and throughout the world, as well as most bibliographical and reference tiols in all scholarly disciplines, actually using one or another variation of alphabetical subject in- dication.

Almost by default John Metcalfe (librarian of the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia) has emerged as the most

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.101 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 10:29:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions