He was a great Scott
Nov 17– From Thomas Carylye’s introduction to Sir Walter Scott (1838)
Summary: Walter Scott had a great childhood. With a very minor sickness: Polio. NBD.
Commentary: This is just wild and all over the place. A bunch of random stories about Scott that don't really go anywhere, a lot of rambling about Rob Burns (I guess there's no other Scottish writers you can discuss. Seems like an insult to Scott.) Not really sure what the point of most of it was.
It starts off with this absolutely garbage paragraph:
Till towards the age of thirty, Scott’s life has nothing in it decisively pointing towards Literature, or indeed towards distinction of any kind; he is wedded, settled, and has gone through all his preliminary steps, without symptom of renown as yet. It is the life of every other Edinburgh youth of his station and time. Fortunate we must name it, in many ways. Parents in easy or wealthy circumstances, yet unencumbered with the cares and perversions of aristocracy; nothing eminent in place, in faculty or culture, yet nothing deficient; all around is methodic regulation, prudence, prosperity, kindheartedness; an element of warmth and light, of affection, industry, and burgherly comfort, heightened into elegance; in which the young heart can wholesomely grow. A vigorous health seems to have been given by Nature; yet, as if Nature had said withal, “Let it be a health to express itself by mind, not by body,” a lameness is added in childhood; the brave little boy, instead of romping and bickering, must learn to think; or at lowest, what is a great matter, to sit still. No rackets and trundling-hoops for this young Walter; but ballads, history-books and a world of legendary stuff, which his mother and those near him are copiously able to furnish. Disease, which is but superficial, and issues in outward lameness, does not cloud the young existence; rather forwards it towards the expansion it is fitted for. The miserable disease had been one of the internal nobler parts, marring the general organisation; under which no Walter Scott could have been forwarded, or with all his other endowments could have been producible or possible. ‘Nature gives healthy children much; how much! Wise education is a wise unfolding of this; often it unfolds itself better of its own accord.’
1. Scott showed no sign of interest in Literature. Except for reading a lot.
2. He was very healthy. Except that minor illness. Polio.
This is the kind of paragraph that I have seen make people literally have a breakdown in a workshop if you brought it.
Even without the questionable first paragraph I find these random prologue, introduction, etc.* sections are usually hard to follow and don't feel very worthwhile. (The fact that Eliot chose to devote an entire book to "Famous Prefaces" is a strange choice. Better than a second book of Burns at least.) I read an article last year that says you should often skip them and read them at the end of the book, and I have found they make more sense. They often reference the content of the book, and it usually works better if you know those events. "In book XII Odysseus does X and meets Y, here's a line with minimal context." Before reading the book: Mmmhmm, yeah, sure. After: Ohhhh, that part makes more sense now. Obviously applies best to Forewords (by definition, they can't be essential to the book) but usually works for Prefaces and often for Introductions.
Prologues just shouldn't exist 90% of the time. If it's important and where the book starts, make it a Chapter 1 or something. Special shout out to the "bait and switch" prologue. For example, Game of Thrones sounds like it'll be about the Night's Watch fighting zombies. And then instead it's the War of The Roses with extra incest.
* Preface: Why you wrote the book. What made you interested. (usually nonfic)
Prologue: What happened before the book. (usually fic)
Introduction: Provides context on the rest of the book. (fic or nonfic)
Foreword: Written by someone else. (fic or nonfic)
