Processes of Literary Creation: Flaubert and Proust

Citation preview

P r o c e s s e s of L i t e r a r y C r e a t i o n F laubert and P roust

TH E E U R O P E A N H U M A N I T I E S RESEARCH CENTRE OF T H E U N I V E R S I T Y OF O X F O R D T h e E u ro p ean H um anities R esearch C e n tre o f the U n iv ersity o f O x fo rd organizes a range o f academ ic activities, in clu ding conferences and w o rk ­ shops, and publishes scholarly w o rk s under its o w n im print, L E G E N D A . W ith in O x fo rd , the E H R C

bridges, at the research level, the m ain

hum anities faculties: M o d e m Languages, En glish, M o d e m H istory, Literae H um aniores, M u sic and T h e o lo g y . T h e C e n tre stimulates interdisciplinary research collaboration throu gh ou t these subject areas and provides an O x fo rd base for advanced researchers in the humanities. T h e C e n tre ’s publications p rogram m e focuses on m aking available the results o f advanced research in m edieval and m o d e m languages and related interdisciplinary areas. A n Editorial B oard , w h o se m em bers are d raw n fro m across the B ritish university system, covers all the m ajor E u ro pean languages. T itles include w o rk s on Fren ch , G erm an , Italian, Portuguese, R ussian and Spanish literature. In addition, the E H R C publishes R esearch M o n o grap h s in F ren ch Studies in association w ith the S o cie ty for F ren ch Studies, and Studies in C o m p a ra tive Literature in association w ith the British C o m p a ra ­ tive Literature Association. T h e C e n tre also publishes O xford G erm an Studies and has launched a Special L ectu re Series u nder the L E G E N D A im print. E n qu iries about the C en tre's pu blishing activities should be addressed to: Professor M a lco lm B o w ie , H o n o rary D ire cto r (Publications) Fu rther inform ation: Kareni Bannister, S en io r Publications O fficer Eu ro p ean H um anities R esearch C e n tre 4 7 W e llin g to n Square O x fo rd o x i 2jF E -m a il: eh rc@ m o d e m -la n g u a g e s.o x.a c.u k w w w .e h r c .o x .a c .u k

LEGENDA ED ITO RIAL BO ARD H onorary Director (Publications) Professor M alco lm B o w ie , A ll Souls C o lle g e E ditorial C o-ordinator D r K e v in Hilliard, St P eter’s C o lle g e Professor Ian M aclean , A ll Souls C o lle g e (French) Professor M arian H o b so n Jean neret, Q u e e n M a r y & W e stfield C o lle g e , L o n d o n (French) D r R itc h ie R o b ertso n , St J o h n ’s C o lle g e (G erm an) D r Lesley Sharpe, U n iversity o f E x e te r (G erm an) D r D ie g o Z an can i, Balliol C o lle g e (Italian) Professor D a v id R o b e y , U n iv ersity o f M an ch ester (Italian) D r Stephen Parkinson, Linacre C o lle g e (Portuguese) Professor H eld er M a ce d o , K in g ’s C o lle g e , L o n d o n (Portuguese) Professor G erald Sm ith, N e w C o lle g e (Russian) Professor D a v id Shepherd, U n iv ersity o f Sheffield (Russian) D r D a v id Pattison, M agd alen C o lle g e (Spanish) D r A liso n Sinclair, C lare C o lle g e, C am b rid g e (Spanish) D r E lin o r Shaffer, S ch o o l o f A d v a n ce d Stu d y, L o n d o n (C o m p arative Literature) Senior Publications Officer K areni Bannister

LEGEN DA E uropean H um an ities R esearch C entre

University of Oxford

Processes of Literary Creation Flaubert and Proust

MARION SCHMID

n

LEGENDA European Humanities Research Centre 1998

First published 1998 Published by the European Humanities Research Centre of the University of Oxford 47 Wellington Square Oxford OX1 z]F LEGENDA is the publications imprint of the European Humanities Research Centre Published 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OXl 4 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

© 1998 European Humanities Research Centre of the University of Oxford ISBN 13: 978-1-900755-06-1 (pbk) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or disseminated or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or othenvise, or stored in any retrieval system, or othenvise used in any manner whatsoever without the express permission of the copyright owner British Cataloguing in Publication Data A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library LEGENDA series designed by Cox Design Partnership, Witney, Oxon Typeset by Joshua Assodates Ltd., Oxford

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

ix

Note

xi

Introduction

xiii

Prologue: An Anatomy o f Genetic Criticism 1 The Intellectual Foundations o f the Genetic School

3

2 The Material Analysis, Classification and Editing o f Modem Manuscripts

14

3 Avant-Texte and Published Text

18

4 The Critical Potential

27

5 Questions o f Methodology

37

6 Genetic Horizons

43

PART I Flaubert: The Macro-Structural Elaboration o f L ’Education sentimentale 1 Flaubert, a Programmatic Writer

51

2 Documentation

57

3 Textuality and Narrativity

72

4 Architectural and Narrative Organization

78

5 Avant-Texte and Published Text: The Modernity Debate Revisited

92

viii

C ontents

P A R T II Proust: The Genesis o f A la recherche du temps perdu in the Period 1908 to 19 11 1 Proust, an Immanent Writer

119

2 The Cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve: Emergence o f Narrative Strands and Thematic Networks (December 1908-Spring 1909)

13 1

3 The Development o f the Cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve between Summer 1909 and Summer 19 11: Emergence o f Narrative Cohesion

160

Epilogue: In Defence o f Textuality

187

Appendix Table: Chronology for Proust’s Cahiers from the End o f 1908 to the Second Typescript (Summer 19 11)

196

Bibliography

197

Index

215

ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS

During the genesis o f this book, I have benefited from the advice o f teachers, friends and colleagues, to whom I would like to express my gratitude. Joseph Jurt first roused my interest in modem manuscripts during a Graduate Seminar at Freiburg University. Subsequently, I was privileged to work under the guidance o f Patrick O ’Donovan who supervised my PhD dissertation, which is the source o f this monograph. His criticism, knowledge and generosity have been present at every stage o f this project. In the later phases o f writing the book, I was offered invaluable advice from Tony Williams who read various drafts o f the book and graciously shared his knowledge o f critique genetique and o f Flaubert’s manuscripts with me, and from Cecil Courtney, who has been unfailingly generous with insight, time and support during the tenure o f my Research Fellowship at Christ’s College, Cambridge. I am further indebted to Alison Finch and Adrianne Tooke who read a later draft and made many intelligent and valuable suggestions for revision. In Paris, Bernard Bm n provided treasured advice and documentation on Proust’s manuscripts. M y intellectual debt to his and the Equipe Proust’s work will be obvious in Part II o f this book. In the overall presentation o f the book, I was fortunate to be helped by Damian Shaw, Virginia Howe, and Kareni Bannister, who, with great enthusiasm, have put the finishing touches to the manu­ script. I alone, o f course, am responsible for any errors and short­ comings that remain. I should also like to thank Akio Wada for allowing me to include his chronology o f Proust’s cahiers in the appendix; the Bibliotheque nationale for granting permission to quote from Proust’s manuscripts; and T. H. Goetz for permission to include a revised version o f an article I have previously published in Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Finally, I should like to thank the Master and Fellows o f Christ’s

x

A cknowledgements

College, Cambridge, not only for making this project possible but also for providing such a stimulating research environment, and my colleagues at Edinburgh University for their time and help. I owe my greatest debt, however, to my parents for their unwavering support and encouragement. The book is dedicated to them.

NOTE

M y analysis in Part I is based on Flaubert, Carnets de travail, ed. PierreMarc de Biasi (Paris: Balland, 1988) and Flaubert, L }Education sentimentale. Les Scenarios, ed. Tony Williams (Paris: Jose Corti, 1992); all quotations from these texts are from these editions. References to the published text are to L }Education sentimentale, ed. P. M. Wetherill (Paris: Gamier, ‘Classiques G am ier, 1984). Quota­ tions from Flaubert’s correspondence in the period up to December 1868 are given from Correspondance, ed. Jean Bruneau, 3 vols. to date (Paris: Gallimard, ‘Pleiade’, 1973— ). After that date, they are from Correspondance, 9 vols. (Paris: Conard, 1926—33). Part II is based on Proust’s manuscripts held by the Bibliotheque nationale, Paris. The transcription o f manuscript material follows the conventions generally used in Proust scholarship. Additions and corrections not on the line have been inserted into the main text. Additions appear in angled brackets: (. . .), deletions in square brackets: [ . . . ] . Notes on the recto are marked as ‘R ’, notes on the verso as ‘V ’ . For instance, 22: 6 R reads cahier 22, folio 6 recto. The author’s original spelling and punctuation have been preserved throughout the transcription. All references to the published text o f A la recherche du temps perdu are to the edition by Jean-Yves Tadie, 4 vols (Paris: Gallimard, ‘Pleiade’, 1987-9).

IN TRO D U CTIO N

The act o f literary creation has exerted a strong fascination on writers and scholars o f all periods, most noticeably so in our (post-)modem age which increasingly privileges writing over the written, and processes over the finished product. At the beginning o f the last century, Samuel Taylor Coleridge asked himself: ‘What am I doing when I am writing a poem?’ 1 Some one hundred and fifty years later, Roland Barthes wondered: ‘Comment est-ce que ga marche quand j ’ecris?’2 Edgar Allan Poe has given his readership a minute, though, it seems retrospectively, untruthful account o f how he composed ‘The Raven’.3 Francis Ponge has published and commented on the preparatory versions o f his poem ‘La Figue’ in 1977.4 Similar ex­ amples o f lyrical poets’ and prose writers’ reflections upon processes o f writing abound in diaries, notebooks or letters. The question, however, o f what precisely we do when we write and, more importantly, o f how a complex literary text takes shape in the course o f its genesis, is still far from being resolved, although it has, in the past decades, become the object o f a wealth o f psycholinguistic, cognitive and sociological studies. A new method o f literary criticism currently referred to as critique genetique (translated hereafter as ‘genetic criticism’), which emerged in France in the early 1970s, approaches the literary act empirically. It attempts to reconstruct the processes and mechanisms o f literary production on the basis o f an author’s preparatory working manuscripts. The main objective o f the genetic school, as it has been defined by one o f its most articulate promoters, Almuth Gresillon, is ‘d’expliquer par quels processus d’invention, d’ecriture et de transformation un projet est devenu ce texte auquel l’institution conferera ou non le statut d’oeuvre litteraire’ .5 1 Biographia literaria. Full details o f all works cited are given in the Bibliography. 2 Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes. 3 ‘The Philosophy o f Composition’ . 4 Comment une figue de paroles et pourquoi. 5 Elements de critique genetique, 206.

xiv

Introduction

Within this methodological framework, the following study will examine the genetic processes that have shaped two o f the great masterpieces o f Modernity, Flaubert’s UEducation sentimentale and Proust’s A la recherche du temps perdu. Flaubert and Proust have long held a privileged place side by side in literary criticism: Flaubert is commonly acknowledged as the founding-father o f the ‘Modem ’ novel, Proust as one o f his intellectual heirs in the transition from latenineteenth to twentieth-century writing.6 Discussions o f Modernity in Flaubert mosdy revolve around UEducation sentimentale, which set truly new standards for the treatment o f narrative and for the (increasingly difficult) relations between text and reader.7 Signific­ antly, Proust himself, in the now famous article ‘A propos du “ style” de Flaubert’, declares that with UEducation sentimentale the Flaubertian Revolution (i.e. his introduction o f a new mode o f repre­ sentation) was accomplished (p. 589). Irrespective o f their iconic status as quintessential^ ‘Modem’ works, UEducation sentimentale and A la recherche compare in a number o f ways. The two novels belong to the genre o f Bildungsroman (although it is o f course treated quite differently in each case). They are both anchored in an important historical context (the 1848 revolution and the Dreyfus affair respectively), and they both narrate a young man’s first steps into the world o f Parisian high society. Love, desire and delusion form dynamic themes in UEducation sentimentale and A la recherche. And, o f course, both novels are famous for their sharp social critique and their exploration o f a new problematic notion o f the self. To date, comparative readings o f the two works are almost exclusively based on the finished published texts, that is, in each case, on one canonical version as established by publishers and editors.8 From the very rich genetic studies on the two authors, however, we know that Flaubert’s and Proust’s texts, perhaps to a 6 Critical works that draw this line o f development include, amongst others, Lawrence R . Schehr, Flaubert and Sons, and Julien Gracq, Proust considere comme terminus. 7 See inter alia the relevant sections in Jonathan Culler, Flaubert. The Uses o f Uncertainty, and Christopher Prendergast, The Order o f Mimesis, as well as an enlightening article by Graham Falconer, ‘Reading UEducation sentimentale. Belief and Disbelief’ . 8 For a recent exception see two articles by Mireille Naturel on intertextual borrowings from Flaubert in Proust’s manuscripts, ‘Le R ole de Flaubert dans la genese du texte proustien’ and ‘De Maria a Albertine: racines flaubertiennes du personnage’ .

Introduction

xv

greater degree than those o f any other Modem French writer, underwent an extremely complex process o f transformation and reorganization. The published text that we appreciate is only the surface manifestation (the ‘pheno-text’, to use a term coined by Kristeva) o f a whole set o f earlier, often significantly divergent stages. An investigation o f the early phases o f writing enlightens us about the intellectual and textual processes which gave a literary work its present shape and meaning. It is likely to enrich, but also to problematize our understanding o f the published text, which, from this perspective, we can no longer take as the only text o f reference. Flaubert and Proust, each in turn, have been classified under two basic modes o f literary production. Together with most nineteenthcentury Realist and Naturalist writers, Flaubert’s work falls into the category ‘programmatic writing’.9 He produced a prodigious quantity o f planning documents (a first sketch, plans, scenarios) in the early phases o f the genesis in order to ensure maximal control over the evolution o f his text. Proust, on the contrary, is generally catalogued under ‘immanent writing’ or ecriture a processus as it is also called. His work was allowed to develop far more freely and spontaneously. The macro-genesis o f A la recherche has often been described as an openended and potentially infinite process o f transformations and expan­ sions, which was only brought to an end by Proust’s untimely death in 1922.10 M y aim in this study is to evaluate how the two almost dia­ metrically opposed practices o f the two authors have shaped a first narrative and thematic framework o f L ’Education sentimentale and o f A la recherche du temps perdu. The documents under investigation are Flaubert’s notebooks and scenarios in the period 1864 to 1869, which have recently been published by Pierre-Marc de Biasi and Tony Williams, and Proust’s cahiers in the period 1908 to 19 1 1. Meth­ odologically, my work inscribes itself in a branch o f genetic criticism known as genetique scenarique or genetique structural.11 This genesis o f structures, a diachronic approach par excellence, focuses on the narratological and thematic components o f a literary work. It examines the evolution o f narrative strands, the creation o f themes and motifs, as well as the diegetic organization and actantial distribution o f the 9 For more detail on the two modes o f writing see Louis Hay, ‘Die dritte Dimension der Literatur’ , 3 1 1 - 1 4 , and my discussion infra, p. 44. 10 See e.g. Rainer Warning and Jean M illy (eds.), Marcel Proust. Ecrire sans fin . 11 For a definition see Henri Mitterand, ‘Avant-Propos’ , vi.

xvi

Introduction

emerging text. Its objective is to illustrate the logic and dynamism o f the compositional process, its necessities and hazards.12 Genetic criticism is very successful in France, and to a certain extent also in Germany where philological methods have a long scholarly tradi­ tion.13 The Anglo-American literary establishments, however, have widely neglected the genetic method in favour o f other schools o f thought such as post-structuralism or deconstruction. More seriously, the public at large often confuses genetic criticism with the brand o f textual criticism which has been practised for many centuries. Excellent surveys, such as the articles collected in Les Manuscrits des Ecrivains (1993) or Almuth Gresillon’s informative account Elements de critique genetique (1994) have passed largely unnoticed on this side o f the Channel. In view o f the uncertainty that surrounds the genetic method (both as regards its international reception and debates within the genetic school) and o f the confusingly wide range o f its possible applications, I have prefaced the main body o f my work by a Prologue, which quite simply addresses the question: ‘What is genetic criticism?’ . However, the title ‘An Anatomy o f Genetic Criticism’ should not be understood in the sense o f a manual devoted to the genetic method. Rather, it is intended as an attempt at a critical evaluation o f this highly controversial discipline. The study o f the macro-structural elaboration o f L ’Education sentimentale and A la recherche du temps perdu which follows will, I hope, illustrate the richness o f the genetic method, and, more importantly, enhance our understanding o f the complexity o f the process o f literary creation. 12 Cf. Mitterand, Zola. L ’Histoire et la fiction, 134. 13 For examples o f collective Franco-German publications in the field o f genetic studies see e.g. Louis Hay and Winfried Woesler (eds.), La Publication des manuscrits inedits; Hay and Woesler, Edition et interpretation des manuscrits litteraires; and Michael W erner and Winfried Woesler (eds.), Edition et manuscrits.

PROLOGUE

A n Anatom y o f Genetic Criticism

La fabrication du livre, en l’ensemble qui s’epanouira commence des une phrase. M allarme

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

3

1. The Intellectual Foundations o f the Genetic School

When Pierre-Marc de Biasi, one o f the most prominent advocates o f genetic criticism, declared in a 1985 article that the genetic school had opened up ‘un nouvel espace de recherches’, the literary establish­ ment reacted with distinct signs o f bewilderment.1 Graham Falconer, an expert on Flaubert manuscripts, reminded his colleague o f the obviously long tradition o f manuscript research in classical and medieval studies and in textual scholarship.2 Rather more aggres­ sively, the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu denounced what Biasi termed a ‘revolution in literary studies’ as a return to the ‘positivisme de l’historiographie litteraire la plus traditionnelle’.3 Genetic critics consider the 1970s, when a group o f Heine scholars fused with other manuscript specialists to found the Centre d’Analyse des Manuscrits Modemes, now the Institut des Textes et Manuscrits Modemes, as the official date o f birth o f the genetic school. Their opponents evoke the mid-nineteenth century when philology emerged as a critical discipline within the humanities. The present polemic over genetic criticism, then, in its most reduced form, revolves around two questions: first, is genetic criticism new? And, second, is it different from more traditional studies on literary genesis and from the type o f manuscript-based research in which the classicist, medievalist or textual critic is engaged?4 Intellectual and cultural history have taught us that the emergence o f new trends in intellectual life, the arts and natural sciences is never entirely spontaneous, even though one may provocatively pinpoint some significant turning-points (the demolition o f the Pruitt-Igoe housing complex, St Louis, in 1972 has been postulated as the end o f modem architecture, and, by implication, the beginning o f PostModernity;5 the fall o f the Berlin Wall in 1989 has come to signify the end o f Communism). Rather we should apprehend the processes 1 ‘Vers une science de la litterature: l’analyse des manuscrits et la genese de l’ceuvre’ , 466. 2 ‘ Genese et specialisation’, 189. 3 Les Regies de Vart, 2 7 6 -7 . 4 In addition, there are also objections on principle against genetic criticism. Milan Kundera, for instance, has condemned the publication (and, a fortiori, the investiga­ tion) o f material authors deleted or o f texts they did not intend for publication as ‘un acte de viol’ . He pleads for respect for what he calls the author’s ‘aesthetic will’ . See Les Testaments trahis, 3 1 2 - 1 3 . Proust had similar reservations about possible studies o f his manuscripts by future scholars. See Part II, p. 122. 5 Charles Jencks, The Language o f Post-Modem Architecture, 9.

4

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

involved in cultural and scientific change as a subtle dialectics o f assimilation and rejection. B y analogy, the genetic school belongs to a longer tradition o f scholarship. Paradoxically, its intellectual founda­ tions He as much in traditional philology as in modem structuralism and linguistics. Its area o f interest, the work in progress, coincides with a more general fascination with the creative act and a new aesthetics o f the fragmented and unfinished in the modem period. If genetic criticism undoubtedly stands in a longer scholarly and intellectual tradition, this does not preclude it from being radically new in its approaches and concepts, nor from being different from the more established methods o f manuscript-based research. In this first introductory section I shall outline both its intellectual history and its new critical angle. A certain amount o f confusion can be avoided if one states clearly from the outset that genetic criticism has its own well-defined object o f inquiry: so-called ‘modem manuscripts’, as distinct from the ancient or medieval manuscripts with which the classical scholar or medievalist is concerned. The two types o f manuscripts differ not only in their affiliation to different periods, but, more fundamentally, in their very status and function. Ancient and medieval manuscripts, written before the invention o f modem printing technology, origin­ ally had a public function, that is to say, their authors and compilers intended them for transmission and circulation. In its very function as a public document o f communication, this type o f manuscript is not without similarities to the modem printed text.6 Modem manu­ scripts, by contrast, are essentially private documents used by an author in the preparation, planning and plotting o f a literary project: notes, plans, scenarios, drafts and even typescripts or galley proofs revised by the author. These ‘working papers’ , as one may also call them, bear the material traces (additions, deletions, substitutions, metascriptural comments by the author, drawings) o f the genesis o f a literary text from its nebulous beginnings to its final stages (on condition, o f course, that the project has been brought to fruition). In their status as uncensored spontaneous documents, they constitute an invaluable object o f inquiry for the study o f the mechanisms o f writing o f one individual author, or, more generally, o f the laws and hazards o f literary production. Although, in the above definition, modem manuscripts need not necessarily be confined to the modem period, only a very limited 6 Cf. Louis Hay, ‘Histoire ou genese?’ , 16.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

5

number o f corpora exist before the eighteenth century, for the simple reason that preparatory writing documents were scarcely preserved before that date and, thus, have not been transmitted to us.7 Most documents were destroyed by the author or his or her relatives, others were lost during periods o f violence or political upheaval. In general, only correspondence valued for its intimate nature escaped destruc­ tion (Mme de Sevigne’s letters to her daughter are a famous ex­ ample).8 The widespread indifference towards documents o f literary creation by sixteenth- and seventeenth-century authors and collectors is not unduly surprising if one considers that modem notions such as ‘originality’ or ‘literary property’ were more or less unheard o f in classical times, when most authors were still dependent on patronage and subsidy. The eighteenth century saw a gradual liberation o f the author, culminating in the declaration o f the droits du genie in 1793, the first legal acknowledgement o f literary property. Simultaneously, eminent literati such as Diderot and Voltaire had begun collecting their own manuscript dossiers. A truly new sensibility for literary creation, however, only emerged during the Romantic period, partly as a result o f the altered conception o f the literary act introduced by the Romantic school (the classical doctrine o f imitatio was replaced by a new aesthetics at the heart o f which lay the notions o f genius, spontaneity and authenticity).9 Significantly, it was also in the nine­ teenth century that librarians and archivists started to collect modem manuscripts systematically, not only for their inherent aesthetic value and the social prestige o f their authors, but in their own right as documents offering evidence o f how the creative mind works. Not least, authors themselves had a decisive influence on cultural politics and, afortiori, on the gradual upgrading and institutionalization o f the creative act. For instance, when Victor Hugo donated his complete manuscripts, including drafts and proofs, to the Bibliotheque natio­ n a l (which, he predicted, would one day be the ‘Bibliotheque des Etats-Unis d’Europe’) in 1875 and 1881, his gesture in many ways 7 The problem o f the availability o f working manuscript documents before the modem period to a certain extent weakens the theoretical status o f genetic criticism. A further restriction to the genetic method arises from modem computer technology which is now used by a large number o f authors. The valuable traces o f the genetic process all risk disappearing with the computer’s ‘delete’ key. Fortunately, authors such as A m o Schmidt, who are themselves interested in the creative act, carefully store each alteration on screen. 8 See Florence Callu, ‘La Transmission des manuscrits’ . 9 See Abrams, The Mirror and the Lamp.

6

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

altered the understanding o f manuscript material.10 B y the end o f the nineteenth century, preparatory manuscript material had gained the status o f a document valid for scholarly inquiry. The next question, then, is: what approaches have been developed in the study o f modem manuscripts? And, crucially, do they differ from those applied to classical and medieval manuscripts? The difference is perhaps most evident in the purely textual treatment o f manuscript material in traditional textual criticism. The main problem for the editing and interpretation o f ancient manuscripts (mostly classical and biblical texts) with which the philologist is confronted is that the text has come to us in the form o f several, often divergent copies. Classical scholarship, especially under the influence o f the German philologist Karl Lachmann (179 3-18 51), proceeded on the assumption that the intervention o f scribes and publishing profes­ sionals involved in textual transmission had led to accidental deteri­ oration o f the lost original. Lachmann proposed to eliminate ‘contamination’ from the mediated text and, by means o f a stemma codicum (a genealogical tree o f the various copies available), to produce a text as close to the lost original document as possible, the so-called ‘authoritative text’ . Lachmann’s method was for many years the standard model for the edition and interpretation o f classical texts as well as for medieval texts in vernacular languages. Introduced to French medieval philology by Gaston Paris in i860, it was only some sixty years later that Lachmann’s editorial rationale was eventually challenged by the philologist Jacques Bedier, who suggested that instead o f seeking to establish an ‘authoritative text’, editors should choose a single ‘best’ manuscript from any o f the copies, and print it with as little editorial intervention as possible.11 Editors ever since have had to situate themselves somewhere in between the two positions, until, in the past decade, a new trend, known by the name o f ‘N ew Philology’, began to shake the foundations o f both methods. Bernard Cerquiglini, a much-quoted promoter o f N ew Philology, has argued that the seemingly objective and scientific methods o f traditional philology are in fact underpinned by a rigid ideology.12 Using hierarchical and idealistic premisses, 10 O n the impact o f H ugo’s donation, see Alain R ey , ‘Traces’ . 11 For a fuller account o f the polemics between Lachmann and Bedier see David F. Hult, ‘Reading it Right: The Ideology o f Text Editing’ . 12 Eloge de la variante. Histoire critique de la philologie. For a fuller account o f the N e w Philology, see also the articles collected in Speculum 65 (1990).

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

7

traditional philologists postulate an ‘ideal’ author versus a ‘limited’ scribe who is made responsible for irregularities and language decay. Behind the attempt to reconstitute an ‘authoritative text’, Cerquiglini and others claim, lies a desire for a stable and regular language which stands in stark contrast to the fluidity o f Old French. Also, the project o f eliminating scribal corruption becomes problematic if one accepts that the close collaboration between author and scribe in medieval times made the scribe himself, to a certain extent, a producer o f the text. Bearing this in mind, N ew Philologists argue that scholarship should overcome its normalizing approach to language and texts and accept that, especially in medieval texts, different versions o f a manuscript may all be ‘correct’ , as it were, and should all be considered in their own right. Consequently, editors o f manuscripts should not only present one text (be it ‘authoritative’ or simply the ‘best’) with the ‘defective’ variants banned to the critical apparatus, but present all variants side by side in a synoptic edition.13 Scholars working in the early-modern and modem period have the great advantage over classical or medieval scholars that, in most cases, more or less complete sets o f manuscripts and o f successive editions are available for their investigations. However, the premisses for the exploitation o f these documents are strikingly similar to the ones adopted for classical and medieval texts. Over the last century, different schools o f modem textual criticism have developed all over Europe and in the United States: the German Historisch-Kritische Ausgabe and the Anglo-American Bibliography are pertinent ex­ amples. Though different methodologically, these schools pursue a similar goal, namely to establish one definitive text in its form ne varietur. Depending on the chosen editorial model, editors compare the published version either with the last manuscript revised by the author (a convention which, incidentally, is coming more and more under attack) or, alternatively, with the first edition.14 The differences between the two versions are incorporated into a potentially vast critical apparatus as a choice o f ‘variants’. Traditional textual criticism, 13 See e.g. Les Redactions en vers du couronnement de Louis, ed. Yvan G. Lepage. 14 For recent methodological debates see e.g. Jerome M cGann, A Critique o f Modem Textual Criticism. M cGann asserts that the text needs to be established in relation to the history o f its production, reproduction and reception. It would thus be more sensible in some cases to take the first edition rather than the original manuscript as copy text. See also Herschel Parker’s powerful critique o f the authorized text in Flawed Texts and Verbal Icons.

8

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

then, is in essence teleological: it views preparatory versions o f a text as an imperfect approximation to the published text. The term ‘variant’ is in itself indicative o f the concept that stands behind this editorial approach. The author’s hesitations and amendments during the process o f writing are on the whole considered o f minor importance compared to a fixed, autonomous, published text.15 Genetic criticism, by contrast, is interested in the text in its making. Basing itself on the material traces o f the writing act, it attempts to reconstruct the intellectual, linguistic and cultural processes that were involved in the genesis o f a work o f art. From this dynamic and transformational perspective, a previous version o f the text is no longer considered as a variant o f minor importance, but as a genuine stage o f the literary creation that deserves to be analysed in its own right. Jacques Neefs, one o f the leading theoreticians o f a genetic aesthetics, has perhaps best formulated what is involved in genetic criticism, and, by extension, how the genetic inquiry differs from philology: C e qui est en je u , c ’ est la variation des etats, c ’est la confrontation d ’une oeuvre avec tous les possibles qui la com posent, en am ont co m m e en aval, c ’est la m obilite co m p le xe et la stabilite precaire des formes. . . . [II s’agit] de chercher a com pren d re des processus d’in vention intellectuelle et esthetique qui, a travers telles activites particulieres, propres a une oeuvre ou a un grou pe d ’ oeuvres, p eu ven t caracteriser un genre, un temps, une activite culturelle.16

Philology is in essence concerned with textual stability (the classical scholar seeks to reconstruct a lost archetype; the modem textual critic establishes an authoritative text ne varietur). Genetic criticism, within a different critical framework, explores the text in its coming-into-being; it investigates processes o f invention and creation. To highlight this important point again, classical and genetic critics not only work on different documents (public versus modem manuscripts), they also part ways in their approach to and treatment o f the documents concerned. The first question raised at the outset, then, can be confidently answered with a ‘yes: genetic 15 This does not o f course mean that textual critics are totally insensitive about variants. O n the English literary scene, Alison Fairlie is a good example o f a critic interested in the effect changes in a manuscript have on a prose text or poem. See e.g. her articles ‘ “ M ene-t-on la foule dans les ateliers?” — Some Remarks on Baudelaire’s Variants’ and ‘The Shaping o f Adolphe: Some Remarks on Variants*. 16 ‘La Critique genetique: l’histoire d’une theorie’ , 16, 2 1.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

9

criticism does differ from traditional textual criticism’ . The second question, concerning the novelty o f the method, or, rather, the claim that studies on literary creation already flourished in France well before the foundation o f the genetic school in the 1970s, remains to be addressed. Names that are usually put forward in this debate include those o f Henri Massis, Antoine Albalat, Gustave Lanson, Gustave Rudler and Pierre Audiat for the first half o f our century, and, for the ’ 50s and ’60s, Jean Pommier, Marie-Jeanne Durry, Bernard Guyon, Andre Vial and Robert Ricatte.17 Unquestionably, all o f these critics shared a common interest in literary production (or, more specifically, in the psychological processes involved in artistic creation), and they were all, in one way or another, involved in the study o f modem manuscripts. The group around Lanson was subjected to violent criticism in 1968— ‘Lansonism’ became the very epitome o f the scholarly dogma and arid erudition o f the old Sorbonne— but has recently made a come-back, be it only in accounts o f the history o f literary history.18 The second group, especially Pommier and Durry, has proved highly influential for younger critics such as Claudine Gothot-Mersch, one o f the pioneers o f genetic studies.19 Not least owing to the efforts o f the scholars listed above, manuscript studies came to occupy the privileged place in literary criticism they hold at present. Whether they may be considered as the first geneticiens avant la lettre, as is argued by some genetic critics, or, more significantly, 17 The works most representative for their treatment o f manuscripts are Massis, Comment Em ile Zola composait ses romans; Albalat, Le Travail du style enseigne par les corrections manuscrites des grands ecrivains; Lanson, ‘U n manuscrit de Paul et Virginie. Etude sur l’invention de Bemardin de Saint-Pierre’ ; Rudler, Les Techniques de la critique et de Vhistoire litteraires en litterature frangaise moderne; Audiat, La Biographie de Voeuvre litteraire; Pommier, Paul Valery et la creation litteraire; Pommier, LTnvention et Vecriture dans {La Torpille’ de Balzac, avec le texte inedit du manuscrit original; Pommier, Creations en litterature; Pommier and Leleu (eds.), Gustave Flaubert, Madame Bovary. Nouvelle version precedee des scenarios inedits; Durry, Flaubert et ses projets inedits; Guyon, La Creation litteraire chez Balzac: la genese du Medecin de Campagne>; Vial, La Genese d ’ ‘Une vie’ , and Ricatte, La Genese de *La Fille Elisa’ . 18 Cf. e.g. Antoine Compagnon’s full-length study o f Lanson in La Troisieme Republique des Lettres, de Flaubert a Proust, 1 9 - 2 1 2 , and R oger Fayolle, ‘Bilan de Lanson’ . It is also o f note that Rudler’s Techniques de la critique et de Vhistoire litteraire was reprinted by Slatkine in 1979 and Albalat’s Le Travail du style by Colin in 19 91. 19 The impact o f her seminal work La Genese de Madame Bovary for Flaubert scholarship will be discussed in Part I.

io

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

whether their work is in essence identical with more recent genetic studies, as is argued by the school’s opponents, is, however, an altogether different question. Lanson and his colleagues were, one should not forget, in the first place literary historians and textual critics in the tradition o f classical scholarship. Their approach to modem manuscripts was still, most o f the time, governed by the hierarchical and teleological principles o f traditional philology that I discussed earlier. Lanson himself is a typical case in point. His study o f a manuscript o f Bemardin de Saint-Pierre’s Paul et Virginie, published for the first time in 1908 and reprinted in his Etudes d’histoire litteraire, for instance, is, in essence, a study in literary stylistics. Denouncing the poor quality o f Bemardin de Saint-Pierre’s first drafts, Lanson shows how, through laborious revision, the author eventually achieved a ‘good’ text with ‘good’ style. Albalat, a contemporary o f Lanson, worked under similar normative and pedagogic presumptions. The premiss behind his work he Travail du style enseigne par les corrections manuscrites des grands ecrivains is that stylistic changes and revisions, as found in the working papers o f eminent authors, lay bare general mles o f writing, and thus provide an excellent didactic model for aspiring young authors.20 Rudler, a disciple o f Lanson, included a chapter on ‘Critique de genese’ in his Techniques de la critique et de Vhistoire litteraires. His theoretical remarks on literary creation are often stimulating. His actual method o f investigation, however, concerns itself less with manuscript processes than with the psychology o f literary creation. Rudler sought, amongst other things, to determine which authorial intention governed and shaped the genesis o f a piece o f literature.21 Audiat, the last scholar mentioned above, was also interested in the psychology o f literary creation, but, in contrast to the group around Lanson, he attached greater importance to manuscripts in their own right. He understood the evolution o f a literary text as a dynamic process at the origin o f which may be a simple idea, concept, image or sentence, which generates further developments.22 Audiat was a major influ­ ence for literary historians o f the second generation, and, as recent 20 For a more substantial discussion o f Lanson, Albalat and Victor Cousin, see Lebrave, ‘La Critique genetique’ . 21 For recent discussions o f Rudler see Pierre-Marc de Biasi, ‘La Critique genetique’ , 9 -10 , and Jean-Yves Tadie, La Critique litteraire au X X e siecle, 2 77-8 0 . 22 C f. Graham Falconer’s evaluation o f Audiat in ‘O u en sont les etudes genetiques litteraires?’, 279-80 .

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

ii

appraisals by Falconer and Gothot-Mersch show, still merits attention amongst genetic critics today.23 And so do most o f the French scholars in the ’ 50s and ’60s who engaged in the study o f modem manuscripts. Gothot-Mersch has given a detailed assessment o f their work in relation to modem genetic criticism, and I shall therefore not discuss them individually.24 She argues that Pommier et alii, whilst still operating most o f the time under the premisses o f Lansonian philology and source studies, already anticipated some o f the lines o f inquiry that are pursued by genetic critics in our time. Their principles were still often hierarchical, as is, for instance, evidenced in Pommier’s new edition o f the scenarios and plans for Madame Bovary which organizes manuscript material o f different periods o f writing in relation to the published text, thus disregarding the actual genetic sequence.25 But, on the whole, they sought to understand the complex mechanisms involved in a genetic process. The ’ 50s and ’60s have indisputably produced many valuable etudes de genese; these works, however, are not strictly ‘genetic’ in the sense defined by the genetic school. Pommier, Guyon and their kind were only just growing away from literary history. Unaffected by the intellectual revolution that shook France in the aftermath o f 1968, they did not yet possess the critical framework which made the conceptualization o f the genetic method possible. I will now assess the influence o f new text theories on genetic criticism. B y the early 1970s, under the influence o f semiotics and post­ structuralism, genetic criticism could eventually establish itself as a new school distinct from philology and literary history. Whilst the dominant schools o f thought from the 1940s onwards (the Russian Formalists, the American N ew Critics, the French Structuralists, or the German Werkimmanente Methode) had treated texts as closed entities with no outside referent and explained in terms o f their internal relations only, the post-structuralist avant-garde, led by Roland Barthes, Julia Kristeva and Jacques Derrida, refuted the notion o f text as a closed literary system and replaced it by that o f text as production. ‘Production’ here needs to be understood in the common sense o f textual production, but, more importantly, also in the sense o f an interaction between the text and its reader whereby, 23 Cf. Falconer, ‘O u en sont les etudes?’ , 279 -8 0 , and Claudine Gothot-Mersch, ‘Les Etudes de genese en France de 1950 a i960’ , 175. 24 ‘Les Etudes de genese’ . 25 C f. Gothot-M ersch’s critique in ‘Les Etudes de genese’ , 177.

12

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

ideally, the reader himself becomes a producer o f the text.26 In this perspective, the text can no longer be considered as a fixed material object, it becomes something fluid and dynamic. Since, in Barthesian terms, the process o f reading involves a certain amount o f re-creation, in consequence the work o f the author and the work of the critic become inseparable and overlapping activities.27 Though avant-garde text theories became highly influential in literary circles, it must be said that theoreticians, and perhaps most prominently Kristeva, never strictly defined the notion o f ‘text’ . They borrowed scientific terminology from diverse disciplines, such as physics or biology, but in such an eclectic way that, to say the least, they created considerable textual confusion constructed around the notion o f an immaterial text.28 Genetic criticism has used the post-structuralist dissolution o f the closed text to define its own notion o f the fluid, dynamic manuscript text which, since it is not in any published form, is subject to constant revision. At the same time, genetic criticism has abandoned the vague post-structuralist conception o f the text as an interactive process. The genetic approach reinstalls the text in its materiality. Its objects o f inquiry are the material traces o f writing. With regard to the foundation o f the genetic school, it is worth mentioning that writers themselves, earlier than critics, commented on their particular practices. At the end o f the 1960s, Albert Skira and Gaeton Picon founded the series Les Sentiers de la creation (published by Skira), which gave writers, artists, critics and scientists the opportunity to reflect on their art or discipline in particular, and on human creation and invention in general.29 In 1976 Aragon donated his and Elsa Triolet’s manuscripts to the C N R S (but not to the Bibliotheque nationale, as Hugo had done almost exactly a hundred years earlier) for scientific exploration, thus inaugurating a new, more collaborative relationship between artists and critics. At about the same time, JeanLouis de Rambures initiated a series o f interviews entitled ‘Comment travaillent les ecrivains’, published in he Monde, where eminent authors commented on their specific mode o f writing.30 26 27 28 tice, 29 30

Cf. Barthes, Le Bruissement de la langue, 7 1, and Le Plaisir du texte, 10 0 -1. Cf. Le Bruissement, 7 6 -7 , and Le Plaisir, 2 5-6 . Cf. Hans-Peter Mai, ‘Bypassing Intertextuality. Hermeneutics, Textual Prac­ Hypertext’, 38. See one o f the first tides, Aragon’sJ e n }ai jamais appris a ecrire ou les incipits (1969). The interviews were published under the same title by Flammarion in 1978.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

13

What might have seemed like a mere fashion, a typically modem interest in the unfinished and work in progress, became an institu­ tionalized discipline when, in the early 1970s, a small group o f Heine scholars, together with other researchers mostly working on Proust and Zola, founded the Centre d’Analyse des Manuscrits Modemes (CAM), which in 1982 became the Institut des Textes et Manuscrits Modemes (ITEM). The ITEM nowadays houses a number o f C N R S groups which, for reasons o f textual transmission discussed above, work mainly on canonical authors o f the nineteenth and twentieth century, and are involved with, or at least supervise, a large number o f critical editions. To conclude, the new impact o f genetic criticism in comparison to traditional philology and (post-)structuralist theory is that it explores the text as it comes into being. It does not focus on static published texts, but analyses dynamic processes involved in literary creation. Genetic criticism does not claim, and has never claimed, to replace traditional scholarship which has a field o f application o f its own, namely ‘public* manuscripts, and this point should be borne in mind. But since classical scholarship has had a powerful influence on the way we consider and investigate manu­ scripts and on the way they are edited, genetic criticism had to liberate itself from the premisses o f classical scholarship and to define its own anti-teleological and anti-normative stance. This liberation has been made possible through the influence o f post­ structuralist text theories. It is worth noting that N ew Philology, with its questioning o f the ideologies o f traditional philology, and in particular o f the theory o f one authoritative text, seems to mark a parallel trend to genetic criticism, one that undermines the hierarchical position o f the closed and ‘final* text.31 Both methods have set o ff a fundamental question­ ing o f the seemingly objective foundations o f ‘scientific’ methods o f text-criticism. They have brought about a shift o f the centre o f interest from the static to the dynamic text, and to the production o f texts. Their new approach necessitates a rethinking in the editing and interpretation o f manuscript material.

31 O n this point see Frank Paul Bowman, ‘Genetic Criticism’, 6 3 1 - 3 .

i4

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

2. The Material Analysis, Classification and Editing o f Modem Manuscripts

In order to give an idea o f the order o f magnitude o f genetic dossiers, I shall start with a few examples. Flaubert is notorious for the slow and painful elaboration o f his texts. The preparatory dossier for Madame Bovary consists o f 1793 folios mostly written recto and verso, plus a 450-page fair copy and the definitive manuscript with revisions in the author’s hand.32 For the first three paragraphs o f Herodias (seventeen lines in printed form) we find thirty-two manuscript pages extending from the first notes to the final fair copy.33 The Fonds Proust o f the Bibliotheque nationale comprises 75 draft cahiers o f variable length, 4 carnets with notes and drafts, 20 cahiers containing the fair copy for the novel from Sodome and Gomorrhe onwards and almost all the typescripts and corrected proofs, for A la recherche du temps perdu alone. (There is also a vast corpus o f manuscripts for his earlier works.) Almost complete manuscript corpora like those o f Flaubert and Proust are the exception. Even in the modem period, many documents have been lost, destroyed or held back by relatives, often for reasons o f censorship. (Flaubert’s niece, for instance, censored all passages relating to her uncle’s epilepsy and sexual activity in her publication o f his Egypt travel diary in 1910.) Others have been dispersed at auctions or are now in the hands o f private collectors, some o f whom refuse access to their holdings. In the few cases where, fortunately, the documents are available for investigation, they have often been provisionally catalogued and numbered by relatives and archivists, a classification which, needless to say, hardly corresponds to the original order o f writing. The wealth o f material, first o f all, needs to be classified folio by folio according to the chronology o f its composition. Scholars can usually derive a certain amount o f information about the possible genesis from an author’s diary or correspondence. Where more specific problems o f dating or identification occur, they can seek assistance from specialists in the material analysis o f modem manu­ scripts. The ITEM itself works in collaboration with the Laboratoire Duffieux in Besan^on, which specializes in the optical analysis o f 32 See Yvan Leclerc, ‘Introduction’ , in Gustave Flaubert, Plans et scenarios de Madame Bovary, 7 -8 . 33 See Gresillon, Elements de critique genetique, 1 1 5.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

15

manuscripts, a technique which measures the characteristics o f any individual handwriting and thus helps to authenticate anonymous documents. Further techniques include analysis in particle accelera­ tors (cyclotrons), which is used to identify a certain type o f ink and thus, a fortiori, to suggest dates for the document under investigation. A folio written in ‘Prussian blue’, for instance, cannot be more than 150 years old, since this type o f ink only came into use in the second half o f the nineteenth century. Finally, approximate dates can also be determined by chemical analysis o f paper and watermark.34 After the material analysis and provisional classification, the differ­ ent types o f working papers are determined. Nineteenth-century prose writers often alternate between carnets and cahiers3S36 7In the case o f a fairly ‘controlled’ genesis, we may find an initial scenario or plan, a series o f developed scenarios, drafts, a final manuscript, a corrected proof, a final proof and so forth. Jean Bellemin-Noel coined the term ‘avant-texte’ for the whole set o f relevant documents as established by the researcher. An avant-texte is defined as Tensemble constitue par les brouillons, les manuscrits, les epreuves, les “ variantes” , vu sous l’angle de ce qui precede materiellement un ouvrage quand celui-ci est traite comme un texte, et qui peut faire systeme avec lui\3637 After classification the work is in principle ready for scholarly inquiry, unless, for reasons which will need to be specified here, it is decided to publish a genetic edition o f a certain manuscript corpus. The fundamental difference between critical editions and truly genetic editions is that in genetic criticism it is no longer the aim o f editors to establish only the ‘best’ version o f a text reflecting the presumed ‘final intentions’ o f the author, i.e. to present a work in the relatively closed and finished form o f canonical texts. ‘Genetic’ editors aspire, on the contrary, to make the different preparatory versions o f the text available, and thus to give the reader an insight into the process o f its development. There are two principal formulae for the genetic edition. One is the so-called diplomatic edition which reproduces the topological aspect o f each folio in the manuscript corpus as faithfully as possible. A masterly example o f this type o f edition is Yvan Leclerc’s presentation o f the scenarios and plans o f Madame Bovary 37 The 34 35 36 37

For greater detail see Louis Hay, ‘Les Manuscrits au laboratoire’ . See the articles collected in Louis Hay (ed.), Carnets d ’ecrivains. Bellem in-Noel, Le Texte et Vavant-texte, 15. Flaubert, Plans et scenarios de Madame Bovary, ed. Yvan Leclerc.

16

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

second model is the so-called linearized or teleological edition; ‘linear­ ized’ because in this type o f edition all the additions and deletions in the margin and between the lines are integrated into the main text and indicated with diacritical signs. The best example is Biasi’s highly praised edition o f Flaubert’s Carnets de travail. The linearized edition proves more accessible, particularly to a non-specialized reader, but it may not be satisfactory to critics who are interested in the dynamics o f writing, and, especially, to those who are concerned with the gestation o f graphic space (this may be important for the analysis o f poetry drafts or for the cognitive implications o f writing). There also exist various mixed genres between the two main models, most notably the ‘diplomatic linearized’ edition which indicates the topography o f each folio by a vast number o f critical signs. Giovanni Bonaccorso is currently involved in a monumental edition o f all o f Flaubert’s preparatory manuscripts under the title Corpus Flaubertianum. The first two volumes, Un coeur simple and Herodias, are an impressive but also a problematic example o f an edition that has reached the frontiers o f what is materially possible and desirable in genetic editing.38 In the absence o f facsimiles, the complex sign system is difficult for the reader to assimilate. What this edition shows is that, paradoxically, both the restrictive and the exhaustive genetic edition fail to give an idea o f the complexity and dynamism o f the writing process. Exhaustive genetic editions o f the whole avant-texte will in any case remain an exception because o f the high cost o f publishing involved. Other possibilities are to present only a certain type o f working papers in the corpus (notebooks, scenarios or drafts) or, even, to concentrate on the papers pertaining to one episode only.39 All the editions I have mentioned so far are genetic editions strictu sensu. These editions are in the first place intended for specialists to spare them the tasks o f transcription and classification. Some, such as Leclerc’s edition o f the scenarios and plans for Madame Bovary or Biasi’s edition o f Flaubert’s notebooks, thanks to their lucid 38 Flaubert, Corpus Flaubertianium, I: Un coeur simple (1983), II: Herodias, tome 1 (1991), tome 2 (1995), ed. Giovanni Bonaccorso and collaborators. 39 Examples o f editions o f a particular type o f document are Flaubert, Carnets de travail, ed. P .-M . de Biasi; Flaubert, L ’Education sentimentale. Les scenarios, ed. To ny Williams; Zola, Carnets d ’enquetes, ed. Henry Mitterand; Valery, Cahiers, ed. Nicole Celeyrette-Pietri and Judith Robinson-Valery. For the edition o f material for one episode see Jeanne Goldin’s edition o f the Cornices agricoles.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

17

presentation and the fascinating and easily accessible content, may also attract a wider educated public. Where, however, the influence o f genetic editing on a more general public is most evident is in the domain o f popular editions. Today, most o f the Folio Gallimard editions include a selection o f manuscript material in the appendix. Likewise, introductions and comments are increasingly concerned with the genesis o f the text and the author’s compositional techniques. Finally, critical editions o f travel notes and diaries (Adrianne Tooke has edited Flaubert’s Par les champs et par les greves, Pierre-Marc de Biasi has edited Voyage en Egypte) introduce the reader to a sketchy but not too strongly reworked manuscript text. In the light o f technical advances in publishing technology, one more type o f edition, which may well become more prominent in the near future, needs to be discussed. Genetic editions on paper, however exhaustive they may be, will always have limitations. Because o f material constraints, they only rarely comprise facsimiles or extra-textual material such as little sketches or drawings which in their quality o f a visual support o f the genetic process may be crucial for the writing process. The only way out o f the dilemma would be to change the medium from printed edition to electronic text. Powerful new possibilities in this domain are currently being explored with the use o f hypertext. Hypertext is an extremely flexible electronic storage system that can be accessed non-sequentially. Since the information stored may be graphics, images, sound as well as text, the system is also referred to as ‘hypermedia’ .40 Used for genetic editing, in the form o f C D -R O M , for instance, hypertext/hypermedia resolves the problem o f the exhaustiveness o f the manuscript and extra-textual material presented in critical editions.41 Moreover, it offers the user an abundance o f supplementary material such as letters, journals or potential intertexts for any given manuscript passage. Scholars themselves may add comments and new findings to the given information. The great advantage o f electronic editions over their printed counterpart is that readers can select a specific part o f the avant-texte and, by virtue o f sophisticated windowing techniques, compare different folios simultaneously on the screen. Hypertext has 40 M y definition o f hypertext and hypermedia is taken from Davio Lucarella, ‘A Model for Hypertext-Based Information Retrieval’ , 81. 41 For a recent edition on C D - R O M see Robert Musil, Der literarische Nachlafl, ed. Friedbert Aspetsberger, Karl Eible and A d o lf Frise.

18

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

been welcomed with great enthusiasm in literary circles and amongst publishers.42 Interestingly, its implications for textual editing mark an important further step in text theories. Fifteen years after Barthes, hypertext makes possible the idea o f a plural, non-linear, nonhierarchical text. Thanks to sophisticated interface tools that enable the readers to navigate through the network and add their own commentaries on the text, critical and creative activities eventually begin to merge, not only in theory, but also in practice. 3. A v a n t-T e x te and Published T ext

Transitions Literary criticism in the formalist and structuralist period has severely cut a text off from its history, and explored it only as a closed system. Genetic criticism, on the contrary, reinscribes the text in the dimension o f time. It calls into question a hierarchy between avanttexte and published text. If we consider a text in statu nascendi, we realize that the so-called ‘final’ version is only one version o f a far more diverse and perhaps richer set o f possibilities, or, to use Jacques Neefs’s suggestive phrasing, that the avant-texte is not a finite, but a virtual space.43 From this perspective genetic criticism has to redefine the status o f avant-texte and published text, and examine the relation in which they stand to each other. Whilst preparatory documents and published text usually show a sufficiently large number o f material and textual differences, one can cite a number o f cases where boundaries between the two are less distinct. What I argue here is that our appreciation o f what is or is not a text often depends on what has been established and presented to us in published form. Let us start with a simple example. Many documents that have come down to us in the form o f a text originally existed only as manuscript copies, some o f them never completed by their authors (one need only think o f Stendhal’s Lucien Leuwen, Proust’s Contre Sainte-Beuve or Kafka’s Das Schloft). Often, in these cases, the manu­ scripts have been re-arranged by the editor and their unfinished nature has been glossed over. Whilst some o f the above texts were established against the explicit will o f their authors (Kafka is the most famous case in point), writers in the second half o f the present century 42 See Bernard Stiegler, ‘Machines a ecrire et matieres a penser’ . 43 ‘La Prevision de Tceuvre’ , h i .

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

19

have themselves initiated the publication o f some o f their manu­ scripts. Ponge’s La Fabrique du pre (1971), Amo Schmidt’s ZetteVs Traum (1970) or Volker R iihm korf’s Selbst IH/88. Aus der Fassung (1989) are impressive examples.44 Can these documents be considered as genuine texts? Are they literature for the simple reason that they have come down to us in published form? The issue becomes even more problematic if we consider texts that were under constant revision and expansion. Montaigne, as is well known, composed mainly by accretion.45 For the fifth edition o f the Essais in 1588, he juxtaposed some 600 additions to Books I and II, and also added a completely new third book. His additions, o f variable length, are integrated throughout the text. After 1588 he wrote no entirely new chapters, but made additions in the margins o f his 1588 edition, which represent about one quarter o f his total work. What is so striking about this accumulative process is that, paradoxically, the text progresses not by eliminating alternatives, but, on the contrary, by multiplying them. The juxtaposition o f the various versions in the edition oblige the reader to take each version in its own right and in its often contradictory relation to the whole set. Similarly, Musil’s manuscript o f Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften had so much proliferated in the final stages that it eventually prevented any further linear development o f the novel (Musil used a dense tissue o f references to link textual fragments, which resulted in a structure in perpetual movement). The author refused in 1938 to publish a provisional continuation o f his novel although the text existed already in proof, and, in the end, he decided that probably the best form for his subject was a loose combination o f drafts.46 Significantly, these drafts not only contain parallel, often contra­ dictory versions for the ending o f the novel, but also establish new passages that challenge the first parts o f the novel that already existed in print. In the case o f Montaigne and Musil, the definitive status o f the printed text is challenged by the constant expansion o f the manu­ script, thus revealing the artificiality o f what we consider a text ne varietur. Other texts, somewhat paradoxically, are devoid o f any documents that relate to their genesis. The blind writer Borges was obliged to dictate his texts to a secretary. His creation is exclusively 44 Cited by Gresillon in Elements de critique genetique, 17. 45 See John Holyoake, Montaigne. Essais, 1 2 - 1 6 . 46 Michel Espagne, ‘Les Enjeux de la genese’, 119 .

20

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

mental with none o f its traces left in written form.47 Slightly differently, in the case o f the Surrealists and their experiments with automatic writing, a distinction between the working papers and the published text is no longer possible.48 I have given a number o f extreme cases where it becomes clear that the boundary between text and avant-texte is, at the very least, hazy. What we consider to be a text depends, first, on the literary aesthetics o f individual authors (and, by extension, on which documents they decided to release to the public)49 and, second, on what has been established and presented as a text by publishers and editors. As I said at the outset, the extreme cases where text and avant-texte overlap are the exception. They are evoked here as a reminder that ‘text’ and ‘literature’ are mediated notions which depend to a large extent on institutionalization (publication, prizes, scholarly studies). Perhaps more importantly, examples such as that o f Musil show that the preparatory manuscript material exerts a certain pressure upon the published text and that, inversely, the published text shapes one’s perception o f the avant-texte.50 What then needs to be explored is the dynamic interrelation between the two. Models Jean Bellemin-Noel, who introduced the notion o f avant-texte, has used a psychoanalytical metaphor when dealing with this issue: ‘L ’avant-texte est le texte enfant, le texte n’est pas l’enfant de l’avant-texte. Et celui que j ’ai ete jusqu’a ma maturite est a la fois moi-meme, par les souvenirs que je revendique comme miens, et une infinite d’autres que j ’ai oublies, que je ne comprends plus.’51 The image o f the child-text is a suggestive model for the maturation o f a text: obviously a text is determined by its genetic origins (the person o f the author), but its development is highly dependent on external factors (the social, political and literary environment) and conscious or unconscious decisions (the author’s ‘intention’, or, as it were, the rationale o f a text as a self-generating entity). 47 Gresillon, Elements de critique genetique, 29. 48 Raym onde Debray-Genette, Metamorphoses du rerit, 20. 49 The examples o f Chateaubriand, Montaigne and Stendhal are discussed by Jacques Neefs in ‘D e main vive’ . 50 O n this point see also Neefs, ‘La Prevision de l’ceuvre’ . 51 Jean Bellemin-Noel, ‘Avant-texte et lecture psychanalytique’ , 163.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

21

Julia Kristeva, not a genetic critic as such, but interested in intertextual transformations o f the text, created the now wellknown concepts o f ‘geno-text’ and ‘pheno-text’, which may be invoked for further clarification. In her definition, she has recourse to linguistic theory, more specifically to Chomsky’s theory o f generative transformation: L e texte n ’ est pas un phenom ene linguistique, autrem ent dit il n ’ est pas la signification structuree qui se presente dans un corpus linguistique vu co m m e une structure plate. II est son engendrem ent: un en gen drem en t inscrit dans ce ‘p h en o m e n e’ linguistique, ce phen o-texte q u ’ est le texte im prim e, mais qui n ’ est lisible que lorsqu’ on rem onte verticalement a travers la genese . . . C e qui s’ o u vre dans cette verticale est l’operation (linguistique) de genera­ tion du p h en o -tex te . N o u s appellerons cette operation un gen o-texte en dedoublant ainsi la notion de texte en p h en o -tex te et ge n o -te x te (surface et fond, structure signifiee et p ro ductivite signifiante).52

If we now compare Kristeva’s notion o f th e geno-texte to BelleminN oel’s avant-texte, it is obvious that the two do not coincide. Kristeva’s ‘geno-text’ is, in a sense, immaterial and abstract; it is not a set o f texts, but the transformation o f a text which eventually produces meaning. It can furthermore be considered as an aspect o f the dynamic that leads from geno-text to pheno-text. At a later point in the chapter quoted above, Kristeva proposes a second and seemingly contradictory definition o f the geno-text which comes close to Bellemin-Noel’s description o f the avant-texte. She points to the larger set o f possibilities that a geno-text contains: ‘Le geno-texte peut etre presente comme le dispositif de l’histoire de la langue et des pratiques signifiantes qu’elle est susceptible de connaitre: les possibi­ lity de toutes les langues concretes existantes et a venir y sont “ donnees” avant de retomber masquees ou censurees dans le pheno-texte’ (p. 223). Her definition o f the geno-text is at least ambiguous. It oscillates between a linguistic and cultural ‘compet­ ence’ (to use terminology o f Chomsky, from whom Kristeva makes extensive borrowings here), a potential o f information and practices (this is what geno-texte, a borrowing from the domain o f genetics, actually implies) and the process o f transformation that this text 52 Julia Kristeva, Semeiotike. Recherches pour une semanalyse, 219. Kristeva has given yet another more expanded definition o f geno-texte and pheno-texte in La Revolution du langage poetique. L }Avant-garde a la fin du X I X e siecle: Lautreamont et Mallarme, 83—6.

22

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

undergoes. Bellemin-Noel’s ‘child-text’ and Kristeva’s ‘geno-text’ must be seen in relation to the specific critical approaches in the context o f which they were developed, namely psycho-analysis and intertextuality respectively. Transposed to genetic theory, they are suggestive metaphors for the virtual qualities inherent in an avanttexte. However, when it comes to a concrete confrontation between avant-texte and published text in their materiality within the wider perspective o f defining premisses for genetic studies, these notions can only be o f a provisional, heuristic nature. A more pragmatic approach must be adopted to scrutinize the status o f avant-texte and published text. A promising recent development in this direction is a move towards cognitive studies in genetic criticism. Almuth Gresillon, Catherine Fuchs and Jean-Louis Lebrave are seeking at present to apply linguistics to the cognitive study o f textualization processes. In an exemplary study on the genesis o f Herodias— an article that can in a sense be considered as the programme for their present work— they raise the crucial questions o f how a mental project comes to be verbalized, how a sequence o f words is further transformed into sentences until it eventually constitutes a textual unity and how such a textual unity is further transformed through series o f fresh reformula­ tions. Gresillon, Fuchs and Lebrave distinguish between three stages in Flaubert’s writing: the ‘redactionnel-scenarique’, the ‘redactionneltextualisant’ and the ‘redactionnel-final’ .53 Their dynamic notion o f ‘textualisation’ stimulates a new discussion o f the status o f an avanttexte. Where Bellemin-Noel had claimed that an avant-texte is already a text, Jacques Petit has now provocatively stated ‘Le texte n’existe pas’.54 Gresillon and her collaborators, in a much more realistic way, maintain that there is a transition from word to text, that an avant-texte is not to be considered as a text from the very beginning, but that it gradually becomes one. The dynamic processes involved in the passage from word to text are manifest in changes in the linguistic system (lexical items, constructions, categories o f grammar). The growing number o f predicates and the increase o f complex verb tenses, for instance, are characteristic o f the emergence o f the levels o f sentence and, thus, crucial for textual coherence and cohesion. The 53 Almuth Gresillon, Catherine Fuchs and Jean-Louis Lebrave, ‘Flaubert: “ R u m iner Herodias” . Du cognitif-visuel au verbal-textuel’ , 68. 54 ‘Les Manuscrits: transcription, editions, signification', Colloque C N R S - E N S , Paris, 1975. Quoted in Louis Hay, ‘ “ Le Texte n’existe pas’ ” , 147.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

23

insertion o f the intertext from documentary notes and what Gresillon and her collaborators call the ‘mise en place du regard’ (that is, a mental and visual representation o f the scene o f action which influences the structuring o f the emerging text) may serve as further non-linguistic indicators for the phase o f textualization.55 From this linguistic and cognitive perspective the term avant-texte as such becomes problematic. If an avant-texte becomes a text during its genesis, it no longer makes sense to distinguish between the pre­ paratory and the published with reference to avant-texte and text. Gresillon has suggested the more neutral term ‘genetic dossier’ which she rather elaborately defines as un ensemble constitue par les documents ecrits que l’on peut attribuer dans l’apres-coup a un projet d’ecriture determine dont il importe peu qu’il ait abouti ou non a un texte publie’ .56 Whether or not the new terminology comes to be adopted, linguistic and cognitive studies pertinently show the validity o f a confrontation between preparatory and published documents in their dynamic interplay. Handicaps: The Anti-Teleological Fallacy All logical considerations, then, seem to point towards a fruitful tension between avant-texte and published text. Paradoxically, the main handicap that obstructs such a dialogue in practice is a tendency displayed by genetic critics themselves. Anxious not to fall back into the reductive teleology o f traditional scholarship, most critics today insist on the independent status o f the avant-texte. Biasi and Jean Levaillant, for instance, warn that an avant-texte must not be con­ sidered as a supplement to the published text, and, from a methodo­ logical point o f view, that geneticians must not transplant the hermeneutics and poetics o f the published text to the avant-texte.57 Rather, one should consider the avant-texte as fundamentally different from the published text, as an ‘espace autre’ .58 There is no such thing as a harmonious development towards a published text, says Levail­ lant. The avant-texte is itself discontinuity and disruption. N ow , although all these points have some justification, they tend to exclude one crucial question, namely the relation between avant-texte and 55 See Gresillon et al., ‘Flaubert: “ Rum iner Herodias’ ” , 104. 56 Elements de critique genetique, 109. 57 See Biasi, ‘Le Manuscrit spectaculaire’ , 200, and Levaillant, ‘Ecriture et genetique textuelle’ , 13. 58 Levaillant, 1 3 - 1 4 .

24

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

published text. By postulating the avant-texte as an autonomous entity which obeys its own rules, Levaillant risks severing the dynamic interrelation between the two. Raymonde Debray-Genette, one o f the leading Flaubert critics, similarly rejects the idea o f progress involved in genetic processes and regards the avant-texte as a different entity altogether: ‘si l’on a pense jusqu’ici la genetique en termes d’evolution, le plus souvent meme en termes de progres, il semble qu’il faudrait incliner a la penser en termes de difference, lui accorder un fonctionnement plus autonome, lui accorder sa propre poetique’ .59 The poetics o f the avant-texte that she envisages would be in essence a poetics o f writing in contrast to the traditional poetics o f the text. In the last instance, Levaillant and Debray-Genette (only cited here as representatives o f a widely spread trend in genetic studies) view the avant-texte as an autonomous system with its own inherent rules. Conceptually, Levaillant’s and Debray-Genette’s approach is, in the end, not so different from that o f immanent reading. It is simply inverting the former hierarchies between avant-texte and published text: the avant-texte now more or less excludes investigation o f the published text, the one that Debray-Genette calls the ‘primitive text* (p. 19). An orthodox theory o f this kind obstructs a potentially fruitful dialogue between avant-texte and published text. And questions concerning processes o f selection and transformation between an avant-texte and a published text still remain to be addressed. In addition to subscribing to what we may term the ‘fallacy o f the autonomous avant-texte’, genetic criticism is inclined to over­ emphasize the act o f writing in comparison to broader aspects o f literary production, such as the textual and the linguistic. Biasi, in the article quoted above, defines the object o f genetic studies as ‘le processus de conception et de mise en oeuvre de Vecriture litteraire, tel qu’il peut etre analyse a travers des documents de redaction’ (p. 200, my italics); Debray-Genette, in the article mentioned above, claims that genetic critics should distinguish between phenomena o f writing and phenomena o f textualization, and consider the text as ‘le produit historique de l’ecriture’ (p. 31). In the same vein, she later distin­ guishes between ‘travail de l’ecriture’ and ‘ [travail] de la mise en texte’ (p. 43). Interesting as they are, her remarks are also potentially problematic. Whilst her observations are pertinent for an author like Flaubert, whose manuscripts show a distinct transition from 59 Debray-Genette, Metamorphoses du recitt 19.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

25

elliptic fragments to what linguistically one would consider as ‘text’ , they exclude more spontaneous authors such as Proust, who imme­ diately textualize even the briefest sketch or note. Similarly, DebrayGenette’s conception o f the writing act appears rather one-sided. Carefully avoiding the idea o f progress and telos, she sees writing as an autonomous self-constitutive activity which has, in principle, neither beginning nor end. It is only at the stage when authors read their text in view o f a public, she claims, that they begin to organize their writing into text. Her model seems to be informed by a rather idealistic conception o f the playfulness and heuristic dimension o f the writing process. The ‘play’ (jeu) between writing and text which she describes may indeed exist in certain authors; it does, however, completely exclude the very real possibility o f an author who, from the outset, writes with a fixed project and a precise public in mind. A leading theoretician in genetic criticism, Debray-Genette is repres­ entative o f a current over-emphasis on writing in genetic studies. For the sake o f anti-teleology, she postulates an artificial division between phenomena o f writing and phenomena o f textualization, where writing is precisely a text-producing activity. Her distinction between a poetics o f writing and a poetics o f the text seems at the least tautologous. The only categories between which we can logically make a distinction are, I would argue, a poetics o f the avant-texte as opposed to a poetics o f the published text, but this would bring us back to the fallacy o f the published text as an autonomous entity. It would not take account o f the dynamic interrelation between avanttexte and published text. Therefore, if we accept the idea that there is such a thing as a poetics o f the avant-texte and a poetics o f the published text, we would have to examine instead the relation between the two, the transformations that occur during the genesis o f an avant-texte.60 The fetishizing o f writing that I have criticized, apart from being conceptually arguable, also has further negative consequences for the application o f genetic theory. B y focusing exclusively on the act o f writing in genetic criticism, one tends to underestimate the role o f the author in text production. The author is displaced by the scriptor, the one who writes.61 However, what makes genetic studies so valuable is 60 As an example see Henri Meschonnic, ‘Poetique du manuscrit chez Hugo dans La Fin de Satan (B N n.a.fr. 24754)’ . 61 Michel Pierssens argues on the contrary that genetic criticism reintroduces the figure o f the author into literary criticism. See ‘French Genetic Studies at a

26

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

that they can give us insights into aspects o f text production o f which even authors themselves may not have been aware: what complex interplay o f external and internal factors leads a text to take a certain direction? In what way does the author’s unconscious shape the structural and thematic elaboration o f the text? To what extent does the process o f writing engender its own rationale?62 A deliberate narrowing down o f the genetic discipline to processes within the avant-texte (thus excluding a dialogue with the published text, and excluding the figure o f the author) would reintroduce closure, precisely the attitude that genetic criticism calls into question, and would moreover prove extremely reductive for genetic theory and inquiry. The potential fallacies that I have pointed out here, and this is a crucial point, all stem from a desire to separate genetic criticism from other critical theories (structuralism, biographism) and from tradi­ tional philology (which tends to privilege the teleological reading). They represent the ‘hard line’, so to speak, o f genetic theory. Moreover, they promote one particular image o f the genesis o f texts which is that o f disruption, randomness and incompletion. This stance is just as much influenced by modem critical theory as are the tenets o f a harmonious genesis o f texts which pretend that manuscripts progress linearly to a ‘final’ text. Not all genetic critics follow this extreme stance. Michel Espagne, for instance, asserts that teleology is inevitable for the study o f manuscripts, but that we have to decide which teleology we are dealing with before we ban it: ‘La teleologie est un element inevitable de l’etude des manuscrits, mais pas n’importe quelle teleologie, et il vaut mieux en cemer l’enracinement et les variations historiques, les relations avec les representations dominantes de la rationalite plutot que de la demoniser’ .63 Similarly, Crossroads’ , 6 21. This is true only to the extent that genetic criticism shows an interest in artistic creation and practice, and thus inevitably comes back to the figure o f the author. W hen it comes to the analysis o f an avant-texte, however, we often find the overestimation o f writing with the consequences that I have stated above. A t best, French critics vacillate between author and scriptor. Michel Contat, for instance, argues that genetic criticism makes the author more complex. The task o f genetic studies, he says, is to show how the author (understood as a social person) and the writer (understood here as scriptor) communicate in the dynamism o f writing. See ‘La Question de l’auteur au regard des manuscrits’ . 62 O n these points see the essays collected in Litterature 52 (1983), ‘L ’Inconscient dans l’avant-texte’ , and the interviews collected in Rambures, Comment travaillent les ecrivains. 63 See ‘Les Etudes genetiques et la teleologie’ , 2 13 .

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

27

Daniel Ferrer argues that teleology is not a critical artefact, but is inherent to genetic processes. He therefore promotes a ‘plural’ teleology.64 There are also some alternative models which attempt to circum­ scribe aims, means and approaches in genetic criticism: Adrianne Tooke, for instance, has defined genetic criticism as follows: ‘Genetic criticism deals with the reciprocal relationship between fluid manu­ scripts and fixed final texts in a new poetics o f texts in the making’ .65 Her definition is a very suggestive one because it attempts a synthesis between avant-texte and published text in their reciprocal dynamics. Jacques Neefs describes the avant-texte as the ‘habitacle d’un texte poursuivi, tente’.66 The avant-texte is the sphere where the text constitutes itself, where the author approximates and experiments with possible forms. The avant-texte, he argues, is a text o f multiple teleologies and infinite possibilities. Neefs invites us to explore the individual rhythm o f creation o f each manuscript corpus: ‘Chaque corpus d’ecrivain est gere selon un rythme, suivant des parcours et avec des visees caracteristiques de l’ceuvre qui y prend forme’ (p. 10). Clearly, Neefs also seeks to overcome the strict separation between avant-texte and published text, and to evade the risks o f the antievolutionary fallacy. Instead o f postulating the avant-texte as an autonomous entity, he explores the procedures by which a work o f art manifests itself and eventually takes shape. With these new directives in mind, I shall therefore argue again that only the more liberal approaches in genetic criticism, those which do not over­ estimate the avant-texte, open up new ways for a dialogue between manuscripts and published texts, and thus enable a fruitful combina­ tion o f philological and interpretative methods. 4. The Critical Potential

Henri Mitterand has suggested that interpretative genetic studies fall into two categories: genetique scriptique and genetique scenarique.67 Genetique scriptique is concerned with the small units o f literary production. It analyses transformations on the page such as the 64 See ‘La Toque de Clementis. Reaction et remanence dans les processus genetiques’ , ioo. 65 See her review o f Raymonde Debray-Genette, Metamorphoses du recit: Autour de Flaubert. 66 ‘La Sphere des manuscrits’ , n . 67 See Mitterand, ‘Avant-Propos’, p. vi.

28

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

substitutions o f words, the expansion or reduction o f sentences or paraphrastic processes, from a mainly stylistic point o f view.68 Genetique scenarique, on the other hand, examines the macro-structural elaboration o f a literary project, i.e. the genesis o f narrative plans and structures and the techniques involved in the organization o f a work o f art.69 According to Debray-Genette, the genetic process as such, on the other hand, can be divided into two types: endogenese and exogenese.70 Exogenese relates to the selection and appropriation o f external elements (the insertion o f intertexts, the absorption o f literary and cultural models, the appropriation o f biographical material), whereas ertdogenese relates to the production and transformation o f working papers, i.e. processes o f selection and combination within the various stages o f writing. If genetique scriptique/genetique scenarique and exogenese/endogenese are separated in genetic theory, the praxis shows that there is a certain amount o f overlap within each pair: apparently insignificant developments on the microstructural level can have a direct impact on the macrostructure. Similarly, exogenetic phenomena are difficult to distinguish from endogenetic ones.71 Borrowings from an intertext (an exogenetic process), for instance, may have direct repercussions on the narrative organization o f a manuscript (an endogenetic process). Within the two large sub-sections genetique scriptique and genetique scenarique, we find a number o f often diffuse approaches. In what follows, I shall survey three approaches which best illustrate the diversity and critical potential o f genetic studies. I have chosen approaches that are clearly inspired by their counterpart in immanent reading, but which reveal the different critical angle o f the genetic approach.72

68 See e.g. Louis Hay (ed.), La Genese du texte. Les modeles linguistiques. 69 T he work o f Mitterand and Neefs provides masterly examples o f genetique scenarique. 70 See ‘Genetique et poetique’, 24. For a more detailed discussion o f ‘exogenetics’ and ‘endogenetics’ see also Pierre-Marc de Biasi, ‘What is a Literary Draft? Tow ard a Functional Typology o f Genetic Documentation’ , 4 2 -7 . 71 Debray-Genette, Metamorphoses du recit, 29. 72 For a detailed discussion o f borrowings made by the genetic school and, inversely, o f the impact o f genetic studies on other methods o f literary criticism see Debray-Genette, Metamorphoses du recit, 3 1-4 7 .

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

29

Genetic Studies and Social and Cultural History When the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu attacked genetic criticism in his book Les Regies de I’art, his main point o f critique was that the study o f the subsequent versions o f a text is not sufficient to reconstruct the genesis o f the work within the different fields that constitute it— the literary field (prevailing literary movements, discourses and narrative models), the social field (market forces) and the field o f power (censors, literary institutions). In his critique, Bourdieu apparently had a specific type o f genetic studies in mind. The very scattered examples he evokes are all taken from the domain o f genetic editing (Williams and Biasi). His only theoretical reference is Biasi’s early programmatic article in Encyclopaedia Universalis. No mention is made o f Henri Mitterand or Michael Werner, who have both worked extensively on the relation between literary production and social and cultural history. In the light o f this rather limited attack, then, we need to clarify in what respect genetic studies with a cultural, historical or sociological inclination differ from purely contextualiz­ ing literary studies or from the ‘genesis o f the literary field’, as it is proposed by Bourdieu. More importantly, I will discuss a number o f studies that have effectively inscribed the avant-texte in the cultural, literary and political field, where Bourdieu denies precisely that the genetic method is qualified for this type o f inquiry. Let us take censorship as an example. Bourdieu briefly refers to the famous trials o f 1857 and their effects on the literary careers o f Flaubert and Baudelaire.73 Whereas Flaubert, owing to the effet de scandale, emerged from the trial as a best-selling and fashionable author, Baudelaire was pushed further into the margins o f the avant-garde, and radicalized his position o f revolt against the author­ ities and literary institutions. Bourdieu attempts in this precise case to analyse the relation between the literary field and the field o f power. More broadly, he evaluates the influence o f politics, market forces, editorial practice and institutional valorization on the literary field. Genetic critics, I would argue, are concerned with similar issues, but go one step further. On the basis o f the evidence o f the manuscripts, they seek to establish precisely how authors react to these external pressures and influences in their literary practice. What is involved, 73 On the political pressure on literary production see also Yvan Leclerc, Crimes ecrits. La litterature en proces au X I X e siecle.

30

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

then, is the impact o f external constituting factors on modes o f writing, rather than, as in Bourdieu’s project, on the constitution o f a literary field. Heinrich Heine is a particularly interesting case in point. Between 1840 and 1848 he wrote articles for the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung about social and cultural life in Paris under the July Monarchy. These articles underwent severe censorship by the German authorities, so that Heine, in anticipation, often had to alter and adapt his text. An investigation o f his drafts not only calls into question the portrayal o f society given in the published articles, but also reveals how Heine developed a system o f rhetoric with special metaphors, parables and quotations under the constraint o f political pressure.74 Moreover, Heine’s manuscripts show how a writer adapts the process o f writing according to the public addressed. Heine published a collection o f his articles in Germany under the title Lutezia in 1854. One year later, he presented a modified version to a French readership. Michael Werner has analysed the transformations between the two versions from various angles: the narrative perspective (in the French version, Heine abandons his German point o f view), representations o f the social and political life (the French version is, as a whole, more politically oriented and Heine gives a more negative view o f England) and rhetorical features, such as imagery and puns.75 Heine’s case shows pertinently how an author adapts his writing in anticipation o f its potential reception. Now , the culture o f a certain time need not necessarily be repressive in order to have bearings on the genesis o f a literary text. Henri Mitterand, influenced by semiotics and Chomsky’s generative transformational grammar, has designed a theoretical model for the relation between what he calls the ‘cultural space’ and literary production.76 Broadly speaking, this model attempts to identify the determining factors o f an emerging text and to reconstitute the development that leads from preconceived ideological and cultural models to the published text. It is applied to the preparatory dossier o f Zola’s L ’Assommoir. Mitterand’s initial proposition is that each text is overdetermined (‘surdetermine’) by received models o f thinking. He 74 See Michael Werner, ‘La Dialectique de la censure: a propos de l’autocensure dans les articles joumalistiques de Heine’ . 75 See ‘Heines franzosische Bearbeitung der “ Lutezia” und das Problem des Zielpublikums’ . 7 See ‘Programme et preconstruit genetiques: le dossier de L ’Assommoir

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

31

argues that the cultural and ideological stereotypes and beliefs o f a certain cultural community at a certain moment in time form part o f an ideological and discursive ‘competence’ . This competence, which lies at the heart o f Mitterand’s theory, is twofold: it comprises the author’s own intentions and writing practice (what Mitterand terms the explicit component o f the competence), but, crucially, it also includes pre-existing external models (the implicit component). All the various components together contribute to shape the emerging text. Working from this assumption, the critic can first o f all determine the generating factors and, then, in a second step, reconstruct the different hypothetical stages o f the genesis. Each individual phase is regarded as an independent system with its own immanent laws which already contains the germs o f further transfor­ mations. Crucially, in the course o f writing, ideological models enter into conflict with pre-established narrative structures or matrices and are gradually transformed as a result o f this clash. Mitterand argues, for instance, that Zola’s first ebauche for UAssommoir was informed by the same social subconscious as the article ‘L ’Ouvrier’ in Pierre Larousse’s Grand Dictionnaire universel du X IX e siecle o f 1874, a text that condenses the stereotypical representation o f workers in the second half o f the century. However, in the subsequent versions o f the avant-texte, whilst Zola continued to adopt the theories o f social reformers which were part o f an ideological discourse o f the time, he set new priorities for his own work by choosing as his heroine a woman from the lower classes. If the text was at first saturated by the contemporary doxa, the ideological underpinnings that nourished it were substan­ tially modified during the genetic process. Mitterand’s article is a powerful example o f ways in which a certain type o f linguistics, here generative transformational grammar, can be applied in genetic studies. Developed in this way, it cannot but refute Bourdieu’s scepticism as to whether the study o f subsequent stages o f the avant-texte is qualified to illuminate the relation between literary production and social and cultural models. In a more recent article, Mitterand has argued that the relation between the socio-cultural space and literary production is mutually reversible. The cultural space acts on literary production; equally, literary production, and the early traces o f it in particular, are indicative o f crucial mutations in the culture o f reference.77 Genetic 77 See ‘Critique genetique et histoire culturelle’ .

32

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

studies would thus become an important element for the practice o f cultural history. Even if Mitterand has not as yet come up with a viable model for this type o f research, and even though studies on the cultural origins o f a certain writing practice, such as P. M. WetherilTs studies on the relation between national education and certain methods o f composition, are still in their beginnings, the critical potential o f ‘socio-genetic’ studies is already clearly manifest.78 This approach within genetic criticism will undoubtedly produce further important findings on the relation between literary and cultural practice, and, inversely, give valuable new insight in the culture o f reference itself. It is perhaps in this domain, mainly thanks to Mitterand’s affinities with structuralism and linguistics, that theoret­ ical models for genetic inquiries are most advanced. Genetic Studies and Intertextuality Traditional literary critics have long focused on the so-called ‘sources’ o f a work o f art, be they literary or (auto)biographical. E. GerardGailly, to give a well-known example, considered UEducation sentimentale as an autobiographical novel, largely, he argued, inspired by Flaubert’s unfulfilled love for Elisa Schlesinger.79 The first readers o f A la recherche du temps perdu evinced great excitement in seeking ‘incarnations’ o f notorious figures o f Parisian society (Robert de Montesquiou, for instance, was generally acknowledged to be a model for Charlus) amongst the dramatis personae o f Proust’s novel. Intertextuality, especially under the influence o f Julia Kristeva, has moved away from this reductive approach which reduces the dynamic interaction between works o f art to a mere quest for sources and key figures, and, instead, has examined how literary models are integrated, transformed and assimilated in a new work. Kristeva has introduced the pertinent term ‘transposition’ to characterize phenom­ ena at work in an intertextual process: Mais puisque ce terme [intertextualite] a ete souvent entendu dans le sens banal de ‘critique des sources’ d’un texte nous lui preferons celui de transposition, qui a l’avantage de preciser que le passage d’un systeme 78 See ‘A u x origines culturelles de la genetique’ . Wetherill raises the question whether the mentality o f a period o f time, and in particular national education, is reflected in practices o f writing and methods o f composition. See also Louis H ay’s critique in ‘Histoire ou genese?’ . 79 See L e Grand Am our de Flaubert.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

33

signifiant a un autre exige une n ou velle articulation du thetique — de la positionalite enonciative et denotative. Si on adm et que toute pratique signifiante est un cham p de transpositions de divers systemes signifiants (une inter-textualite), on co m pren d que son ‘lieu ’ d ’ enonciation et son ‘ o b jet’ denote ne sont jam ais uniques, pleins et identiques en eu x -m em es, mais toujours pluriels, eclates, susceptibles de m odeles tabulaires. La p olysem ie apparait done aussi co m m e le resultat d ’une polyvalen ce sem iotique, d ’ une appartenance a divers systemes sem iotiques.80

In other words, when one text enters into a discursive dialogue with another or with a whole set o f texts, there is transposition. Each transposition necessitates a repositioning o f the former signifying system. And, we may extrapolate, if a transposition occurs, elements from one system are likely to be modified according to the demands and particularities o f the new system to which they are transposed (for instance, transpositions from one narrative genre to another). The problem with intertextuality as defined by Kristeva, Michael Riffaterre or Gerard Genette, to name only three, is that, in general, it only operates on published texts.81 In contrast, intertextual genetic criticism analyses processes o f transposition in their very first material articulation, namely in the early manuscripts. Intertextuality is thus no longer perceived as a product, but as a ‘procede scriptural’, a writing process (Eric Le Calvez).82 Within this perspective, genetic studies investigate how literary models are integrated into an avant-texte, and, what is more, how the author appropriates them for his or her own purposes during the process o f writing. This dynamic model refutes the traditional study o f the ‘sources’ and ‘models’ o f a text. It necessitates a new approach that deals rather with processes o f transformation or ‘fusion’ o f literary or real world sources. Eric Le Calvez, to give one example, has shown how Flaubert uses Baudelaire’s poem ‘Une Charogne’ for the textual elaboration o f the eighth chapter o f Bouvard et Pecuchet. The poetic intertext at first catalyses the narrative in Flaubert’s scenarios. Although it does not provide a generic structure (Flaubert exploits it for a prose text), it offers a diegetic model, i.e. it imposes a narrative structure upon the scene under elaboration. The dynamic interplay between intertext and avant-texte has repercussions alike on the microstructure (semantic 80 See La Revolution du langage poetique, 60. 81 See Michael Riffaterre, Semiotique de la Poesie, and Gerard Genette, Palimpsestes. 82 See ‘Visite guidee. Genese du chateau de Fontainebleau dans L ’Education sentimentale\ 116 .

34

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

and lexical derivations) and on the macrostructure. Le Calvez demonstrates with great pertinence not only how Flaubert took inspiration from the underlying Baudelaire poem (this would be the angle o f traditional source studies), but how he appropriated and transformed the intertext into a new text.83 The concept o f intertextuality need not be confined to the integration o f written texts. Its premisses and methodology are equally applicable to studies on the influence o f autobiographical elements (what biographical criticism has called ‘models’) on the elaboration o f a literary text.84 Extended to the oral (the integration o f an anecdote, for instance) and the lived, it becomes part o f a wider field which one may term ‘interdiscursivity’, understood in its broadest sense as the channelling o f information in texts. In the light o f my discussion above, we see that socio-genetic approaches, approaches in cultural history and intertextual approaches are actually closely linked. They all deal with the absorption and transformation o f written, spoken or otherwise transmitted donnees; they all deal in one way or another with interdiscursive processes. Genetic Studies and Psychoanalysis Psychoanalytical approaches, although they could be highly pertinent for the investigation o f material that has not yet undergone selfcensorship, at present stand somewhat on the margin.85 Jean Bellemin-Noel, one o f the early proponents o f genetic criticism, has not included one single psycho-genetic study in his book Vers Vinconscient du texte. The rare, psychoanalytically oriented studies often deal solely with the author’s unconscious, traces o f which may be found in an uncensored avant-texte, or with the formation o f an unconscious symbolic network in the manuscripts.86 A more vigorous way o f adapting psychoanalysis to genetic studies has been demonstrated in two independent articles by Judith Robins on-Valery 83 See ‘La Charogne de Bouvard et Pecuchet (genetique du paragramme)’ . 84 For a study o f the appropriation o f biographical elements in Flaubert’s scenarios for L ’Education sentimentale see Marion Schmid, ‘Jules Janin, Madame de la Carte et le comte Dem idoff — l’appropriation d’une anecdote biographique dans les scenarios de L ’Education sentimentale . 85 See however Genesis 8 (1995), which is exclusively devoted to psychoanalysis. 86 See the articles collected in Utterature 52 (1983), ‘L ’lnconscient dans l’avanttexte’ .

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

35

and Michel Collot.87 Robinson-Valery discusses the case o f Valery, who, traumatized by Mallarme’s sudden death, suffered physically from symptoms o f suffocation, and, with regard to his literary creation, from poetic aphasia. Although he made numerous attempts, he felt incapable o f writing a speech for Mallarme’s funeral. Several years later, he integrated material from this failed prose text into a poem, which eventually helped him to overcome the initial trauma. Robinson-Valery not only points to the conclusion o f ‘writing as a therapy’, but analyses the gradual transformation o f a prose text into poetry. She combines exogenese with endogenese, the way that an external datum influences the writing process. Collot discusses the case o f Supervielle, who in the first half o f his life was haunted by the fear o f madness. In his writing Supervielle was over-anxious about shape and form, as if they could make him overcome the vertigos and horrors o f his mind. In the 1932 edition o f Gravitations, he regrouped his poems under similar thematic aspects. The theme o f death (Supervielle had lost his parents at a very early age) no longer formed the underlying theme o f the whole collection; rather it was, so to speak, put to one side, and became ‘domesticated’ . Collot’s main point is that the ordering o f a text can be the result o f extra-textual constraints— in the present case, an unconscious need for structure. Both Robinson-Valery’s and Collot’s approaches seem fruitful in as much as they handle different strands simultaneously, without attempting to draw from them a one-sided conclusion. M y comparison o f immanent and genetic approaches in a number o f fields leads us to a more general distinction between the genetic method and other methods o f Modem Critical Theory. In the PostM odem era, critics and philosophers are becoming increasingly aware o f the potentially reductive nature o f ‘large narratives’ (the Marxist, the Freudian, the Feminist). The danger with master-discourses in literary theory is that they exploit texts as a source o f documentation for far broader issues and concerns, such as the condition o f women, homosexuals or workers in Feminism, Queer Theory or Marxism. Though, o f course, we need these ideologies o f the text for social criticism, in their very status as interpretative literary methods they 87 Judith Robinson-Valery, ‘Valery face a la mort de Mallarme: de l’impossible prose a la poesie’ ; Michel Collot, ‘Genetique et thematique: Gravitations de Super­ vielle’ .

36

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

run the risk o f filtering a complex text through their particular system. The results are often predictable. They tell us less about the workings o f the text than about the intellectual climate o f contemporary criticism and the authoritarian nature o f the master-discourse. Genetic criticism, in contrast, by its very nature as a ‘positive’ method concerned with the visible traces o f writing, is not part o f the master-discourses, nor does it aspire to become an ideology or a philosophy o f literature.88 Though, as my discussion o f ‘sociogenetic’ models has shown, it may be concerned with the cultural, social and ideological determination o f writing, its analysis is deduc­ tive rather than inductive. In other words, the critic starts o f necessity with the manuscript dossier before advancing any hypotheses on certain aspects o f the writing process. The Feminist, Marxist or Freudian critic, by contrast, operates with a large baggage o f assumptions on, say, the workings o f society or the role o f the unconscious which inevitably shapes and directs his or her reading o f the text. Secondly, more traditional methods o f literary criticism tend to consider a text as the product o f determining external factors— the social, cultural and political environment, the historical context, or the author’s own biography and psychological disposition. These methods have, o f course, long overcome such simple mono­ causalities as, for example, that Nerval wrote Aurelia because he was mad, or that L ’Education sentimentale is the account o f Flaubert’s own unfulfilled love for Elisa Schlesinger. If, on the whole, traditional methods have become more pluralistic, their potential is none the less limited, because they operate on the basis o f the one published text only. Critics adopting one o f these approaches may only speculate as to how supposedly determining external factors have come to shape a literary text, or, a fortiori, any work o f art. Genetic studies, in contrast, though they may o f course adopt a psycho­ analytical, feminist or sociological stance, examine exactly what impact external factors have on literary production, how social, cultural or historical donnees are absorbed into an emerging text and, more importantly, how they are modified in the course o f writing. They thus seek to overcome the precarious speculative status o f immanent approaches.

88 See Louis Hay, ‘Critiques de la critique genetique’, 19.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

37

5. Questions o f Methodology

Whilst critical models for the external factors o f literary production have been developed and applied successfully in a number o f cases, a theory o f the internal elaboration o f a text as reflected in linguistic, narrative or textual processes is less advanced. It is in this latter domain that genetic criticism can benefit most from the methodology o f already established disciplines, most notably linguistics and narratology. To define a solid framework for genetic studies, however, premisses for such borrowings need to be carefully defined. Linguistics Faced with a strongly reworked manuscript corpus, the first acute problem that arises for the scholar is how to describe and interpret the complex processes manifest on the page. In genetique scriptique, methodology and terminology are relatively straightforward. Gresillon regroups all basic genetic operations under the term ‘substitution’. A substitution can be either a replacement (A > B), a deletion (A > zero), an addition (zero > A) or a displacement (AX > X A ).89 She further distinguishes between ‘writing variants’ (variantes d’ecriture) and ‘reading variants’ (variantes de lecture). The former are simple revisions (for instance the correction o f a spelling error) that the author carries out during the writing process proper. The latter are retrospective revisions (for instance a change o f name) which in general have far greater repercussions on the development o f the text.90 In terms o f the internal constraints o f the writing process, one may also differ­ entiate between ‘free variants’ (independent spontaneous changes) and ‘bound variants’ (changes that are governed by syntactic, structural or prosodic demands).91 An examination o f these two different types o f variants can be expected to give precious insights into the necessities and hazards o f literary genesis. As for processes in a small part o f the avant-texte (paraphrastic processes, the instalment o f a stable instance o f enunciation, the emergence o f a temporal framework), the application o f text lin­ guistics and o f a linguistics o f enunciation in the tradition o f Benveniste and Culioli has proved successful. Since my own study 89 ‘Fonctions du langage et genese du texte’, 178. 90 See ‘Les Manuscrits litteraires: Le texte dans tous ses etats’, 112 . 91 See Gresillon, Elements de critique genetique, 143.

38

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

is in the field o fgenetique scenarique, I shall not discuss these approaches in detail. Pertinent examples may be found in the collection La Genese du texte. Les modeles linguistiques edited by Hay and in the excellent Proust a la lettre co-authored by Gresillon, Lebrave and Viollet.92 The main difficulty lies in the domain o f genetique scenarique, i.e. in the description and formalization o f macrostructural processes (the emergence o f narrative structures and the installation o f a system o f characters, the development o f themes and motifs, the formal organization o f the narrative into parts and chapters). The problem is that all the different processes involved do not emerge separately, but are likely to influence one another. The question then is whether one may consider them in isolation and, if so, how one can possibly describe the complex rules by which they are governed. It is again Mitterand, benefiting from his long experience in Zola studies, who has outlined a programme for studies in genetique scenarique. In his Preface to Legons d’ecriture, he introduces a model o f genetic analysis which he terms some sort o f ‘linguistics o f textual production’ .93 This genetic linguistics focuses on the following five components o f the emerging text which are all derived from linguistic categories: the semiotic component (the creation o f a system o f characters and definition o f a narrative programme), the rhetorical component (the author’s own evaluation and projection o f the emerging text as evidenced in the marginal notes de regie), the chronotopical component (time and space), the narratological com­ ponent (organization o f the narrative, focalization, descriptions) and, finally, the grammatical component. The five components operate jointly in the genesis o f a literary text. They influence its development and co-operate in making its matrices more and more complex as the composition progresses. Despite their interplay, Mitterand argues, one can none the less analyse the shaping effect each o f them has on the avant-texte separately (p. vii). Mitterand’s model is above all programmatic. It will have to be put to the test in a full-length study. But even in its reduced heuristic form, it suggestively describes the complexity o f macro-genetic processes and illustrates the perti­ nence o f linguistics to the study o f literary production.

92 See also Gresillon’s detailed remarks on genetic criticism and linguistic theory in Elements de critique genetique, 147-6 0 . 93 See ‘Avant-Propos’, p. vii.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

39

Narratology Narratology as a discipline in literary studies is, in the widest sense, concerned with narrative discourse and story. The formal analysis o f narrative discourse focuses to a large extent on the organization o f a narrative, both in terms o f its hierarchy (major articulations versus expansions o f the nucleus, or, in semiotic terminology, ‘cardinal functions’ versus ‘indices’) and its spatial distribution (juxtaposition, embedding or alternation).94 Later structuralist critics, most impor­ tantly Gerard Genette, have given more attention to the temporal order that a narrative can follow (achronies etc.), to narrative speed (ellipsis, summary, scene, pause), to narrative frequency, distance and point o f view.95 Narrative semiotics has proved pertinent for the analysis o f fictional characters.96 What all the different inquiries in narratology which I have briefly mapped out have in common is that they operate on the basis o f a static published text. The challenge o f genetic studies for narratology is that, rather than describing static structures or constellations, it examines their coming-into-being from the first embryonic outline to subsequent stages o f the text. As Mitterand very pertinently says: ‘L ’un des objectifs de la critique genetique consiste bien a eclairer les modes d’emergence des configurations narratives qui donnent son assise a une oeuvre romanesque, en faisant toutefois, pour chacune des synchronies successives, la part de la necessite et la part du hasard.’979 8What, then, makes genetic studies in narratology particu­ larly valuable is that they enable us to determine to what extent the emergence o f narrative structures and constellations is due to a necessity (for instance the overall composition o f a work or the economy o f telling a story), and to what extent they are entailed by more random factors (for instance biographical models). A crucial question in this respect is to what extent inherited narrative forms impose their own generic pressure on an avant-texte.9* The first scenario for L ’Education sentimentale is an interesting case in point: 94 See Tzvetan Todorov, ‘Les Categories du recit litteraire’ , 140. 95 See Figures II I (Discours du recit) and the revised Nouveau discours du recit. 96 See Greimas, Semantique structurale; Mitterand, Le Discours du roman; Hamon, Le Personnel du roman. Le systeme des personnages dans les ‘Rougon-Macquart’ d ’Em ile Zola. 97 Henri Mitterand, Zola. VHistoire et la fiction, 134. 98 See Mitterand’s remarks about the pressure o f inherited semiotic models in ‘Avant-Propos’ , pp. vii-viii.

40

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

Flaubert initially adopted the model o f a bourgeois novel o f adultery with at its centre ‘le mari, la femme, l’amant’ (cahier 19: folio 35), but soon set paradigms for a Bildungsroman with Frederic as the prota­ gonist (F 3 6 )." From a similar transformational perspective, genetic criticism throws into relief how an author conceives a fictional character. Enid Marantz has shown that Proust amalgamates character traits from a number o f protagonists or transposes them from one character to another.9 100 Philippe Lejeune has analysed the complex relations 9 between autobiography and processes o f fictionalization in the manu­ scripts o f Sartre’s Les Mots, Georges Perec’s autobiographical works and Anne Frank’s Diary.101 Genetic studies furthermore reveal the driving forces that lead to a certain constellation o f characters which we may take for granted in the published text. The triangular constellation between Frederic, Rosanette and Deslauriers, who cuckolds his friend in Part III o f UEducation sentimentale, for instance, was inspired by a social fait divers from Flaubert’s entourage, namely the complicated love relations between the critic Jules Janin, his mistress the Marquise de La Carte and the friend Count Demidoff.102 The constellation o f characters in Zola’s La Curee and the novel’s structural model, on the other hand, emerged from an intertextual generative matrix, namely the triangle Phedre-Thesee—Hippolyte in Racine.103 Some authors take an abstract, structural approach to character. Flaubert, for instance, distributes his minor characters in the plot in relation to others. Others see the fictional personae in their text, in some respects, as independent human beings. Francois Mauriac, for example, reports that characters may escape the author’s control: Que de fois m’est-il arrive de decouvrir, en composant un recit, que tel personnage de premier plan auquel je pensais depuis longtemps, dont j ’avais fixe revolution dans les demiers details, ne se conformait si bien au programme que parce qu’il etait mort: il obeissait, mais comme un cadavre. Au contraire, tel autre personnage secondaire auquel je n’attachais aucune 99 See Flaubert, Carnets de Travaily 286 and 290, and Tony Williams’s discussion in The Construction o f Character in Fiction, 6 -7 . 100 See ‘La Genese du personnage proustien’. 101 See ‘Auto-genese. L ’etude genetique des textes autobiographiques’ . 102 See Marion A . Schmid, ‘Jules Janin, Madame de la Carte et le comte Dem idoff. 103 See Mitterand, ‘Le Metatexte genetique dans les ebauches de Zola’ , $9.

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

41

im portance se poussait de lu i-m em e au prem ier rang, o ccupait une place a laquelle j e ne l ’avais pas appele, m ’entramait dans une direction inattendue. . . . Plus nos personnages v ive n t et m oins ils nous sont soum is.104

Does this mean that on the level o f characters also, the text may engender its own rationale? Tony Williams’s examination o f genetic dossiers seems to refute the notion o f an independent self-generative character. He argues that ‘the process o f character construction is a long-drawn-out and systematic manipulation by the author o f mater­ ial in which the degree o f authorial control gives the He to claims made by novehsts that characters have a will o f their own’.105 As with the emergence o f narrative structures, then, the study o f the constitution o f character can be expected to throw into reHef what Mitterand, in the article quoted above, terms ‘la part de la necessite et la part du hasard’ . In other words, one o f the questions to be addressed would be whether, in the face o f generic and narrative constraints and o f external pressures, the avant-texte can none the less preserve a certain degree o f autonomy. Thematics B y their very nature, themes are more elusive than narrative structures. Whether, in the tradition o f the Russian formaKsts, one defines a theme as ‘the idea that summarizes and unifies the verbal material’ (Tomashevski), thus stressing its cohesive impact on the text, or, in the tradition o f nouvelle critique, as an expression o f the author’s unconscious (Bachelard) or his or her affective relations with the visible and invisible world (Jean-Pierre Richard), the theme remains difficult to pin down in the text. Whether we deconstruct the text in search o f the elements that hold it together, or else assemble, generaKze and abstract narrative elements which we then declare a ‘theme’ or a ‘thematic network’, the very nature o f the theme often remains nebulous. The thematic deconstruction and reconstruction o f the text gives us valuable information about our readerly activities and about the functioning o f the published text. It is, however, Httle qualified to enHghten us about the precise working o f a Hterary theme: Is it exterior to the text or interior? Is it a product o f the author’s unconscious? Or, as Shlomit Rimmon-Kenan suggests, is it 104 he Romancier et ses personnages, 12 7 —8. 105 The Constitution o f Character in Fiction, 4.

42

A n A natomy

of

G enetic C riticism

only a conceptual artefact constructed by the reader in search o f .

Proust

135

returning to a normal daily rhythm o f life, waits for his mother who comes regularly each morning to bring him his mail and to kiss him before he goes to bed. In cahier 3, the first o f the series, he discovers an article he wrote long ago in Le Figaro, and which his mother lays on his bed. Further on, we learn o f the hero’s desire to travel. The reflection o f sunlight evokes a trip once made to Venice and life in a little country town. In the first pages o f this cahier, the temporal relation between the various textual units is not yet established. The thoughts o f an older man who sleeps only during the day alternate with the sensations o f a younger man who wakes up in the middle o f the night. The two different time-frames at first seem incompatible. A solution presents itself when, after a number o f attempts in this direction ( F F 1 1 R —12R ), in F 1 8 R Proust eventually introduces a complex temporal framework: ‘Autrefois j ’avais connu comme tout le monde la douceur de m ’eveiller [un instant dans l’obscurite] (au milieu de la nuit) [et] de [sentir] (gouter) un instant [le noir] l’obscurite le silence’ (3: 18 R ).48 The contrast between ‘autrefois’ and ‘maintenant’ reconciles the two disparate time levels and experi­ ences, and introduces a structure o f retrospection. In addition, the younger hero’s uncertainty as to where he is when he wakes up at night creates a flexible scheme that enables him to evoke a multitude o f different spaces. Simultaneously, the instance o f enunciation which was highly unstable at the beginning o f cahier 3 (Proust alternated between ‘je ’, ‘nous’ and ‘on’) is clarified.49 The individual ‘j e ’ used in the beginning is eventually replaced by a collective ‘nous’ .50 The simple concept o f present versus past, here versus there, and individual versus collective turns out to be a genuine ‘coup de 48 See Pleiade, i, Esquisse 1.9, 639. For a detailed study o f the emergence o f a complex time-frame and its narrative impact, see Bernard Brun, ‘Le Dormeur eveille’ . 49 See Francine Gonjou, ‘Les Premieres Pages du Cahier 3: une ecriture tatonnante?’ See also Almuth Gresillon, Jean-Louis Lebrave, and Catherine Viollet, ‘Une histoire a dormir debout’ . 50 See Quemar, ‘Autour de trois avant-textes’ . Her analysis needs to be supplemented by Almuth Gresillon, Jean-Louis Lebrave, and Catherine Fuchs, ‘ “ Quand tous mes autres moi seront morts . . Reflexions sur l’hologramme proustien’ . In a linguistic analysis Gresillon and collaborators investigate the transition between the individual ‘j e ’ and the collective ‘nous’ , ‘on’ or ‘celui que’ in Cahier 3, and also in two loose sheets o f Proust 45 and Proust 88, which are earlier than cahier 3, but which Quemar had not taken into account in her article. The fluidity o f the instance o f enunciation, they argue, is an important step towards the problematic concept o f the self in A la recherche.

136

Proust

texte’ (to use Quemar’s phrase) which opens up new narrative possibilities for the text. It is responsible for its ‘many-layeredness’ whereby an older narrator reflects on a younger man’s experience, and for the constant alternation between passages o f real experience and abstract passages in the form o f maxim-type reflections. Thus, at a very early stage o f development, mainly as a result o f Proust composing in seemingly unconnected fragments, we already find the cohabitation between concrete and abstract which is so typical o f the published text. Elements o f the story are followed by an immediate reflection and often expanded on a more theoretical level. The reversed part o f cahier 2 expands, amongst other developments, on the story o f the article. The young man appears unexpectedly in his mother’s dressing-room in order to ask her opinion on his article in he Figaro. Back in his room, he has a sudden idea for a new project, this time on the critic Sainte-Beuve. He calls his mother to explain his idea to her. Maman me quitte mais je repense a mon article et tout d’un coup j ’ai l’idee d’un prochain: Contre Sainte Beuve. Demierement je l’ai relu, j ’ai pris (contre mon habitude) des quantites de petites notes que j ’ai la dans un tiroir et j ’ai des choses (importantes) a dire la-dessus. Je commence a batir l’article dans ma tete. A toute minute des idees nouvelles me viennent. II n’y a pas une 1/2 heure de passee et l’article tout entier est bati dans ma tete. Je voudrais bien demander a Maman ce qu’elle en pense. J ’appelle aucun bruit me repond. (2: 21VE-20VE) The mother at first refuses to give advice, considering herself unfit for questions o f literary criticism, but eventually encourages her son’s propositions: ‘Tu sais en quoi elle consiste cette methode: “ Fais comme si je ne le savais pas” ’ (2: 19VE) are the last words o f their discussion. Proust here consolidates the form o f a dialogue between son and mother on the subject o f Sainte-Beuve’s method, which will allow the author himself to discuss issues o f literary criticism, which was first planned in this form in Proust 43. The rather rigid form o f a scholarly essay envisaged earlier in the year (see the letter to Albufera supra) has thus been transformed into a genuine narrative, which, in this exemplary form with two interlocutors, reminds us o f the classical type o f a philosophical discussion and investigation. Needless to say, this form presented vast scope for expansion, but, instead o f embark­ ing upon it, Proust, in his typical discontinuous manner, continued with composing two fragments. The first thematizes the futility o f

Proust

137

human existence provoked by a consideration o f gravestones washed smooth by time and the weather. The second, perhaps the more interesting o f the two, revolves around the characteristics and sensibility o f different authors. In an autobiographical reference the narrator/author admits that he has a particular sense for language which has allowed him to write pastiches, but at the same time deplores that he has not exploited this gift sufficiently. Similarly, he has also neglected a particular sensibility for discovering deeper links between two ideas or sensations: ‘Mais ce don [1’ouiUe fine] je ne l’ai pas employe et de temps en temps a des periodes difficiles de ma vie, celui-la, comme celui aussi de decouvrir un lien profond entre deux idees, deux sensations, je le sens toujours v if en moi, mais pas fortifie, et qui sera bientot affaibli et mort’ (17VE). At this stage, the fictionalization o f personal experience is already developed to such a degree that it is impossible to decide whether it is Proust who notes his own reflections, or, on the contrary, whether we are confronted with the voice o f a fictional character. Autobiography and fiction will become increasingly interwoven in the next cahiers. In cahier 5 a further expansion occurs. The intimate universe o f the narrator’s family in which the narrative was anchored thus far (next to the mother and her servant Felicie, cahier 2 also staged the hero’s aunt, grandmother, great-uncle and their gardener) explodes. A number o f new characters, whose function is not evident at first sight, are introduced. At the same time, the setting o f the narrative widens. We encounter an anonymous count and countess and a florist who keeps a little shop in the count’s house in Paris. A brief reference to Querqueville, the seaside resort where the hero spends his summer holidays, introduces Mme de Villeparisis, her great-nephew M ontargis and a certain Mile de Quimperle. Folios 2 0 R -3 9 R sketch a fully developed portrait o f the servant, now called Frangoise. This textual unit is closed (it has a distinct beginning and an ending) and shows few traces o f reworking.51 The portrait is a crucial type o f text for Proust’s composition. He first o f all composes in ‘compacts’ (the portrait is one type o f ‘compact’ , we will see others in due course) which he later disperses and amalgamates with different narrative fragments.52 The portrait o f Fran^oise is a suggestive example for the 51 Jean-Yves Tadie has published this text under the title ‘Portrait de Fran^oise’ . 52 T o my knowledge, Bardeche was the first to draw attention to Proust’s technique o f initial condensation and subsequent dispersal. The term ‘compact’ is borrowed from Marcel Proust romancier, 229.

138

Proust

blurring o f boundaries between autobiography and fiction in the early manuscripts. At one point we encounter Gabriel de la Rochefou­ cauld, a friend o f Proust’s, who comes for a visit. More importantly, we find the name ‘Marcel’, the Christian name both o f Proust the writer and o f the hero o f A la recherche, which also figures occasionally in the rest o f the avant-texte, but was suppressed by the author in the later stages o f the genesis. ‘Ah! Gelos, Gelos! (c’etait le nom de son pays) quand est-ce que je te reverrai que je verrai l’aubepine en fleurs dans le jardin de mon pere et que je pourrai passer toute la sainte joumee sans entendre la satanee sonnette de Monsieur ou de Monsieur Marcel!’ (5: 2 5 R -2 6 R ).53 Other autobiographical refer­ ences are interspersed in earlier cahiers: in cahier 2 Reynaldo Hahn, the composer and an intimate friend o f Proust’s, sings the choruses o f Esther for the family (F6R). In later cahiers boundaries between the hero o f the future A la recherche and Proust the artist are blurred. In cahier 36, for instance, the hero wins Mile de Forcheville’s respect by telling her that he has translated Ruskin: ‘La jeune fille que j ’avais cru n’aimer que les sports quand elle sut que c’etait moi le traducteur de Ruskin me temoigna les plus grands empressements’ (F 37R ).54 Cahier 26, a complementary cahier for Combray and Querqueville, contains a reference to the pastiches: ‘Dans cet ordres d’idees (meme) les (petits) pastiches qu’on a lus de moi, ne sont que la continuation de 1’effort qui commence sur le pont vieux, du cote de Meseglise’ (26: 10V).55 It would o f course be tempting to extrapolate from the avant-texte that A la recherche has strong autobiographical features, or even that the narrator o f A la recherche is Marcel Proust himself. However, an argument o f this sort would be more than simplistic. The avant-texte is more than just a confirmation that there is a strong resemblance between Marcel Proust, the author, and the hero o f A la recherche in the published text, a phenomenon which has been discussed with great subtlety by scholars such as Jean-Yves Tadie.56 We also know that Proust had a tendency to eliminate autobiographical references from his manuscripts or typescripts in the later phases o f the genesis. 53 See Pleiade, iv, Esquisse X , 666. 54 See Pleiade, iv, Esquisse X , 666. References to the translation also figure twice in the published text o f A la recherche, the first time in Venice where the hero talks about a work on Ruskin on which he is engaged, the second time when Jupien refers to a translation o f Ruskin that he has sent to Charlus. See Pleiade, iv, 224 and 4 1 1 respectively. 55 See Pleiade, i, Esquisse L V , 836. 56 Proust et le roman. Essai sur les formes et techniques du roman dans (A la recherche du temps perdu\ 17 -2 9 .

Proust

139

The rare instances that remain in the published text figure in the volumes that were published after Proust’s death, and which he did not have the time to correct.57 The avant-texte is interesting for us because it shows how autobiographical material is used for the fictional elaboration (the emergence o f certain constellations, for instance), in short, for the dynamism that it introduces into the genetic process. The portrait in cahier 5 already traces Frangoise’s main character traits that we know from the published text: her pity for remote suffering which stands in stark contrast to her cruelty to those around her, notably the asthmatic kitchen maid; her devotion to the family; her monarchist tendencies. In contrast to the published text, the homesick Fran^oise returns in her old age to her birthplace Gelos. In this portrait, Proust introduces for the first time the anonymous count and countess with whom the narrator’s family share the courtyard. He composes a new portrait o f these two characters in two stages, part immediately after the Frangoise portrait, the rest further down in cahier 5, where for the first time he refers to them as ‘Guermantes’ . In the second stage he explores the physical and mental characteristics o f the Guermantes lineage, and puts special emphasis on the imagery that the hero associates with their name and social standing. The boy is bitterly disappointed when he first catches sight o f the ‘real’ Mme de Guermantes. At this stage o f planning the hero’s phases o f enthusiastic imagination, and the way it is crushed by a sudden invasion o f reality, form a close pattern. The second phase is not delayed as in the published text, where it becomes a dynamic motif that pushes the narrative forward. Thus, Proust composes in a very condensed way at this stage o f the avant-texte. As we can see in the following passage on the hero’s relations with Mme de Guermantes, the time frame ‘autrefois’ versus ‘maintenant’, developed in cahier 3, proves adaptable: ‘Plus tard quand ces (memes) personnes fiirent devenues pour moi des personnes ennuyeuses ou je ne tenais plus a aller et que je vis qu’il en etait de meme pour elle, sa vie perdit de son mystere et souvent elle prefera rester avec moi a causer, plutot que nous allions dans ces fetes’ (5: 67R ).58 On the reversed part o f the 57 Michihiko Suzuki and Harold A . Waters have argued that in the only two instances where the name ‘Marcel’ occurs in the published text (La Prisontiiere, 583 and 663), the author would have suppressed it had he had the time. See Suzuki, ‘Le “J e ” proustien,’ and Waters, ‘The Narrator, not M arcel’. 58 See Pleiade, ii, Esquisse II, 1030.

140

Proust

cahier, Proust pursues the theme o f the man who sleeps during the day (cf. infra) and makes an addition to the Fran^oise portrait (FF 106V E 104VE). Cahier 5 must be considered as a turning-point for the development o f the avant-texte. Through the expansion o f fictional characters, and the introduction o f the Guermantes in particular, the Sainte-Beuve narrative which was planned in the form o f a dialogue with the mother is slowly transformed and, although no plot outline is fixed for the moment, approaches a genre closer to the novel. In the words o f Claudine Quemar, who has brilliantly analysed the transi­ tion from essay to narrative to novel, ‘Proust etait comme entraine au-dela de son recit initial, vers le genre romanesque, par le dynamisme meme de son ecriture’.59 The first three cahiers (3, 2 and 5) are all characterized by a great dispersion o f narrative units. Where one might expect a deepening and an expansion o f some o f them, Proust suddenly conceived o f different strands or developed older ones. The only vague link that loosely ties them together is the Contre Sainte-Beuve project. Now, in cahier 1 , we witness the emergence o f a stronger concern for order and coherence. In the beginning, Proust reworks a passage from the Fran^oise portrait in cahier 5, where he evokes a scene in which the servant combs the hero’s mother’s hair whilst they are discussing the daily menu together. This episode, which formed the last textual unit o f cahier 5 reversed, is used here for the hero’s discussion with his mother. The young man returns to his mother’s room, and finds her having her hair combed by Frangoise (F 2R). She is too busy to talk to him because it is Saturday.60 The mention o f Saturday generates an evocation o f the special sabbatical family habits in Combray. This passage ends abruptly, and a new one about the jo y felt at the sight o f a sunbeam starts, which develops a theme announced on the cover page o f cahier 1: ‘Charme du dehors devenu dedans le Balzac de M. de Guermantes Le rayon de soleil sur la fenetre (autre et importante version) le jour gris de la pcesse de G ’. The sunbeam appeared for the first time in cahier 3 where, it will be remembered, reflections o f the sun evoked Venice and a little town where the hero used to spend his 59 ‘Autour de trois avant-textes’, 2 1. 60 There is no direct link between the two fragments. The scene o f the mother in her dressing-room is interrupted. The next fragment on the sabbatical habits only starts after two blank lines. The first sentence is elliptical: ‘parce que c’est Samedi et je n’ai pas trop de temps’ (F 2 R ). The two scenes are fragments that belong to the same textual unit.

Proust

14 i

holidays (FF43R , 42V, 41V , 4 1R ). It was followed by a second fragment about the sunbeam on the hero’s balcony in Paris. Proust expands on the theme in cahier 1. He attempts to define the value o f the sunbeam for the hero at different periods o f his life. In former times he rejoiced at the sight o f a sunbeam which permitted him to go to the Champs-Elysees, a potential meeting point with a young girl he admired. The young girl and her home seemed inaccessible until one day he received an unexpected invitation from her. This frag­ ment, after a description o f the mysterious house and an analysis o f the sensations set o ff by the sunbeam, returns rather abruptly to the discussion with the mother that formed the beginning o f cahier 1 with the words ‘Le rayon de soleil fit eclater de rire Maman’ (F 10R ). The sunbeam, as a generator o f remembrances, similar to the awakening, creates a very frail structural link between the textual units. The story about the young girl echoes the story o f the inaccessible mother, the waiting for her good-night kiss in the early morning described in the first cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve and the air o f unavailability she preserves even when the hero has managed to penetrate into her private sphere, her dressing-room, which in the girl’s case is the parental home. A new theme, that o f desire and pursuit, is about to emerge in this cahier. The ‘young girl* narrative is taken further by a new fragment where Proust enriches the theme o f inaccessibility with that o f disillusionment felt at the realization o f desire which, it will be remembered, was first introduced by the example o f Mme de Guermantes. The story o f the young girl is used as an example o f a wider psychological law. Enriched by the parameter o f disappointment, the theme o f desire and pursuit becomes more dynamic since it can be repeated ad infinitum. A first structural trace is consolidated. Proust’s method o f putting a theme to the test on several characters had a crucial impact for the genesis o f the future novel. B y virtue o f superimposing the experiences and even the mental and physical characteristics o f his fictional personae, as we will see in due course, he builds up a dense network where episodes echo each other, and which resembles Flaubert’s technique o f superimposition that we observed in the scenarios for L yEducation sentimentale. In the reversed part, Proust reworks the ‘wakening’ scene. For the first time he is not only rewriting and paraphrasing elements from previous cahiers, but truly reassembling them. Thus, F F 7 1V —57V form a long textual unit which shows signs o f extensive reworking.

142

Proust

It begins with passages from cahiers 3 and 2 on the sleepless man waiting for the dawn o f day to come. Metaphors like the whistling o f a train that hurries from one station to another and the sound o f which gives the sleepless man an idea o f the countryside around him, or the suffering o f a sick man near to a crisis at some hotel at midnight (taken from cahier 3, F 13), illustrate his feelings. Proust then takes up several elements from cahier 5. In cahier 5, the remembrances o f the awakened sleeper are introduced by: ‘a cette epoque j ’etais deja malade et ne pouvais plus etre couche et dormir que le jour’ (F 109VE, that is, the first page o f the reversed part). Then follows the boy’s fear o f having his hair pulled by the Combray priest, which, although the priest is long dead, haunts his dreams. After a reflection on the transition between states o f wakefulness and unconsciousness, Proust has an idea for another feature o f the narrator’s dream experience: ‘Parfois pendant mon sommeil, comme Eve [naquit] (sortit) d’une cote d’Adam, une femme [naissait] (s’elevait) d’une fausse position de ma cuisse’ (F 11 1R E ) . This evocation o f an erotic dream sets off a reflection on a more active form o f solitary pleasure, masturbation, which— and this is crucial— is only approached in general terms in cahier 5.61 Even the flower imagery which constitutes an important part o f the future ‘cabinet a l’iris’ in the published text is not linked to a personal experience here. Proust introduces the issue o f masturbation rather reluctantly, and he makes an apology, stating that only the ephemeral nature o f the experience allows the author to approach these base matters: (C’etaient aussi) D’autres impressions a peine [plus] (moins) anciennes, (mais) si basses qu’un ecrivain serait inexcusable de les depeindre si l’impossibilite ou on est de les ressentir une fois passee la premiere adolescence, ne leur donnait quand elles [passent] se montrent dans nos reves ce charme d’etre detachees de tout lien avec la [realite] terre, de s’y epanouir comme des fleurs d’eau, et donner en somme le parfum de cet age comme tout ce qui a disparu avec lui, poetique ou non, comme une (chaude) joumee peut etre evoquee aussi bien par le bourdonnement des mouches dans la chambre, que par le parfum des lilas dans le pare. (5:109VE)62 61 The discussion about masturbation on the verso is not directly linked to the erotic dream on the recto. N o r does the fragment about the fear o f the Combray priest link with it. This is typical o f Proust’s practice at this stage: even if one idea direedy entails another, the two do not necessarily form one paragraph. 62 See Pleiade, i, Esquisse II.3, 643.

Proust

143

Moreover, masturbation is denied its intrinsic quality, which is selfsufficiency, pleasure alone with one’s own body. In this passage it is directly linked to the desire for a woman as it is expressed in the erotic dream.63 In cahier 1, by contrast, the erotic dream and masturbation are separated by the intercalated story o f the priest pulling the boy’s hair. O f course, this episode o f the dream is sexually charged as well. Philippe Lejeune has rightly interpreted it as the boy’s fear o f castration.64 It is significant that at first it was the Combray priest who pulled the boy’s hair. In a revision on F 65R it is the grandfather, and, in the published text, the great-uncle. The priest, as a represent­ ative o f Christian morality, introduces the imagery o f evil and sin that we will find in the expanded version o f the masturbation scene that follows. The order o f narrative has changed: an associative pattern is adopted in cahier 5, while in cahier 1 the chronological sequence which follows the order o f dream remembrances is maintained. The erotic dream is introduced by ‘quelquefois’, the priest story by ‘d’autres fois’ and, finally, the scene o f masturbation by ‘des sensations qui elles aussi ne reviendront plus qu’en reve, caracterisent les annees qui suivent’ . The evocation o f solitary pleasure experienced in the ‘cabinet sentant le lilas’ at Combray in cahier 1 is very detailed and rich in images. The climax o f excitement, in particular, deserves our attention: E n fin s’ eleva un je t d ’ opale, par elans successifs, co m m e, au m o m en t ou il s’ elance, le je t d ’eau de S- C lo u d que nous p ou vo n s reconnaitre — car dans l’ eco u lem en t incessant de ses eaux, il a son individualite que dessine gracieusem ent

a

laisse

H u b ert R o b e r t, alors seulem ent que la foule qui 1’ adm irait avait des

sa

courbe

resistante — dans

[space]

qui font dans le tableau du v ie u x

maitre

le

portrait

de petits

q u ’ en

[sic]

valves roses,

verm illonnees ou noires. A ce m om en t je sends (c o m m e ) une tendresse qui m ’entourait, c ’etait l’odeur du lilas que ds m o n exaltation j ’avais cesse de p ercevo ir. (1: 6 6 V E )

The narration continues on the versos, but Proust adds on the recto: M ais une odeu r acre (une odeur de seve) s’y m elait c o m m e si j ’ eusse casse la branche; j ’avais seulem ent laisse sur la feuille une trace argentee et naturelle, co m m e fait le fil de la vierge ou le colim a^on. M ais sur cette branche il m ’apparaissait co m m e le fruit defendu sur l’ arbre du mal. E t co m m e les 63 Serge Doubrovsky in his psychoanalytical reading o f the masturbation scene speaks o f a ‘secondary desire’, a substitute for the absent sexual object. See La Place de la madeleine. Ecriture et fantasme chez Proust, 2 7 -8 . 64 ‘Ecriture et Sexualite’, 130.

144

Proust

peuples qui donnent a leurs divinites des formes inorganisees, ce fut sous l’apparence de ce fil d’argent qu’on pouvait tendre presque indefiniment sans le faire fmir, et que je venais de tirer de moi-meme, en allant tout au rebours de ma vie naturelle, que je me representai des lors et pour quelque temps le diable. (i: 67R)65 In the first reference to the cabinet in the published text (A L R , I, p. 12), the rich imagery o f cahier 1 (fountain, forbidden fruit) and the emphasis on guilt and sin experienced by the young boy have disappeared. In the second reference contained in the published text, only one simile from the avant-texte survives: ‘jusqu’au moment ou une trace naturelle comme celle d’un colimagon s’ajoutait aux feuilles du cassis sauvage’ (p. 156). Emphasis is less on guilt than on the fear experienced at the exploration o f one’s body: ‘je me frayais en moi-meme une route inconnue et que je croyais mortelle’ (p. 156). The contrast between the transparency and organic beauty o f the bodily fluid with its acrid smell, and the image o f forbidden fruit, have disappeared. Probably one o f the finest portraits o f solitary jouissance in literature has been sacrificed in an act o f self­ censorship. It cannot be simply out o f regard for his readers that Proust cut this passage, since, as we know, he was always aware o f the ‘indecency’ o f other parts o f his book, namely the passages on homosexual love and sadism.66 He may have preferred to leave the masturbation scene in the nebulous unspoken world o f childhood, whereas the discovery o f homosexuality, be it only through observa­ tion, constitutes an important step towards the adolescent’s apprehen­ sion o f the ‘real’ world, and, thus, needs to be expressed more directly. Also, in terms o f the economy o f the narrative, the theme o f inversion, which is a powerful structural pattern,67 has far greater narrative weight in the novel than masturbation, which is only one episode in the long process o f self-discovery, and thus could be reduced more easily. In the continuation o f this textual unit o f cahier 1, Proust, through an analogy with the lilac o f the cabinet, comes to the boy’s walks in the surroundings o f the little town where he used to spend his holidays, 65 See Pleiade, i, Esquisse III, 6 46-7. 66 In an often cited letter to Alfred Valette he writes: ‘Je termine un livre qui malgre son titre provisoire: Contre Sainte-Beuve, Souvenir d ’une Matinee est un veritable roman et un roman extremement impudique en certaines parties. U n des principaux personnages est un homosexuel*. Corr.f ix. 155. 67 See Roland Barthes, ‘Une idee de recherche*.

Proust

145

which are also bordered by this fragrant plant. On his walks the boy regularly meets a mysterious fisherman, the only unidentified char­ acter in his small universe. Interestingly, in a later fragment on an affair between the hero and the chambermaid o f baroness Putbus, his identity is revealed (he is a friend o f the chambermaid).68 Thus, already in the protected world o f adolescence, the fisherman antici­ pated and signified the world o f conquest and seduction.69 In the Villebon passage in cahier 1 he stands for sexual desire which is still full o f mystery for the hero. In the later chambermaid unit, he stands for the fulfilment o f desire which destroys mystery and illusion. Proust then rewrites part o f the awakening scene with special attention to the evocation o f different places by the bodily memory, and enriches it with new elements. After an interrupted reprise o f the sunbeam scene, he develops a typology o f Balzac readers. These include the critic Sainte-Beuve, who, as is pointed out in the dialogue with the mother, misunderstood Balzac, and the Guermantes family. The dialogue on Sainte-Beuve and the Guermantes story do not yet form a plot. What links them together is a common inquiry— the way they read and respond to Balzac.70 Cahier 1, to sum up, must be seen as a first attempt to reorganize textual elements from previous cahiers. The textual units in this cahier are longer than in previous ones, and develop frail connections, be they structural or thematic. Cahier 4 evolves around three places— Paris, Combray and an anonymous seaside resort.71 In the Paris part, the author develops 68 See Pleiade, Esquisse X V III, 7 12 . 69 Jean-Pierre Richard has pointed out that, throughout A la recherche, fish have a strong sexual connotation. See Proust et le monde sensible, n o —11. 70 For more detail on this reader typology see Volker Roloff, Werk und Lektiire. Z u r Literarasthetik von Marcel Proust. R o lo ff argues that the aesthetics o f reading explored in the reader typology is constitutive for the poetics o f the emerging novel (see 10 1-3 7 ) . 71 Note that opinions on where exactly to situate the transition between the Sainte-Beuve narration and the novel vary. Quemar argues that in cahier 1 Proust has found the structure that will enable him to write a novel o f involuntary memory. See ‘Autour de trois avant-textes’, 12. Brun agrees with her on this point. See ‘Le Dormeur eveille’ , 310 . Bardeche has postulated the transition later, namely in cahier 4. He says: ‘le recit de la matinee cede le pas a un roman de la memoire involontaire, fondee sur reminiscences nocturnes et permettant de recuperer les elements narratifs deja elabores. C e glissement se pergoit nettement a partir du cahier 4 .’ See Marcel Proust romancier, i. 23. From a different perspective, I would suggest that cahier 1 is a turning point, because it is the first cahier where Proust uses the technique o f assembling unconnected fragments by means o f a montage.

146

Proust

the theme o f the diurnal sleeper. Although sequestered in his room, he perceives echoes from the outer world in the form o f sounds or odours from the street. Occasionally, he stands by the window to observe anonymous young passers-by. This second motif o f desire for unknown young girls, a reprise o f cahier 3 (FF 29V -33R ), is developed at some length. The binary structure inside/outside that figured in the title o f cahier 1, ‘Charme du dehors devenu dedans’, has become a generative pattern. Even if the hero is unable to communicate with the outer world because o f his illness, he observes it with desire. Two unconnected sections (one on the Endroit, one on the Envers) widen the description around the countess Guermantes, which is now subordinated to the story o f the young man, since we learn that he is ardently in love with her. Proust had already described the society received by the countess in cahier 5, and had made some allusion to the count’s homosexuality: ‘et quand le comte, pour le besoin de ses amours ramenait de temps en temps un jeune homme “ que personne ne connaissait” ils savaient le charmer en l’entretenant [avec beaucoup d’amabili] de sujets qui lui fussent familiers (“ Vous etes architecte Monsieur?” )’ (5: 42R ).72 This first instance o f inversion in a character (long before the creation o f Charlus) is eliminated in cahier 4. The countess now receives a number o f her husband’s former mistresses: ‘II y avait une partie de la societe de la Comtesse composee d’un certain nombre de femmes que le Comte avait aimees’ (F71V E). The remembrance o f childhood holidays resurrects both Combray and the seaside resort. In Combray, emphasis is on the daily drama o f the desired good-night kiss which the mother refuses on days when the family takes the Villebon way, or when Swann comes for dinner.73 The Villebon way is considerably longer than the Meseglise way, and is given priority in this fragment.74 The narrator explains that in his childhood the two ways seemed incompatible, but that later in his life he discovered that, by taking the Meseglise road, one can get back to the Villebon way: ‘Car je sus alors que le cote de 72 See Pleiade, ii, Esquisse I, 1023. 73 N ote that at this stage o f the genetic development the narrator is not the only child. ‘II se trouvait toujours quelqu’un, mon grand pere, mon oncle, pour dire avec une [cruaute] ferocite inconsciente: “ neuf heures deja! les enfants devraient etre couches, ils doivent etre fatigues’ ” (4: 4 4 R -4 5 R ; see Pleiade, i, Esquisse VIII, 666), and ‘M on grand pere pretendait que chaque fois que nous ramenions du college un nouveau camarade pour l’introduire a la maison c’etait toujours un israelite’ (4: 4 6 R ; see Pleiade, i, Esquisse V III, 667). 74 See Quemar, ‘Sur deux versions anciennes des “ cotes” de Com bray’ .

Proust

147

Meseglise et le cote de Garmantes n’etaient pas aussi inconciliables que je le croyais autrefois et qu’on pouvait parti pour du cote de Meseglise couper par Garmantes, (F42R ).75 On the Villebon way, the hero catches sight o f a young girl for the first time, who is first called Mile de Forcheville. This is immediately replaced by ‘Querely’ (F42R). The encounter with the young girl differs in many ways from the version that we find in the published text. Not only is her appearance not announced by the aubepine imagery, but the under­ tones o f disdain for the hero on her part, and o f hatred and a desire for revenge on his part, are absent. Moreover, she does not make the obscene gesture that the hero misinterprets and the true significance o f which (namely, her desire for him) will only be revealed in Le T'imps retrouve?6 A brief portrait o f Swann shows one o f the typical procedures o f Proust’s conception o f character. Swann is first described through the eyes o f the family, but almost immediately the older narrator rectifies their limited point o f view. This process o f laying bare a double identity has been used for the creation o f all o f Proust’s characters whom we know as ‘inverted’ from the published text, i.e. the first impression their surroundings and we readers get turns out to be diametrically opposed to their true nature.77 In the avant-texte, the revelation is given at a very early stage, in the case o f Swann within one textual unit. But, in the published text, it is deferred. This is another instance o f Proust’s technique o f composing in compact units. In the early cahiers we find highly condensed narrative patterns, be they desire/pursuit, illusion/disillusion, or appearance/reality. And the ‘cell’, so to speak, for the development o f these patterns is the textual unit. It is the resurrection o f holiday memories that leads the narrator from Combray to the seaside where, to our surprise, we find Swann again. It is well established that the younger hero in A la recherche relives to some extent the life o f Swann.78 In the avant-texte their relationship is even more interwoven. Apparently the role which later 75 See Pleiade, i, Esquisse LIII, 8 13. 76 On this point, see Akio Wada, ‘La Creation romanesque de Proust: etude genetique sur la premiere apparition de Gilberte’ . See also W ada’s dissertation where he retraces the obscene gesture back, and where he establishes that it only appears in the avant-texte in Proust 2 1: F 4 3 R (‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’ , 137). 77 For the particular case o f Swann, see Jean Rousset, ‘Le Statut narratif d’un personnage: Swann’ . O n double identity in general see Roland Barthes, ‘U ne idee de recherche’ . 78 See Tadie, Proust et le roman, 226 -8 .

148

Proust

becomes that o f the narrator in Balbec was in the beginning assigned to Swann. Not only are the affective lives o f the two superimposed to a certain extent, Swann and the hero also show a striking resemblance o f character, as the narrator points out on F 60R: J ’ ai (p eu t’ etre) deja trop parle de M . S w an n et je n ’ai pourtant donne encore q u ’ un aspect de sa personne, le m oins interessant certainem ent. D ’autres traits de sa nature, que j ’ai p eu t’ etre reconstitues plus tard par les recits des m iens plus que je n ’ai ete a m em e de les observer, m e [semblent] sont si sym pathiques, si voisins en un certain sens de certains traits de m a nature que j e v e u x leur donner quelques mots. (4: 6 0 R )

We find, furthermore, additions to previous fragments (for instance ‘ajouter au Balzac de .M. de Garmantes’), another part o f dialogue between the narrator and his mother and a number o f very short fragments in the reversed part, which are mostly theoretical notes on writers and writing, but also fictional passages, such as a homage to the courage o f the hero’s mother when she was facing death (F 68V). Although centres o f interest have already crystallized at this stage o f the avant-texte, we still find fragments that have no fixed place at all. The crucial point is that they have maximal mobility and flexibility. Other notes may serve in various contexts. Thus, Proust hesitates between three possibilities as to where to insert a note on the genuine beauty and talent that one has to find in oneself: important soit pour le cote de Meseglise, soit pour Bergotte, soit pour la Conclusion’ (F69RE). Francine Gonjou has very pertinently argued that Tenjeu des reecritures, n’est pas seulement 1’organisation thematique mais aussi le point d’insertion du fragment’ .79 Multiple combinatory patterns in the avant-texte create a provisionally ‘elastic’ narrative that remains open for transformations and expansions. Thus, for instance, cahier 31 develops the Swann story that was briefly sketched in cahier 4. The analysis o f his love and marriage to a kept widow generates a closely written passage about the circle that this woman (her name is first Louisa, then Sonia)80 frequents, namely the Verdurins and their friends. Swann’s waxing and waning love for her are treated in autonomous fragments which together form one textual unit. It is quite obvious in the avant-texte that Swann’s love in the final analysis is for a good part nourished by his desire for love, by 79 ‘L ’Ordre des fragments dans le Contre Sainte-Beuve , 39. 80 See Fran^oise Leriche, ‘Louisa/Sonia, Wanda, Anna, Madeleine, Carmen, Odette, Suzanne’ .

Proust

149

his fixation on the object o f his love, regardless o f what his partner’s true personality might be: ‘et il disait ma belle [Louisa] Sonia, ma bonne Sonia, caressant de la pensee une statue ideale belle et bonne, celle de son amour a lui et de sa bonte a lui’ (F9R). The Verdurins are not depicted directly. They have no name in society. One is confronted only with their existence and financial power when one fails to rent a villa in the country or a flat in Paris, being told that the Verdurins and their friends already occupy them. Whereas later on they will become boastful eccentrics and nouveaux riches, here they are given an air o f mystery and glamour. The evocation o f holidays by the sea in cahier 4 is also developed in cahier 31. Proust develops two new characters related to the hero— Mme de Villeparisis, and her great-nephew Jacques de Montargis, the future Robert de Saint-Loup whom we know already from cahier 5.81 As in the case o f Swann, the first impression o f Montargis proves to have been erroneous and in due course necessitates rectification. On their first meeting, the hero perceives Montargis as arrogant and condescending, yet at a later point during his holidays he comes to know him as the very opposite— a generous and caring person. After the seaside story, Proust suddenly reverts to the hero’s love for Mme de Garmantes in Paris. The point is that the two places are linked by the newly introduced character, Montargis, who is a cousin o f Madame de Guermantes, and whom the hero intends to use as a mediator between himself and the countess. More than once, as we shall see, Proust draws two fragments together by means o f a fictional character who figures in both o f them. Montargis’s function in the end becomes void, since the hero will make his way into the Guermantes salon by himself. Thus, at a later point in the cahier, an essay o f his, recently published in a newspaper, opens for him the doors to Mme de Villeparisis’s regular receptions at five (31: 49R). Hiroshi Kawanago has attached some significance to this develop­ ment o f the narrative, which, he says, marks the transition from a primitive Sainte-Beuve essay to the Sainte-Beuve novel.82 He claims that the new use o f the article as an integral element o f the story demolishes the Sainte-Beuve essay. Apparently refuting the thesis o f a 81 See Loic Depecker, ‘Prehistoire d’un episode du roman proustien: la rencontre avec Madame de Villeparisis dans quelques brouillons pour A Vombre des jeunes filles en jleurs’ . For more information on Montargis see ‘Les Avant-textes de l’apparition du fiitur Saint-Loup dans les cahiers de brouillon de Marcel Proust’ . 82 See ‘Note sur l’etat primitif du Contre Sainte-Beuve’ .

1 50

Proust

direct continuity between the Contre Sainte-Beuve essay and the novel, he sees the development more in terms o f discontinuity and abolition. There are, I think, two mistakes in his argument which deserve our attention: first o f all, the article in question was not the Sainte-Beuve article. It is only after this first article has appeared in Le Figaro that the hero has an idea for a new one, namely a critique o f Sainte-Beuve. Secondly, the Sainte-Beuve project comprises far more than just the article. From Proust 45 onwards the critique o f Sainte-Beuve was constitutive o f the author’s own literary criticism and poetics. It is this applied criticism that survives in the novel-to-be, and we will see in the phase 19 0 9 -11 how Proust eventually uses critical elements from Contre Sainte-Beuve for the creation o f Le Temps retrouve.83 N ow , after this important turn in the story, namely that the hero has been invited into Parisian high society, Proust does not develop his plot further, but engages in a description o f the world around Mme de Villeparisis. He evokes her partner, the former illustrious prime minister the Marquis de T, and provides information about Mme de Villeparisis’s relations with her niece Oriane de Guermantes, whom she educated and for whom she found a suitable husband. This purely fictional universe is anchored in a historical context when Proust notes the reactions o f the Villeparisis circle to the Dreyfus affair. Twice in cahier 31 Proust has expanded a social field as soon as it has attained special importance in relation to one character: the Verdurins became a significant environment for Swann, and the Villeparisis circle for the hero himself. Whilst there is still no such thing as a coherent plot, let alone a narrative framework, Proust already expands considerably, even on secondary characters. Cahier 36, the next in the series, contrasts with previous ones in as much as it is more focused and coherent thematically. Proust concentrates on one theme, namely the hero’s relations with a number o f young girls. Previous cahiers, it will be remembered, contained fragments on the hero contemplating young passers-by in the street and on his fantasies about young girls from the aristocracy or the haute bourgeoisie. The girls had been anonymous and inaccessible thus far, but are now given individual features. The theme o f conquest and pursuit is put to the test on the hero and his female acquaintances. The first and best-known o f them is the chambermaid o f Mme de Picpus, later baroness Putbus. The hero is infatuated with 83 It is well established that Le Temps retrouve is the definitive version o f the unfinished Contre Sainte-Beuve project. See Brun, ‘Le Dormeur eveille’ , 3 13 .

Proust

i 51

the maid, a girl o f dubious morals according to what he has learnt from his friend Montargis after a matinee at the Duchesse de Guermantes’s,84 and he is even prepared to follow her to Venice. When, years thereafter, they eventually meet for the first time, her once beautiful face is disfigured by bums, the result o f a liner accident. During their conversation, it turns out that the young girl grew up in the surroundings o f Combray. She reveals to the narrator the identity o f the mysterious fisherman met in the course o f the walks to Villebon. The young man’s fantasy about the chambermaid prostitut­ ing herself in the fields around Combray arouses his desire afresh: La pensee que, pendant que je m e consum ais seul de desir dans la petite tonnelle de C o m b r a y pendant que cette admirable fille a B ro u (o u ) par pure fatalite je ne voulais jam ais m ’arreter et ou une annee ou j ’etais souffrant on avait vo u lu m e lou er une cham bre p o u r passer l’h iver au g^ air quand on avait ferine C o m b ra y , cette admirable fille ivre de desir se prostituait dans les granges aux paysans m e rendait fou. O u blian t son visage je m e jetai sur elle [et l’am enai] et ce furent de violentes caresses que je sentais apprises a elle par des bergers, et ou j ’avais l’im pression de ne plus etre m o i, d ’ etre un (jeu n e) paysan q u ’une paysanne plus hardie et deja dessalee roule dans le foin.

(36:5R-6R)85 Their caresses are interrupted by the entrance o f the girl’s aunt. In a later fragment (50: 2—17R & V ) the hero’s desires will be fully consummated. Having followed her to Padua, he meets her in the chapel with the Giotto frescoes (note that the Giotto imagery o f La Charite has been transposed to the pregnant kitchen servant in Combray in the published text) and succeeds in taking her to a hotel room where she offers herself to him. The chambermaid seems to have been assigned a position o f some importance in the universe o f the novel-to-be. One indicator for this is that Proust links her to two other characters: Montargis, with whom she had an affair, and her aunt, who, it will be revealed, is the mother o f the Verdurin house-pianist. Thus, the chambermaid figures in the cosmos o f both the Guermantes and the Verdurins, and is equally part o f the hero’s Combray memories. Her position is a very flexible one which would have had potential scope for development. 84 In the further development o f this episode in cahier 43, which is part o f a manuscript draft for Le Cote de Guermantes, as distinct from cahier 36, Montargis arouses the hero’s desire for the chambermaid and a certain Mile d’Orcheville not after a matinee at the Duchess’s, but during a ball at the Princess Guermantes’s. 85 See Pleiade, iv, Esquisse X V III, 714 .

152

Proust

But, like a number o f other young girls, she more or less disappears from the story with the creation o f Albertine in 19 13 .86 In the published text she has a merely peripheral role, and were it not for her strong presence in the avant-texte, one could easily miss the passages in which she figures.87 She is one o f the desired women who nourish the hero’s sexual fantasies, but whom he never gets to know in reality.88 In a new textual unit, the hero perceives three attractive young girls on his way home. He learns from the superintendent that one o f them is called Mile d’Orcheville or de Forcheville, and immediately associates her name with the story told to him by Montargis o f a young aristocratic woman prostituting herself in Paris brothels. When, after various attempts to determine her identity and to establish contact, he meets her at the Guermantes’s by pure accident, she reveals her true identity: she is Swann’s daughter.89 The confusion o f names has only become possible by a unit on Swann that is intercalated between the story o f the chambermaid and that o f Mile d’Orcheville. In four successive fragments we learn that Swann’s wife and daughter are unacceptable in the social circles he continues to frequent, and how these attitudes change after his death, when the haute bourgeoisie and the aristocracy alike begin to receive widow and daughter, whilst they forget their old friend.90 By virtue o f her father’s death and her mother’s new marriage, Gilberte becomes Mile de Forcheville, a girl who is finally acceptable in high society. At the 86 Tadie has made the important point that in cahier 56 (F58) Proust planned to divide characteristic features o f the maid up among other female characters: ‘Proust s’est ensuite interroge sur l’existence du personnage, et a prevu de le repartir entre Albertine pour la jalousie, Gilberte pour les coucheries dans le donjon de Combray avec d’autres enfants, Cottard et Odette pour les mots d’amour betes, et Albertine encore pour la reconnaissance de la chair.’ See Proust et le roman, 186. 87 She appears for instance successively in Pleiade, iii. 9 3-4 , 12 0 -1 , 235, 250, 594. 88 In Le Temps retrouve we read: ‘il n’etait pas une de mes annees qui n’eut eu a son frontispice, ou intercalee dans ses jours, l’image d’une femme que j ’avais desiree; image souvent d’autant plus arbitraire que parfois je n’avais jamais vu cette femme, quand c’etait par example, la femme de chambre de Mme Putbus, Mile d’Orgeville, ou telle jeune fille dont j ’avais vu le nom dans le compte rendu mondain d’un journal, parmi “ l’essaim des charmantes valseuses’” (Pleiade, iv. 567). 89 See Pleiade, iv, Esquisse X , 6 6 3-8. In the published text this episode forms the second chapter o f Albertine disparue entided ‘Mademoiselle de Forcheville’. See Pleiade, iv. 13 8 -2 0 2 (esp. 14 2 -56 ). 90 In the published text the narrative order has changed. This unit comes after the meeting between the hero and Gilberte. See Pleiade, iv, 15 6 -6 7.

Proust

153

same rime her name can be confused with that o f Mile d’Orcheville, the young aristocratic prostitute. Death and marriage have introduced an unexpectedly new dynamic into the plot which enables Proust to treat the Gilberte story on the same narrative line as the story o f the young girls. Moreover, the story o f Mile d’Orcheville echoes the story o f the chambermaid. Once again it is Montargis who arouses the hero’s desire for young girls o f ill repute. The frivolous young girl, just like the chambermaid, is in the end linked to the narrator’s childhood in Combray. The young peasant woman in Combray was always associated with easily fulfillable desire. Gilberte Swann, on the other hand, represented purity and innocence in cahier 4. Now, when the hero confuses her name with that o f the aristocratic prostitute, she is associated with easy love as well. The role o f the name is a crucial one here. We know that throughout A la recherche the narrator’s remembrance and finally his initiation into life and literature are partly guided by the onomastic power o f names.91 None the less, the two girls in cahier 36 are more or less nameless. The chambermaid does not have a name o f her own. She is referred to as the maid o f Mme Picpus; Mile d’Orcheville’s name is fluid, and in the end is confused with that o f Mile de Forcheville, the daughter o f Swann. The women who do not have a name also seem not to have their own personal identity. They are bom out o f male fantasy. Not being ‘inscribed’, they seem to be in anyone’s possession. In a new fragment, the hero meets the girls he had observed in the street (suddenly there are four o f them) on the occasion o f a party on the little island in the Bois de Boulogne. Proust now combines the maid’s story with that o f the three girls. The maid who is preparing to leave for Combray accompanies the hero to the little ferry, but does not come to the party. The young girls, all perfectly respectful, show him every possible sign o f affection, but he has lost interest in them. The fragment ends with a romantic passage where he takes one o f them, Germaine, to a nearby grotto. Although this episode as such has not been preserved in the published text, much o f its atmosphere has. The little island in the Bois de Boulogne figures several times as a place o f seduction in the published text. Odette, giving way to Swann’s insistent questioning about her sexual past, tells him about a woman who, one night, enticed her behind a rock at the island to 91 See e.g. Roland Barthes, ‘Proust et les noms\

154

Proust

make love with her.92 At a later point o f the story the hero organizes a splendid dinner for Mme de Stermaria, whom, he fantasizes, he will possess on the island.93 On the reversed part o f this cahier, the young man perceives a graceful girl in a restaurant in Saint Valery (the name o f the seaside resort at this stage) who moves him by her distinction and aristocratic beauty. She is successively called Mile de Penhoet (the girl we know from the Querqueville passage in cahier 5), de Quimperle and de Cauderan.94 The hero is eventually intrigued by yet another girl, an audacious young beauty who appears to make advances to him at a ball at the Guermantes’s, and who haunts the narrative for some time.95 Her identity is as fluid as the hero’s desires. Once she is believed to be Mile Soliska, the daughter o f a Polish musician, then a niece o f the Guermantes, Mile de Garmantes-Senach, or a certain Mile Ecuyer, daughter o f a wealthy industrialist.96 Antoine Compagnon briefly refers to the chambermaid and to the mysterious young woman at the Guermantes ball in his book Proust entre deux siecles. He claims that in the person o f the disfigured chambermaid Proust exploits a fin-de-siecle image o f the fallen woman, Medusa.97 The frivolous young girl met at the ball o f the Guermantes, on the other hand, would correspond to the beautiful and dangerous woman, Salome. Compagnon argues that the polar­ ization between these two decadent images o f woman will, by virtue o f the creation o f Albertine and Morel, be replaced by another dichotomy, namely Sodom and Gomorrha: ‘Or, Albertine une fois inventee, la jeune fille aux roses rouges et la femme de chambre de Mme Putbus s’evanouissent, Meduse et Salome, Helene et Galatee. Le couple decadent se retire; un autre couple s’installe dans ce roman 92 See Pleiade, i. 359. 93 See Pleiade, ii. 665-89. 94 For the genesis o f Mile de Penhoet, see Georgette Tupinier, ‘Autour de trois ebauches de Mile de Stermaria’; and Takaharu Ishiki, ‘Maria la Hollandaise et la naissance d’Albertine dans les manuscrits d ’A la recherche du temps perdu , 44 -50 . Note that Germaine, the girl the hero takes to the grotto, is a genetic predecessor o f M m e de Stermaria. 95 It is not further specified whether the ball takes place at the Duchess’s or the Princess Guermantes’s. However, later on in the fragment the hero leams that Mile Soubiska (the former Mile Soliska) hardly ever frequents Mme de Guermantes: ‘On m ’avait dit que c’etait par un hasard qu’elle etait chez M - de Guermantes qu’elle n’allait jamais dans le faubourg Si Germain’ (36: 54VE). Thus, we can conclude that it is a ball o f the Duchess’s. This detail is important for the further development o f the episode. See my discussion below, pp. 18 0 -1. 96 See Pleiade, iii, Esquisse V , 960-1. 97 Proust entre deux siecles, 125.

Proust

155

tout rempli de symetries: Albertine et Morel, c’est a dire Sodome et Gomorrhe, (pp. 125—6). Compagnon’s analysis is certainly very helpful for our understanding o f patterning and o f the large network o f symbols in A la recherche. However, with regard to the genesis o f characters and themes in the novel, part o f it seems debatable. It is misleading to say that with the creation o f Albertine in 1913 the dichotomy Medusa/Salome is suddenly replaced by the new dichot­ omy Sodom/Gomorrha. We have to bear in mind that the theme o f Sodom has been exploited very early on in the novel with the homosexuality o f M. de Guermantes. As we will see in due course, the major expansion o f this theme comes about with the creation o f the figure o f Guercy, the future Charlus, in cahier 7. Although we have not seen any indications for Gomorrha in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve thus far, Proust already creates narrative lines o f devel­ opment into which the future Albertine can be inserted. Thus, in cahier 36, we have found a large number o f models for femininity: the peasant girl who ‘ascends’ in society, and now prostitutes herself to young aristocrats; the young aristocratic woman who ‘descends’ and sells herself in Paris brothels; the inaccessible Apollonian beauty, and finally the frivolous young girl at the Guermantes ball (Mile Soliska/ Garmantes-Senach/Ecuyer). Whereas the chambermaid and Mile d’Orcheville change their social status by prostitution, Mile de Penhoet/Quimperle/Cauderan remains rooted in her own class and thus proves inaccessible. The girl at the ball is class-mobile. She is subsequently taken to be from either an artistic, or an aristocratic or a bourgeois family. In cahier 7, the emphasis once again changes. Cahier 31 was dedicated to the Swann story, cahier 36 evolved around the theme o f young girls, and now Proust explores new aspects o f life in Combray. They are presented in the form o f a conversation between the parish priest o f Combray and the narrator’s aunt on matters o f church restoration, and in the form o f a dialogue between the hero and his mother about the beauty o f the Guermantes chateau. Intercalated is a unit composed o f six independent fragments on the Verdurin circle, before the author comes back to the Combray church, now seen through the eyes o f the narrator who acknowledges its unique beauty. Whereas the rest o f the units will be used in one way or another for the further development o f the novel, the cahier also comprises one fragment which does not figure in the published text. The hero is invited to board with a woman from Pinsonville for

156

Proust

the rest o f his holidays, but in the end prefers to return to Paris in the company o f his parents. It is only years later that he learns o f a farmhouse girl who prostituted herself in Pinsonville. This girl is without doubt the future chambermaid o f baroness Putbus. Proust has now subordinated her story to that o f the boy’s holidays in Combray, and makes no mention o f her name. The universe closes, but, in the published text, the proposed stay in Pinsonville disappears and the chambermaid has only an ‘immaterial’ presence.98 After a number o f fragments on the hero’s peregrinations in the Combray woods, Proust quits Combray and takes up the seaside narrative again. The rest o f the cahier is dedicated to the person o f M. de Guercy, the uncle o f Montargis. In the first fragment the arrival o f this new character is announced to the hero by his friend. In a second fragment, the hero meets M. de Guercy on his way back to the hotel and feels irritated by his eccentric behaviour. N ow Guercy links the story o f the seaside resort to the Paris narrative. In a new segment we find him visiting Mme de Guermantes and Mme de Villeparisis, and at a ball at the house o f the prince and princess Guermantes, where it becomes more and more obvious that Guercy’s attitude to the hero is capricious and unpredictable. It varies between cold disregard and affectionate proofs o f sympathy. As in Montargis’s case, Guercy’s ‘true nature’, this time in the sense not o f character but o f sexual preference, is revealed only in retrospect in the same cahier. The hero, who had earlier on been struck by Guercy’s exaggerated virility and his sympathy towards women, realizes that Guercy is, so to speak, a ‘woman’ himself: O n dirait que c ’ est une fem m e! M ais au m o m en t m em e o u je pronongais (en m o i-m e m e ) ces m ots il m e sembla q u ’ une revolu tion m agi que s’ operait en M de G u rc y . II n ’avait pas b o u ge mais tout d ’un coup il s’eclairait d ’une lum iere interieure ou tout ce qui m ’avait chez lui ch o q u e trouble, semble contradictoire, se resolvait en harm onie depuis que je venais de (m e) dire ces m ots: on dirait une fem m e. J ’avais com pris, e’ en etait une! C ’ en etait une. (7: 5 0 R ) "

The hero’s sudden awareness o f Guercy’s homosexuality introduces the theme o f homosexuals as a ‘race maudite’, an image that 98 Tadie comments: ‘Cette heroine s’est done vu privee de son existence materielle dans le recit au profit de rivales plus heureuses; mais les hasards de la genese l’ont affermie dans nos memoires: attendue et jamais defloree, symbole du plaisir et de la perversite, elle a la force des songes.’ See Proust et le roman, 186. 99 See Pleiade, iii, Esquisse I, 924.

Proust

157

immediately leads to an expanded simile with the persecuted race o f Israel.100 The cahier ends with a conversation between the narrator and his mother on Sainte-Beuve and Baudelaire. Cahier 6, the last but one o f the Contre Sainte-Beuve series, is extremely fragmented. Elizabeth des Portes, in her catalogue for Bulletin d’informations proustiennes, enumerates as many as seventeen textual units.101 The action is located in all three o f the principal settings o f Contre Sainte-Beuve and the future A la recherche: Combray, Paris and the seaside resort. The fragments relating to one o f the places are not regrouped, but scattered over the pages. Fragments o f narrative alternate with two pieces o f literary criticism, one on Baudelaire, the other on Nerval. The first Combray unit deals with the narrator’s and the grandmother’s individual appreciation o f the cathedral towers o f Chartres when they are on their way to Combray. The theme o f the Chartres towers is a parallel to the description o f the Combray tower and its impact on various people— the aunt, the priest and the narrator— in cahier 7. The sight o f the Chartres towers makes the hero homesick, and incites him to return to his mother. In the next fragment, Proust moves back to Paris and the hero’s desire for young girls outlined as early as cahier 3. In this fragment, the hero is inactive in the beginning, but, on a pretext, obtains permission for the daughters o f domestic suppliers to come to his room. Yoshikawa considers this development, where the girls whom so far he had contemplated passively enter into the hero’s life, as an ‘eclatement de la structure lineaire’ .102 What was part o f the matinee is now assimilated into a genuine narrative.103 In the reverse part o f the cahier we read for the first time a developed description o f the magic lantern. It has been mentioned on a couple o f occasions, but is now developed in comparison to the Combray church window. The church is used as a link between the world o f Combray and the world o f Guermantes. It shows the continuity between past and present. There is an episode in cahier 6 which does not figure in the published text. The hero, who is staying with Mme de Villeparisis in Guermantes, is seized at the sight o f Combray by an ardent desire to return to Paris to see his mother. A trivial telegram from his friend 100 W e will see in due course how this passage develops after the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. 101 B I P 9 (1979), 69-70. 102 ‘Etudes de genese de La Prisonniere , i. 8 4-7. 103 See Pugh, The ‘Birth’ o f ‘A la rech erch e7 1.

158

Proust

Montargis serves as a pretext to take the next train. As in the fragment in the Endroit part, where the view o f Chartres incited the hero to return, now it is the view o f Combray that causes his painful awareness o f the absence o f his mother. After this passage we find three portraits, one o f Dr Cottard (a continuation o f cahier 7), one o f Princess Sherbatoff and one o f Hubert de Guerchy (whose initial name Guercy has been changed here), which is an addition to an earlier portrait in cahier 7, this time focusing on his homosexuality alone. In his youth, he had a relationship with his cousin, the future Prince de Guermantes, but after the marriage o f the latter he becomes enamoured o f a station waiter and, later, o f a butcher. In cahier 51, the last o f the Contre Sainte-Beuve series, we meet Guercy with the florist Bomiche and an anonymous pianist, the first instance o f the future Morel. In due course the station waiter o f cahier 7 will be transformed into a bus driver, whereas the butcher anticipates the young man flagellating the future Charlus at Jupien’s maison de passe. The different types o f homosexuality are classified under the title ‘La Race des tantes’ later on in the cahier (F F 3 7 R -4 1R ). The Combray narrative which dominates in this cahier, and where emphasis is on the hero’s longing for his mother, culminates in the famous drame du coucher scene. In previous cahiers, the narrator remembered on several occasions the painful experience o f not receiving a proper good-night kiss, on days when the family went the Villebon way, or when Swann came to dinner. The episode in cahier 6 is generated by the arrival o f Swann. The waiting for the mother resembles the scene o f the published version, but here the outcome is different. The hero fully enjoys the company o f his mother when she comes to him, without suffering any feelings o f guilt. Besides, the chosen reading in order to calm the boy is not Francois le Champi, which in the published text she reads when he is ill, but, as Nina Glaser has pointed out, George Sand’s La Mare au diahle. Glaser argues that by replacing La Mare au diahle with Frangois le Champi Proust deliberately concealed the relations in which the parents stand to each other, and the mother’s grief in particular.104 Cahier 51, finally, can be divided into two parts. The Endroit part continues the Guercy portrait, and ends with Mme de Villeparisis’s death and Guercy’s physical decay. The reversed part takes place approximately at the same time as the end o f the Endroit part. After several years away from Paris, the narrator sees all his former 104 ‘Proust du cote de chez Sand: “ Premiere nuit d’insomnie et de desespoir” \ 47.

Proust

159

acquaintances at a soiree at the hotel o f the Prince and Princess Guermantes. All o f the characters are aged and disfigured, so that the hero feels as if he were at a ‘Bal de tetes’.105 Although this soiree reminds us strongly o f the matinee o f the published text, the two are embedded in a different narrative. Bernard Brun has pointed out that the ‘Bal de tetes’ in cahier 51 is part o f the narrator’s retrospection.106 It follows the structure ‘autrefois’ versus ‘maintenant’ . The main opposition, ‘temps perdu’ versus ‘temps retrouve’, however, o f which the matinee forms the closing part, does not yet exist at this point o f composition. Proust is not quite sure about the perfect setting for this scene. A second fragment within the textual unit stages it in the box o f the Marquise de Tours, where the hero has been invited by Mme de Guermantes. The narrator once again becomes aware o f the cruel impact o f time past on the persons he knows in the audience. Brun has dated the invention o f the ‘Bal de tetes’ to the beginning o f 1909.107 Now , Akio Wada has given evidence in his dissertation which suggests that the reversed part o f cahier 51 was written considerably later than the Endroit part, namely between spring and summer 19 10 .108 It would thus be contemporaneous with the constitution o f the Guermantes cycle. Our understanding o f Contre Sainte-Beuve and its relation to A la recherche needs to be modified according to this changed view o f things. Brun has argued that cahier 51, the closing cahier o f the series Contre Sainte-Beuve, eventually replaces the conversation with the mother (the ‘matinee’), and that it is a first attempt to find a new conclusion for the text. The ‘Bal de tetes’, he says, has eventually made the conversation with the mother void (it still appears, however, in the avant-texte for some time), and thus, in a sense, closes the Contre Sainte-Beuve project in its initial form, and opens up new narrative possibilities.109 Taking account o f Wada’s discovery, however, we must understand that the Contre Sainte-Beuve project has been preserved for far longer in the cahiers. Our perception and consideration o f the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve as 105 Cahier 51 has been published in Matinee chez la Princesse de Guermantes, 1 3 —79. 106 ‘ Le Temps retrouve dans les avant-textes de “ Com bray” ’ , 1 1 . 107 ‘Le Temps retrouve’ , 11. 108 ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’ , 2 2 5—6. 109 ‘Le Temps retrouve , 11 . T o avoid confusion, it must however be said that Brun sees a filiation between Temps retrouve and Contre Sainte-Beuve. Earlier on in the article quoted, he argues that ‘Le Temps retrouve n’est qu’un dernier etat du Contre SainteBeuve’ (7). I will come back to the extremely difficult question o f the development o f Contre Sainte-Beuve shortly.

i6o

Proust

a distinct narrative series can no longer be grounded on the idea o f the separateness o f the Sainte-Beuve project brought to a close by the ‘Bal de tetes\ We must now go on to observe the development o f Contre Sainte-Beuve in the cahiers after spring 1909.

3. The Development o f the Cahiers Contre Sa in te-B eu ve between Summer 1909 and Summer 1 9 1 1 : Emergence o f Narrative Cohesion

In the relatively short period between summer 1909 and summer 19 11 the planning and composition o f the future A la recherche du temps perdu made dramatic progress: narrative sequences110 emerged and developed, and parts and chapters o f the novel began to crystallize. This development stood in close relation to what was written in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve to which Proust frequently returned, and I will analyse primarily how strands from Contre Sainte-Beuve were developed until a first state o f A la recherche was generated. We will see how a complex narrative built up and, more importantly, what mechanisms and narrative strategies assisted in making this narrative more coherent and complex. In contrast to the cahiers Contre SainteBeuve, where Proust composed in draft cahiers, in the period with which I shall be concerned in this section he alternated between various types o f working papers (montages, fair copies, typescript, draft, manuscript draft). Since, as we will see in due course, this alternation is crucial for Proust’s practice in this period, I shall furthermore attempt to define the characteristics and functions o f each type, and discuss by what means they assist in shaping the text. In June 1909 Proust for the first time assembled textual units from the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve which so far had been dispersed. Cahier 8 and the first part o f cahier 12 (up to F 42R) together form the first montage o f ‘Combray’. Proust partly used textual units from previous cahiers, reorganized them and subordinated them to a larger structure, which emerged only in the course o f writing cahier 8. Whereas in most o f the later cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve we frequently found units on Combray, the seaside resort and often Paris together in one cahier, Proust selected the Combray units only for his montage in cahier 8. This process o f a more systematic selection which eventually pro110 As ‘narrative sequence’ I designate a group o f cahiers that develop the same theme or focus on one particular setting (for instance Combray or Querqueville).

Proust

161

duced a distinct part o f the novel must be considered as a genuine change in Proust’s practice o f writing which, we shall see, will become highly significant for the genesis o f A la recherche du temps perdu in the period 1909 to 19 11. In cahier 8 ‘Combray’ is narrated through the remembrances o f the insomniac whom we already know from the early cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. In a first version, which will later be deleted, it is sketched in a ‘compact’:111 a short description o f the country town and o f the hero’s aunt Leonie figure together with a first mention o f the famous ‘biscotte’ (the future madeleine) experience.112 In parallel, on the versos (F F 9 V -11V ), Proust develops the theme o f the lanterne magique o f cahier 6 (FF 2R , 6 R —7 R , 5V). The ending o f this passage contains overt allusions to the narrator’s incestuous desire for his mother: J e crois que si dans quelque cham bre enfantine j ’apercevais sur le m u r ou sur la porte leurs belles taches bleues et lum ineuses co m m e celles q u ’ on v o it sur les ailes de certains papillons — leurs belles taches bougeantes c o m m e si l ’invisible papillon q u ’elles decorent avait rem ue — j e

m ’enfuirais en me

bouchant les yeu x. (8: 1 1 V ; m y italics)113

The oedipal imagery o f this passage, a delight for psychoanalytically inclined readers, has been eliminated in the published text. Proust eventually rejects the idea o f narrating Combray in a ‘compact’, no doubt because this condensed presentation did not provide sufficient scope for further development. Instead, through the evocation o f different rooms where he lived in his youth, the hero’s thoughts move to his room in Combray which he remembers as a ‘lieu de supplice’ (8: 14R) on evenings when his mother did not come to kiss him good-night. It is important that in the first place the drame du coucher is treated in the iterative. That is to say, it is a recurrent feature o f the young man’s fears in Combray. Pugh has argued very pertinently that Proust has gained a major structural advance here. The narrative starts with a prelude (the remembrance o f the sleepless man). As a consequence, the drame du coucher is no longer placed in the 111 This version (8: 9 R - 1 3 R ) is part o f a long textual unit. 112 The ‘biscotte’ appeared for the first time in Proust 43 in the form o f toasted bread that the old cook offers to the boy on a cold winter’s day. Dipping a slice into his tea, he suddenly has a reminiscence, which, he realizes, is that o f sharing a ‘biscotte’ writh his grandfather in Combray (FF 1-2 ). 113 See Pleiade, i, Esquisse V II, 664.

162

Proust

opening sequence, but is isolated as an instance o f involuntary memory.114 The drame du coucher is followed by a long portrait o f Swann which recycles elements from cahier 4 (FF 4 5R -4 9 R ; 52V 65R), but uses the Combray elements only. Swann’s relation to the Verdurins, his marriage with Odette and his death, all developments which already figure in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve, are left to one side. It is Swann’s evening visit in Combray that forms a link with the drame du coucher. Although this link was already established in cahier 6, Proust did not immediately make use o f it at the beginning o f cahier 8, an example that shows us that the recycling o f material is not always systematic. The solution o f the drame in cahier 8 differs from the version o f cahier 6 (FF 4 3R -5 iR ): at the thought that he has forced his mother to give in for the first time, the little boy is overwhelmed by sadness, for, he feels, their relationship will never again be as it was before. The mother, to console him, reads him La Mare au diable, but skips all the love scenes.115 There is a strange confusion between La Mare au diable and Frangois le Champi in cahier 8. Although Proust explicitly states that the mother reads La Mare, he embarks on describing the little boy’s reaction when he learns about the myster­ ious (deliberately concealed) relations between Champi and his mother. In the next unit only he develops the ‘biscotte’ scene that figured earlier in the first ‘compact’: Frangoise, the cook, offers the boy a cup o f tea and a ‘biscotte’ . The development o f this scene is too well known for me to comment on it further.116 I shall instead discuss the following unit, which is a portrait o f aunt Leonie. This portrait consists o f a number o f fragments taken from earlier cahiers and subordinated to it. The elements dealing with the aunt’s housekeeper Fran^oise, for instance, are cut off from the long portrait in cahier 5 (FF 20R -39 R ); the priest’s visit stems from cahier 7 (FF 1R - 4 R ; 4 R 9R), and, finally, Fran^oise’s cruelty towards the kitchen maid is from cahier 5 (F F 38 R -39 R ). These elements were originally all part o f 114 The *Birth’ o f ‘A la recherche\ 72. 115 For a detailed discussion see Enid G. Marantz, ‘Les Romans champetres de George Sand dans la Recherche: Intertextes, avant-textes et texte.’ 116 See inter alia BischofF, La Genese de Vepisode de la madeleine. Brun has made the important point that the introduction o f a series o f reminiscences (of which the madeleine is the first) into the narrative is crucial for the development o f the avanttexte in the period 19 0 9 -11. Whereas in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve the narrative was based mainly on retrospection, it will now become more and more grounded on involuntary memory, which offers a far larger scope for developments. See ‘Le Temps retrouve, 12 .

Proust

163

‘compacts’ . As the narrative evolves and eventually builds into a framework, as in cahier 8, parts o f earlier portraits or parts o f earlier ‘compacts’ are cut out and ‘fused’ with a new unit. I am using the notion o f ‘fusion’ here, because it was one that Proust exploited quite consciously himself. He uses the verb ‘fondre’ a number o f times in his cahiers: ‘Ceci se mettra plutot a la fin du livre et sera fondu dans ces deux morceaux ci’ (26: 17V); ‘suivra* ce qui est deja ecrit plus haut et qu’il faudra fondre avec ceci de meme qu’avec le cahier de toile grise’ (64: 24V); ‘fondre avec ce que j ’ai deja fait notamment dans le cahier de toile’ (64: 31V), to cite but a few examples. The first part o f cahier 12 (FF 1R -4 2 R ) continues the ‘Combray’ montage o f cahier 8. An intermediary part which was written some­ time in the second half o f 1909 forms a montage for ‘Querqueville’ (FF42V—73R). In the first part Proust proceeds as in cahier 8, that is, he selects and reorganizes passages from earlier cahiers. Although it is claimed that the Combray and Querqueville parts were written at different times,117 they none the less show clear and significant links. First Proust drafts a short plan: R e so m m e il fem m e naissant avec E v e sensations bizarres Q u erq u eville ( F 4 2 V )

and then, he notes: ‘D ’autres fois je ne me rendormais pas et ma pensee continuait a visiter les chambres que j ’avais habitees [je retoum parfois aux chambres diverses] allait de Combray a Querqueville ou nous allames plusieurs annees pour prendre des bains de mer’ (F 42V).118 This link could be interpreted in two ways: either Proust had written the montage for ‘Querqueville’ 119 immediately after the montage for ‘Combray’, or else, which seems more plausible, even when he was working on two different montages, he still felt a concern to connect the later to the earlier one once he took up his cahier again. After the ‘Querqueville’ montage, we find a long portrait o f Legrandin. In accordance with a pattern we have already discerned in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve, the first impression and the revelation about his true nature figure in one ‘compact’ . In an 117 Quemar argues that the Querqueville part was written after cahier 26. See ‘Hypotheses sur le classement des premiers cahiers Swann’, 18. 118 The word ‘Com bray’ could also be read as ‘Com bourg’ . 119 N ote that from cahier 8 on the seaside resort is called ‘Querqueville’ .

1 64

Proust

addition on the versos, Proust attempts to embed the Legrandin portrait into the aunt Leonie narrative (F74V), an attempt that will only be fully realized in cahier 63, which is partly a fair copy o f cahier 12 .120 Legrandin, who has contacts in Combray and Querqueville, serves as a link between the two worlds in cahier 12. So his refusal to inform his sister Mme de Chemisay (the future Mme de Cambremer), who lodges in Querqueville, about the arrival o f the hero and his grandmother, leads Proust to compose a portrait o f Mme de Chemisay’s mother-in-law, the old Baroness Chemisay. Baroness Chemisay is a model o f the humble simplicity and politeness o f the old aristocracy, which stands in sharp contrast to Legrandin’s snobbery. Whereas in earlier cahiers, and even in the beginning o f the ‘Querqueville’ montage o f cahier 12, Combray and Querqueville were related only by the narrator’s memory, which drifted from one place to the other, they now come together through the introduction o f a fictional character, Legrandin.121 There are two complementary cahiers for Combray and Querque­ ville: cahiers 26 and 32. In complementary cahiers Proust develops a limited number o f episodes from earlier cahiers. These episodes were usually already fully textualized when they figured for the first time, but, none the less, they are now rewritten and expanded. Proust adds numerous details, and may also have conceived o f new versions o f a fragment or unit that he had composed earlier on. Cahier 26, for instance, contains an altogether different version o f the ‘biscotte’resurrection o f Proust 43 (F 3): in this revision the hero is having cake with his governess in Combray. The sound o f his fork touching the plate conjures up the memory o f railway workers observed long ago hammering on tracks. O f course, this resurrection also reminds us o f the ‘biscotte’ o f cahier 8. This time it is not food, but sound, that conjures up long-forgotten images. In the middle o f cahier 26 Proust sketches a number o f episodes which, at first, seem to have nothing in common. These include the hero’s refusal to leave a beloved woman (the narrative ‘casts’ first Mile Penhoet in this role, and then Mile Swann) and go out into the world, the horror o f sleeping in an unknown room, and the refusal to break with old habits. A solution o f how to link these fragments presents itself when Proust introduces a new theme, that o f the fear o f death 120 See Wada, ‘L ’Evolution de Combray*, 125. 121 Compare my analysis above, p. 156, where w e saw that Querqueville and Paris were linked by Guercy.

Proust

165

into which suddenly all the symptoms o f an obsession with habits and continuity above-mentioned may be incorporated. In cahier 32, a complementary cahier for Querqueville, we unexpectedly encounter a new character, a friend o f the hero who introduces him to the poetry o f Leconte de Lisle and Baudelaire (F 64V) and helps to form his developing literary taste. We read: ‘Seulement un moment avant M de Villeparisis avait fait allusion a la belle poesie de Casimir Delevigne sur Jeanne d’Arc. Or Ragenot m ’avait dit que c’etait idiot et en effet je n’y trouvais aucune des beautes que je trouvais dans Victor Hugo’ (F 67V). Without doubt, ‘Ragenot’ anticipates the future Bloch. The name ‘Ragenot’ disappears in the course o f writing, and the new friend o f cahier 32 will be linked to the figure o f M. Bloch who was first introduced in the portrait o f Frangoise in cahier y. he will become the son o f the accountant o f a friend o f the hero’s father.122 Again, two narrative leads have come together by means o f the introduction o f a new character. Let us now look at more general characteristics o f complementary cahiers such as cahiers 26 and 32 which I have just discussed. As a rule, Proust proceeds in two ways: he either takes up a fragment or a unit from an earlier cahier and rewrites, expands or alters it altogether, or he writes brief fragments that are to be intercalated in addition to what already exists in an earlier cahier. These usually shorter fragments are signalled by notes de regie as, for instance, my examples taken from cahier 32 show: ‘Intercalage pour ailleurs’ (F 23R ); ‘J e vais mettre dans le gros cahier rouge le passage sur Camaval de Vienne qui ira dans la [sic] le 1— sejour a Querqueville’ (F32V); ‘A mettre dans Montargis quelquepart’ (F46V); ‘Peut’etre serait-il preferable de mettre ensem­ ble toutes les sensations qui font l’originalite du souvenir retrospectif ’ (F41V ); ‘Mettre pendant les dejeuners a Querqueville soit au debut, soit quand je sors le matin avec M [an ink-stain makes the rest of the word unreadable; it should probably read lMontargis\ soit chez les Chemisy’ (F41V). Clearly, these fragments are intended to ‘feed’ earlier cahiers.123 None the less, we must not regard complementary cahiers 122 For the genesis o f Bloch in the seventy-five cahiers see Enid G . Marantz, ‘La Genese de Bloch, ou la mise en fiction du traite de critique et d’esthetique litteraires’ . 123 I have used the metaphor o f feeding because Proust exploited it extensively himself See e.g. a passage on literary creation in Le Temps retrouve: ‘car cet ecrivain . . . devrait preparer son livre, minutieusement, avec de perpetuels regroupements de forces, comme une offensive, le supporter comme une fatigue, l’accepter comme une regie, le construire comme une eglise, le suivre comme un regime, le vaincre comme un obstacle, le conquerir comme une amitie, le suralimenter comme un enfant [my

166

Proust

solely as a supplement to the cahiers de montage, since Proust may conceive o f new episodes, or find ways o f bringing his narrative together. So, in the summer o f 1909, Proust had at hand a coherent version o f ‘Combray’, consisting o f a montage in cahiers 8 and 12, and the complementary cahiers 26 and 32. Mainly for reasons o f his rapidly declining health, he decided to attempt an immediate publication o f the first part o f his novel in the first half o f August. The story o f his negotiations with various publishers and their rejections is well known. After Alfred Vallette had declined to publish his work in the Mercure de France, Proust planned to publish in instalments with Gaston Calmette in he Figaro.124 Whilst he was waiting for a response from Calmette (who, although he had made a firm offer, remained silent in the eleven months after his discussion with Proust), he copied and expanded the first montage for ‘Combray’ . Cahiers 9, 10 and 63 (a cahier Guerin) are commonly acknowledged to be a mise au net o f cahier 8 which was undertaken by one o f Proust’s secretaries in October 1909.125 It would be erroneous to consider the mises au net as simple copies o f the cahier de montage. Pierre-Louis R e y and Jo Yoshida have pointed out that, whilst he was dictating to his secretaries, Proust changed words or whole episodes, reorganized the narrative and inserted entirely new passages.126 Autograph additions often spread over two or more folios. In cahier 8, for instance, there are autograph notes on FF 5 4 R -5 7 R , 62R, 7 7 R -7 8 R , 8 2 R -8 3 R and so forth. Cahier 10 contains a considerably larger number o f autograph notes than cahier 9. Finally, all but the first five folios o f cahier 63 are written in Proust’s own hand, which makes it particularly interesting to us. In contrast to what Quemar and Callu have argued,127 cahier 63 is not a copy o f cahier 8, but, clearly, a revised copy o f cahier 12. It begins with italics], le creer comme un monde . . Later on w e read ‘O n le nourrit, on fortifie ses parties faibles\ See Pleiade, iv. 609-10. 124 H e intended to publish with Vallette in Jan. or Feb. 1910 . In the meantime he wanted to pre-publish his novel in series in the Mercure de France. A t that point the work was entided Contre Sainte-Beuve. Souvenir d ’une matinee, but Proust affirmed to Vallette that it was a genuine novel. See Lhomeau and Coelho, Marcel Proust, 30-3. 125 Claudine Quemar argues that they are a copy o f the ‘informes brouillons’ that Proust had promised to his friend George de Lauris in mid-Oct. 1909. See ‘L ’Egfise de Com bray’, 290. 126 ‘N otice’ , Pleiade, i. 1069. 127 Quemar, ‘L ’Eglise de Combray*, 290; Callu, ‘Inventaire du Fonds Proust’, Pleiade, i, p. clii.

Proust

167

the first unit o f cahier 12 (FF i R —10R ), follows the narrative o f the montage established in cahier 12 (although, as we shall see, this order is subject to some changes) and ends with an interrupted fragment on Querqueville (F 63R ; it will be remembered that cahier 12 in contrast to cahier 8 comprises a montage both for Combray and for Querque­ ville). Parts o f the Legrandin portrait which formed a ‘compact’ in cahier 12 are now dispersed. Here, only his good qualities and artistic tastes are mentioned. The revelation o f his snobbery is delayed until F F 3 6 R -3 7 R , where the hero’s father reports on his strange beha­ viour in front o f the church in Combray when, being in the company o f a chatelaine, he pretends not to see his old friend. The final revelation is given only in FF 46R—58R, when the hero himself finds out about Legrandin’s snobbery, and when the hero’s father puts Legrandin to the test by asking him for contacts in Querqueville (the person he has in mind is Legrandin’s sister, Mme de Chemisay). The selected parts o f the Legrandin portrait have thus been fully embedded before the narrative moves on to the two ways (named at this point Meseglise and Guermantes). Although cahier 63 is mainly an altered version o f the ‘Combray’ montage o f cahier 12 as concerns plot, we also find elements which are taken from cahier 8. A passage about Frangoise’s cruelty to chickens, for instance, stems from cahier 8 (F F 6 1V —63V). The mise au net— and this is crucial for our under­ standing o f the nature o f various working papers and o f Proust’s practice in general— is not, as the term strongly suggests, simply a neat copy. On the contrary, Proust’s creation is fluid. N ew developments such as, in the case o f cahier 63, the embedding o f parts o f the Legrandin portrait and the postponement o f revelations about his true nature are to be found even in documents that have the primary function o f a copy. Proust does not cease to make additions at the stage o f the typescript either.128 He has added a great deal o f material to the 1909 typescript (NAFr 16733, FF 1-200), and has altered it in many ways. I shall give only two relevant examples to illustrate his practice o f continuous revision. We read about the regular visitors to the 128 O n post-19 12 typescripts see Finch [Winton], and Richard Bales’ edition o f the typescript (N A F r 16735) that covers the first holiday at the seaside resort which in this embryonic form formed the second part o f the novel in 191 3. See Marcel Proust, ‘Bricquebec’ . Prototype d’ {A Vombre des jeunes filles en jleu rs’ . See also Jo Yoshida, ‘Sur les trois jeux de dactylographies de la “ mort de la grand-mere” : un aspect du processus de la creation chez Marcel Proust’ .

168

Proust

family in Combray: ‘Le “ monde” se bomait habituellement a M. Vington et a M. Swann’ (F 28R). The rather unexpected mention o f Vington is developed in a long addition in the margin. We learn that on days when the hero’s father visits Vington, the latter cautiously hides his manuscript.129 M y second example is taken from FF 3 5 R 37R , where we find a long portrait o f Swann’s mother. This portrait is almost Balzacian: Proust gives a detailed description o f Mme Swann’s upbringing, her character and her social success (which is partly due to the fact that she is Jewish).130 Although she has relations in high society and among the aristocracy she hides them from her family and from persons o f her own social standing: ‘ces amities brillantes Madame Swann, qui n’avait aucune vanite, les dissimula facilement grace au jeu innocent et naturel de sa distinction et de sa delicatesse, a tout son entourage de femmes de notaires et d’agents’ (F 36R). Proust has deleted all o f this portrait by crossing it out. On F 3 7 there follows a passage about the great-aunt’s possible surprise, had she come to know about Swann’s brilliant relations: ‘ [Et si maintenant, plusieurs annees apres la mort de Monsieur et Madame Swann] Mais si l’on avait dit a ma grand’tante’ . Proust again deletes all reference to Swann’s parents. Even in the passage that precedes the portrait o f Mme Swann, Proust has retrospectively eliminated all direct reference to the parents: ‘il demeurait, depuis [la mort de ses parents] (qu’il etait orphelin, Quai d’Orleans)’ (F34R). The portrait o f Mme Swann is an example o f an occasion when Proust had originally planned to explain the character o f one o f his heroes, Swann, by his origins. Mme Swann, o f course, here anticipates Swann’s own behaviour in society before he meets Odette de Crecy. But, in the course o f writing, Swann absorbs the features that were assigned to his mother, to the extent that the mother herself must disappear from the typescript.131 129 It is well established that, in the early stages o f planning, Vington is a natural scientist. He exists in parallel to a character called Berget, who is a composer. The two only fused in 1 913. See Kazuyoshi Yoshikawa, ‘Vinteuil ou la genese du Septuor’, 2 9 1-4 . Thus, in 1909, Vington the scientist hides his manuscript and not, as one might expect, his musical score. 130 O n the treatment o f Judaism and the Jewish question in this portrait, see Marion A . Schmid, ‘The Jewish Question in A la recherche du temps perdu in the Light o f Nineteenth-Century Discourses on R ace’ . 131 See also Alison Finch, ‘The Family in Drafts o f A la recherche du temps perdu . Finch argues that Proust eliminated Swann’s mother from the text, because she would have competed too strongly with the narrator’s own idealized mother: ‘It

Proust

169

Whilst Proust was still waiting for Calmette’s response, his text expanded more and more. If in the beginning he was mainly occupied with fixing the ‘Combray’ part, he now also develops other strands inherited from the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. Wada has argued that Proust’s waiting and Calmette’s eventual rejection entailed a second cycle o f work (to be distinguished from a first cycle— end o f the year 1908 to November 1909) where Proust finally decided to publish his novel as a whole.132 Indeed, in notes de regie o f the cahiers that follow the first montage for ‘Combray’, Proust began to conceive his literary project, if not yet in terms o f parts, at least in terms o f chapters. In cahier 32 he notes: ‘Mettre cela dans le chapitre Combray’ (F43R); in cahier 14, we read: ‘A ajouter au chapitre sur la sonate de St Saens’ (F5R ). Along with the elaboration o f the framework for his book, Proust developed a more and more systematic method o f writing. Either the fragments composed in the draft cahiers after the first typescript for ‘Combray’ are intended for addition to an episode o f an earlier cahier, in which case Proust would usually note ‘A intercaler’ or ‘Ajouter a’, or, as the case may be, he had an idea about the link between a new passage and one that already exists, in which case we often find notes like ‘fondre ce morceau avec’. There is a greater concern about plotting than in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. This change o f practice is reflected in the avanttexte: Proust drafted a far larger number o f plans and synopses, which either summarize the order o f narrative or develop better solutions for the organization o f plot. He frequently omitted essential episodes, or only sketched them briefly with the intention o f returning to them subsequently. Numerous examples o f this practice are to be found in the draft and montage cahiers for Querqueville and Paris written in winter 1909 and spring 1910. In cahier 29, for instance, Proust plans the ‘scene du lit’, that is, the first attempt to steal a kiss from Maria, one o f the genetic predecessors o f the future Albertine, on the night when the young girl lodges in the same hotel in Querqueville. He simply notes ‘Suit la scene du lit’ (F 7R); the episode itself will be fully rehearsed much later, namely in cahier 64.133 He proceeds in a similar seems clear . . . that Proust wished to have only one admirable mother in his novel, both to save digression in D u cote de chez Swann and to give the narrator’s mother unique prestige’ (182). 132 See ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’, 236. 133 Proust again only mentions ‘scene du lit’ (93V —90V) before he formulates it in full (90V -89V ).

170

Proust

way with the death o f the grandmother. Despite the fact that he has already mentioned it in the ‘Querqueville’ cahier 65 (FF 30R —44R), the narrative moves forwards and backwards in cahiers 65 and 14. We encounter the grandmother in Paris, in Querqueville where she cares for her grandson, in Paris again, where she suffers a stroke, until in cahier 14 the author fully sketches her final illness and death (FF 8 5 R 97V). A number o f these ‘unfed’ passages, so to speak, are marked by the note de regie ‘Faire une scene de cela’ . An example o f this sort may be found in cahier 29, where the hero talks about his relationship with his parents: ‘Car la fonction des parents me semblait etre de contrarier les vocations, et le jour ou mon pere me disait: “ Fais ainsi puisque c’est ta vocation et que ce sera ta vie” il m ’aurait semble qu’il abdiquait son role de pere, qu’il disait c’est toi le maitre, qu’il mourrait’ (29: 19R). Proust adds a note in the left-hand margin: ‘(Peut’etre faire une scene de cela)’ (F 19 R ). All my examples demonstrate that after the first typescript for ‘Combray’, Proust shows a greater concern with plotting. The ‘feeding’ o f story elements is occasionally held back until their position in the narrative becomes less fluid. After montage, mises au net, and typescript, Proust devotes himself to developing themes within the Combray/Paris/Querqueville strands, whilst, at the same time, he continues to revise earlier fragments and to compose new ones. One first such theme is the love stories.134 Cahier 12 (FF 1 1 1 R - 1 2 4 R ) and the reversed part o f cahier 25 develop the hero’s relationship with the young girls in Querqueville. In the various units and fragments that Proust com­ poses, the hero’s desire shifts from one girl to another. Even their names, their physical appearance and the circumstances under which they meet the hero vary considerably from one version to another. In the first fragment o f cahier 25 reversed, it is no longer the young man who pursues the girls in Querqueville, but, as in cahier 4, his older double— Swann.135 On F F 4 4 R —43R , however, the narrative, with­ out transition, again features the young man. The genuinely new element o f the young-girl theme in this cahier is that Swann, who has become infatuated with Anna, is led to suspect at one point that she 134 Akio Wada has argued that from summer 1909 on, Proust proceeds system­ atically by themes. A narrative sequence on ‘love* (autumn 1909-beginning o f 1910) is followed by another sequence on ‘art’ (cahiers 29, 14, 28, 30), and, finally, one on ‘death’ . See ‘L ’Evolution de Combray’ , 239-4 0 . 135 Cf. Bardeche, Marcel Proust romancier, ii. 16 -17 .

Proust

171

has had an affair with her friend Septimie. To my knowledge, this is the first instance o f female homosexuality in the cahiers. It does not yet contain the two girls’ ‘danse contre seins’, which will only be added in cahier 46 (FF 63-66; written in 1914), that is after the creation o f Albertine.136 In the following cahiers, Proust concentrates on the story o f Swann. Cahiers 69, a cahier Guerin and cahier 22 together form a quasi-complete (though strongly reworked) draft o f Swann’s love for Odette. They were probably written between November 1909 and the beginning o f the year 1910, together with the development o f Combray, and not only once later parts, such as Guermantes and he Temps retrouve, had been sketched.137 Cahier 22 even shows traces o f borrowings from the abandoned Jean Santeuil: Swann and Odette are often called ‘J ean’ and ‘Fran^oise’. Cahier 69 stretches from Swann’s first encounter with his future wife (named at this point Mme X or Carmen) to his awakening suspicions as to her fidelity. Cahier 22 starts with the scene where Swann has opened Odette’s compromising letter to Forcheville. It is noteworthy that at the beginning o f cahier 69 Swann meets Mme X in the company o f the narrator’s cousin who, at his request, introduces him to the Verdurin circle. The mysterious cousin appears several times in the cahiers.138 He is a mediator between Swann’s world and the world o f the narrator. Events that are prior to the narrator’s experience are reported to him by his cousin. Thus, in cahier 26 we read: ‘Et j ’ai bien reconstitue d’apres les recits de mon cousin ce charme qu’avait pour Swann sa vie mondaine pendant ces longues periodes ou il incorporait un [sentiment] (amour)’ (26: 26 R -27 R ). In cahier 14 the cousin has yet another function. It is he, and not the hero himself, who observes the scene o f profanation at La Rousseliere (the future Montjouvain). The cousin reports events which the young narrator, for reasons o f decency, could not possibly have seen. Together with the brother, the cousin disappears as the planning progresses. Although cahiers 69 and 22 appear as a distinct montage o f Un amour de Swann, the story o f Swann’s love is not yet an entirely autonomous part as in the published text. The person o f the cousin 136 See Pleiade, iii, Esquisse X V II, 1082. The hero observes the two girls in the company o f Elstir, and not o f Dr Cottard, as in the published text. 137 See Carla Tammenoms-Bakker, ‘The Figure o f Swann in the Cahiers o f Marcel Proust’ , 120. 138 O n the role o f the cousin see Wada, ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’ , 174.

172

Proust

who figures as a mediator and an extended ending about Mme Swann’s social ambitions after her marriage make it rather appear as a long analepsis within the Combray narrative which is related directly to the story o f the young man.139 Cahiers 27, 23 and 29 that follow the montage revert to the love stories o f the young hero. Cahier t j for the major part develops the hero’s advances to Swann’s daughter Gilberte (it also contains a number o f notes and additions for Querqueville and for the Swann story). Cahier 23, a very short notebook, sets forth general theories o f desire exemplified by the hero’s love for Maria, the chambermaid and Gilberte. A unit on Mme Swann (FF 1 1 R - 1 8 R ) is annotated by the hand o f Proust’s secretary, Nahmias, and was used without doubt for the last part o f the manuscript draft o f ‘Autour de Mme Swann’ . Cahier 29 is highly heterogeneous. It contains fragments for Querque­ ville and Combray, as well as passages o f literary criticism which continue the Contre Sainte-Beuve project.140 With regard to the story o f the young girls, Proust plans a more synthetic treatment o f the hero’s two love experiences with Maria and Gilberte, in the form o f a comparison: ‘peut’etre plus tard au moment ou je comparerais les 2 amours’ (F 2 R , note on the left-hand margin). All o f these cahiers, it has been argued, develop the love stories o f A la recherche, but not in the sense that they constitute a linear and coherent version o f the various stories in Querqueville and Paris. In reality, Proust either sketches fragments to be embedded in the typescript, expands scenes or sketches new ones. There is an overt concern for the order o f the plot, as may be seen in the notes de regie, but, apart from cahiers 69 and 22, none o f the cahiers discussed constitutes a coherent version of, say, one o f the holidays in Querqueville, or the hero’s friendship with Gilberte in Paris. A first attempt to reorganize fragments from previous cahiers pertaining to ‘Querqueville’ is carried out in two cahiers Guerin, cahiers 64 and 65. Since they were not accessible to him at the time, Wada has omitted the investigation o f these two cahiers in his thesis. The reversed part o f cahier 64, which is previous to the Endroit part, is especially important for our understanding o f the relation between the various cahiers, o f how Proust eventually combines them and o f 139 See below, pp. 18 4 -5 , for its further development. 140 The two most important texts are the article ‘A aj outer a Flaubert’ published in the Pleiade edition o f Contre Sainte-Beuve (299-302) and a text on Romain Rolland (Contre Sainte-Beuve, Pleiade, 30 7-10 ).

Proust

173

how ‘Querqueville’ takes shape. It takes up fragments from cahiers 12, 26, 32, 25, 27 and 29 (that is, all o f the cahiers after the first typescript, except the manuscript draft for ‘Un amour de Swann’ and cahier 23), and develops a few fragments from cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve 36, 1 and, 3.141 Proust has without doubt used it as a manuscript draft for A Vombre des jeunes fdles en Jieurs, as a title in the left-hand margin o f F i R , which was probably added retrospectively, indicates: a l’om bre des J - F en fleurs prem iere version

Folios 145VE—50VE form a continuous, though at times strongly reworked, version o f the holidays in Querqueville (we will see that Proust planned three trips at this stage). It is only occasionally interrupted when Proust copies out a textual unit that he has developed earlier on the rectos onto the versos.142 In this cahier special attention is given to the hero’s encounter with a group o f young girls. The first year in Querqueville is treated on FF 145VE— 88VE (interrupted by a few additions). It shows several attempts to link cahier 25 with cahier 12. Frangoise Leriche distinguishes a first part up to F 1 16V (plus a reprise on FF 1 17 R —1 1 8R) where the young girls are anonymous, and which is probably earlier than cahiers 27 and 29.143 In this section, the hero, intrigued by a ‘gang’ o f young strangers, makes efforts to be introduced to them by an anonymous painter, but fails to establish any contact. In the second part, which is contemporaneous with plans o f cahier 29, three young girls crystallize within the group. They are Andree, Maria and Simone. The young man’s interest shifts continuously from one girl to the next. After a number o f character portraits and crucial scenes (for instance the ‘scene du lit’ which is first mentioned in cahier 29, but is for the first time formulated here), the narrator analyses his waxing and waning attraction at the end o f the first holiday. He loses interest in the girls as soon as they become accessible to him: 141 For a detailed discussion o f the different layers o f composition and hypotheses on their dates o f composition, see Fran^oise Leriche, ‘Note sur le cahier “ Querque­ ville” , les theses d’Akio Wada et de Takaharu Ishiki, et sur l’activite de Proust en 1909’ . 142 See e.g. a unit entitled ‘Les Maquerelles’ which develops on folios 13 9 R E , 1 3 7 R E - 1 3 6 R E , 1 3 9 R E -1 4 0 R E , and is copied on 1 3 6 V E - 1 3 5 V E . 143 ‘N ote sur le cahier “ Querqueville” ’ , 13.

174

Proust

Si je n’avais su qu’il me fallait revenir a Querqueville pour connaitre la lyceenne qu’on ne pouvait me faire connaitre avant je ne serais pas revenu l’annee suivante. Et pour cela peu importait que Maria et Andree y iraient*. Les deux autres suffisaient bien et me plaisaient mieux, parce qu’elles etaient quoique plus insignifiantes plus inconnues. Maria etait videe pour moi. Et Andree remplit [sic] de quelque chose qui me ressemblait trop. (64: 88VE) Cahier 64 thus exploits a typical feature o f the hero’s love experience which we already know from various cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. In notes de regie Proust reflects on whether a number o f elements from the first holiday in Querqueville might not be better transposed to the second holiday which he drafts on FF 87VE-69VE. Folios 68VE50VE draft yet another, third visit to Querqueville, two years later. On the invitation o f the Chemisay family, the young man spends the summer holidays with them in a town called Belle-Rive or Rivebelle. This third visit is an example o f ternary patterns in the early stages o f composition which, as Bernard Brun has pointed out, were even­ tually superseded by binary patterns, once the diptych Temps perdu and Temps retrouve had been established.144 In this third visit, Maria, who now accepts and even encourages the young man’s advances, dominates. Even if certain characters crystallize out o f the anonymous group o f young girls in cahier 64, they and the relations they entertain with the hero are still exchangeable to a large extent. The fluidity o f the girls’ identity is perhaps seen most clearly in a number o f notes de regie, where we find a distinct superimposition between the young girls in Querqueville on the one hand, and Gilberte Swann and her mother on the other. Consider for instance notes such as: ‘II y avait une blonde (souvent tout en blanc) (peut’etre transporter cela pour M — Swann) a la douce peau blanche et vemie’ (F 133R E ) or: ‘Ne pas oublier la rose comestible (Pierrette) si je ne la transporte pas a M Ue de Forcheville (voir le cahier des filles)’ (F 105R E). A particularly interesting case in point is F 64PJE where Proust notes: ‘Mettre q.q. part pour Maria’; there then follows part o f a folio that was cut from a not yet identified cahier which deals with Swann’s tormented relation­ ship with Odette. In cahiers after the Combray typescript, we find a far greater concern for linking up episodes and for creating symmetries in the narrative. Thus, cahier 64 attempts not only to reorganize earlier fragments for ‘Querqueville’, but also to contrast the hero’s love experience with the young girls at the seaside resort with his 144 See ‘Histoire d’un texte: Les Cahiers de la R e c h e r c h e 13.

Proust

175

infatuation with Gilberte when he was still a boy. In contrast to his earlier experience, he now evaluates the potential o f a relation with the girls (in this case Maria) in a far more sober and detached tone: ‘Et je n’etais plus au temps ou je quand Gilberte aurait pu venir aux Champs-Elysees ou je l’attendais et si [sic] y venait pas, je pensais qu’un jour une raison mysterieuse m’apprendrait pourquoi tout en me preferant, tout en se [ill] d’aller ailleurs elle y allait’ (F 93 VE). He understands clearly that Maria prefers mundane distractions to his company, and that their relations will o f necessity remain superficial. Cahier 64 is a suggestive example o f the practice o f transposition between different characters. The superimposition o f characters that we know from the published text is largely a result o f Proust’s practice o f wdting, as we can clearly see here. His simultaneous use o f different cahiers, belonging to different phases o f writing and with different content, and his constant attempt to bring them together, is one o f the sources o f the intricacy and the complexity o f A la recherche du temps perdu. The Endroit part o f cahier 64 deals mostly with the hero’s love for Gilberte. There are, amongst others, units on his perception o f the Swann household to which he has become a regular visitor, on his meetings with Gilberte on the Champs-Elysees and on her famous ‘gouters’ which so much impress the adolescent. We also find a number o f notes and ‘intercalages’ for Querqueville and Combray. In a note on F 2 R , Proust recapitulates the dominant themes o f the first and second holiday in Querqueville: ‘Querqueville sera domine par les noms, par les filles, redevenues mysterieuses si aimees et les deux aimees n’etant recherchees la 1— que pour rencontrer les autres, la 2que pour voir la 1—, l’amour qui ment, et ma grand’mere.’ 145 The guiding themes o f ‘Querqueville’, namely the power o f names and the dialectics o f desire that drives the hero from one girl to another, are clearly outlined here. Cahier 6$, the second cahier Guerin under investigation, is again composed o f different layers. According to Leriche, its beginning can be dated 1909; the rest is probably contemporaneous with cahiers 29 and 14 .146 It is entitled ‘Copie definitive (?) du Chapitre “ Querque­ ville” ’ (Proust’s question mark). It is, however, not, as one might conclude, a copy o f cahier 64, but deals with a period prior to the 145 See Pleiade, ii, Esquisse L X IX , 1004. 146 ‘N ote sur le cahier “ Querqueville” ’ , 19.

176

Proust

reversed part o f cahier 64. Amongst the 75 cahiers o f the Fonds Proust no matching cahier has been found, and Leriche therefore suggests that, if it is indeed a copy, the original could have been lost.1471 shall outline the most important narrative units. Whereas in cahier 64 the focus was on the young girls, it is now on the hero’s relationship with his mother, his grandmother and Montargis. The first fragments concentrate on the first trip to the seaside resort. On FF 1 R - 4 R it is specified that, initially, the boy was supposed to visit Florence and Venice, but after a nervous crisis caused by his excitement, the trip was postponed and the destination changed to Querqueville. On FF 3 0 R -4 4 R we are suddenly transposed into a different time frame. This fragment drafts the hero’s sudden remembrance o f his grandmother and the awareness o f her death in a dream on his first night in Querqueville (during his second trip, that is). This leads to a more abstract reflection on the power o f reminiscences to resuscitate the past on folios FF 46R -48R . To recapitulate, cahiers Guerin 64 and 65 establish two separate versions o f ‘Querqueville’ which will later be amalgamated. Cahier 64 drafts the various encounters with the young girls during the three visits planned at that point as well as the Gilberte story which will form the second part o f ‘Noms de pays: le nom’ . Cahier 65, on the other hand, sketches the opening scenes o f the first trip, drafts a number o f scenes o f Querqueville I (for instance the episode where Montargis takes a photograph o f the grandmother) and introduces the scene which will later be entitled ‘Les Intermittences du cceur’. Cahiers 14 and 28 seem to have been written more or less simultaneously in the first months o f 19 10 .148 Cahier 14 contains additions to the Paris and Combray part o f the narrative, as well as important new narrative fragments, and two critical texts on Baude­ laire and Jules Renard. Folios 8R —19V sketch a text on Vington, his daughter and her mistress, which contains the first version o f the ‘scene de sadisme’ (FF 12 R - 16 R ) . We also find two drafts on the grandmother’s illness and death, as well as other drafts for Combray. Cahier 28 contains numerous additions and fragments for almost all parts o f the novel established thus far. What makes this cahier particularly interesting is a short addition on FF 3 3 R -3 4 R : ‘(Pour la [demiere] (IV-) partie (critique))’ . Proust apparently has decided retrospectively to postpone a note on the value o f style for the representation o f reality which he has just sketched to the last, or, in 147 ‘Note sur le cahier “ Querqueville” ’ , 19. 148 See ‘Notes sur les inventaires des cahiers Com bray’, 50.

Proust

177

the revised version, a fourth part o f the novel. We know that in the first months o f 19 10 the last part was still dedicated to the critical essay in the form o f a conversation with the mother.149 Wada, it will be remembered, has given evidence that the ‘Bal de tetes’ o f cahier 5 1 Envers was not written in 1909, as was thought previously, but between spring and summer 1910. This invention reversed the overall plot structure. Proust decided to transfer notes on aesthetics to the fourth part and reserved the last part for the reappearance o f the aged characters.150 Wada concludes that Contre Sainte-Beuve remained in the manuscripts until the invention o f the ‘Bal de tetes’ . It was transformed into the novel later called A la recherche du temps perdu with the creation o f he Temps retrouve at the turn o f the year 1 9 1 0 / 1 1 . Whether or not one shares Wada’s radical position (the alternative is Brun and Bonnet’s hypothesis that, with a creation o f a novel o f remembrance in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve, the initial project o f a conversation with the mother had become void, but that theoretical fragments from these cahiers were eventually transferred into he Temps retrouve), Wada’s analysis throws into relief that there was undeniably a strong continuity between the ten cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve and the cahiers in the period 1909—11 . After the cahiers which were for the greatest part devoted to the development o f Combray, Un amour de Swann and Querqueville, we can distinguish a further group, comprising both draft and montage cahiers, which increasingly focus on the elaboration o f Guermantes. They are cahiers 38 (second part), 13 (first fragment), 30, 37, 51 (Envers), the rest o f 13 and 49. As with the cahiers for Combray and Querqueville, they contain fragments not exclusively on Guermantes, but also on the other parts o f the novel, as well as fragments that are not yet assigned a fixed place in the narrative. Proust subsequently outlined the three phases o f the hero’s relations with the Guermantes. The first is the apparition o f Mme de Guermantes in the church o f Combray. The hero sees her as an incarnation o f centuries o f aristocratic power, splendour and cruelty (13: 1R - 9 R ) . The second phase revolves around a performance at the Opera during the hero’s adolescence (30: 4 R —17R ). Finally, we find the hero frequenting the Guermantes, and experiencing a sense o f disappointment regarding their triviality in all aspects o f life.151 Simultaneously, in these cahiers, 149 See Wada, ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’ , 226. 150 See ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’, 2 2 5 -6 . 151 O n this point see ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’ , 198.

178

Proust

Proust develops the hero’s aesthetic and artistic initiation. We find units on Elstir in Querqueville, on reading in Combray and on the theatre in Paris. There is no cahier which deals exclusively with one o f the arts; in general we find at least two together. Whereas Elstir incarnates painting, and Sarah Bernhardt acting, Bergotte only rarely figures in the passages on reading. Cahier 66 is a first attempt to organize Guermantes. The reversed part o f cahier 67 continues the narrative o f cahier 66. But it is only in cahiers 39-43 (written between April/May 1910 and September 1 9 1 1 ; some additions were written in the early months o f 1911) that Proust elaborates a coherent series o f what will become he Cote de Guermantes. It does not yet have a title, but three o f the five cahiers are marked ‘IV partieV52 We may compare Proust’s narrative technique here to that o f the montage o f ‘Combray’, in part at least. He takes elements from cahiers as early as Contre Sainte-Beuve and reorganizes them. Simultaneously, these units are considerably enriched and, within the new framework, expanded. All cahiers are strongly reworked, many o f the versos covered with variants and new episodes. They form one continuous narrative for Guermantes that covers the power o f names, the hero’s first encounter with Mme de Guermantes in Combray church, his unrequited love for her in Paris where they live in the same building, his visit to Montargis at the barracks in order to use him as a mediator, the invitation to the salon Guermantes and his resulting colourful social life, up to the ball at the house o f the Princess Guermantes. They deal exclusively with the Guermantes. Everything else, such as the death o f the hero’s grandmother, developed in cahier 14, is for the moment left to one side.153 Proust takes up elements from very early cahiers such as the Frangoise portrait from cahier 5, and also from the 1910 draft cahiers which focus increasingly on Guermantes (cahiers 38, 1 3 , 3 0 , 3 7 , 5 1 , 4 9 ) . The performance at the Opera, for instance, where Mme de Guermantes greets the hero from her baignoire, stems from cahier 30 (FF 4 R —17R ). B y means o f fusing them, shorter units which 152 O n the exact order o f writing o f these cahiers see Thierry Laget’s discussion in his introduction to Pleiade, iii, 14 9 1—518. Since in cahier 28 the fourth part was reserved for criticism, w e may assume that with the expansion o f the world o f Guermantes Proust has intercalated a new part, and now envisages his novel in five parts. Wada hypothesizes that the contents o f these parts in 1 9 1 0 - n are ‘Com bray’ , ‘Querqueville’, ‘U n Amour de Swann’ , ‘Cote de Guermantes’ and ‘L ’Adoration perpetuelle’ (reflections on poetics and aesthetics). See ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’, 2 13 . 153 See Bernard Brun, ‘Avant-Propos’ , B I P 21 (1990), 5.

Proust

179

were independent micro-narratives in earlier cahiers lose their original quality o f a closed text. The Frangoise portrait originally had a beginning, a description and an end. When integrated into cahier 39, however, it becomes a genuine element o f the Guermantes narrative and is modified according to the development the text has undergone up to this point: Fran^oise’s birthplace is no longer Gelos, but Combray. When she uses the term ‘grande famine’ in the sense o f both ‘big’ and ‘glorious’, this is demonstrated not with the example o f Gabriel de la Rochefoucauld, a personal friend o f Proust’s who figured in cahier 5, but with that o f the fictional Guermantes. Moreover, the former portrait has been enriched with characters that did not yet exist in cahier 5, such as Elstir and the Marquis de T . 154 Some units which up to this stage did not have a distinct place in the narrative and were held back, are now re-inserted. For instance, there is an episode in cahier 28 (FF 24 R —26R) where the name o f the Duke o f Guermantes’s brother-in-law reminds the hero o f a little German spa where he used to go with his mother before they discovered Querqueville. It is not specified when the conversation with the Duke took place. We read: ‘Un jour que je demandais a M. de Guermantes les beaux titres de son beau-frere’ (28: 24 R ).155 In cahier 41 this brief episode is integrated into a larger narrative where the hero for the first time enters the Guermantes salon.156 Many episodes which were only briefly sketched in earlier cahiers are expanded in cahiers 39-43. The relations between Montargis and his mistress, an actress who abuses his affections for her, are enriched with details (39: 69R). In a rewriting o f the passage on Mme de Guermantes’s amiability with her husband’s mistresses, which was already briefly alluded to in cahier 5, we now learn that she encourages them to enter into these adulterous relationships (43: iR ). In cahier 43, the hero receives an unexpected invitation to a ball at the Princess Guerman­ tes’s. He has serious doubts about its authenticity and therefore decides to ask the Duke and Duchess for their opinion on the matter. During his visit to them Swann appears. B y intercalating the visit to the Guermantes, Proust delays the hero’s appearance at the ball, and is thus able to introduce the famous scene where Swann 154 N ote that in the Guermantes montage the Marquis de T . is not identical with Norbois (who, o f course, becomes Norpois in due course). Whereas the Marquis de T . is an old friend o f the hero’s father, Norbois is a more recent acquaintance. 155 See Pleiade, ii, Esquisse X X , 1 1 7 2 -4 . 156 See Pleiade, ii, Esquisse X X X I I , 12 3 4 -13 0 9 .

i8 o

P roust

makes the first mention o f his impending death, and where the Guermantes show greater concern about Madame’s attire (the notorious red shoes) than about the destiny o f their old friend. Mme de Guermantes’s unfaithfulness to Swann here is not entirely new. It was already hinted at in a passage on the verso o f cahier 42: L e le c te u r (atten tif, s’ il T e st,) se rap p elle p e u t’ etre a v e c q u e lle a ffe c tio n M - de G u e rm a n te s q u i ( n ’ ) etait alors q u e P ^ 5^ des L a u m e s [parle to u te u n e soiree] p arle c h e z M - d e S- E u v e r t e , a S w a n n q u ’ elle n e v o u la it pas q u itter, q u ’ elle v o u la it e m m e n e r a v e c elle so u h a ite r sa fete a la P rin ce sse d e P a rm e . C e m e m e le c te u r v e rra plus tard si la D u c h e s se d e G u e rm a n te s g ard a u n b ie n fid e le s o u v e n ir d e S w a n n , u n e fois q u ’il fu t m o rt. (4 2 : 4 7 V )

Cahier 43, the last o f the series, ends abruptly in the middle o f a sentence narrating the hero’s reluctance to have his future life directed by Guercy. This sentence and the narrative as a whole continue in cahier 49. One might therefore be inclined to take it as the last cahier o f the Guermantes series. Compagnon and Brun, however, claim that cahier 49 is earlier than cahiers 39—43 and, indeed, contemporary with cahiers 14 and 28.157 I shall none the less discuss it here, as it is an interesting example o f how Proust creates a coherent narrative on the basis o f the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. The revelation about Guercy’s true nature in cahier 7 was part o f one o f several fragments on his character. The fragment where the hero suddenly becomes aware o f his homosexuality comes after an evening at the house o f the Princess Guermantes and starts with the words ‘Le comte de Guercy s’etait assoupi (ou du moins fermait les yeux)’ (7: 50R). We assume therefore that it is on this occasion that he fell asleep. But, in cahier 49, the revelation takes place at a later point in the novel’s time-frame, namely during a performance at the Opera when the hero comes to see Mme de Guermantes and to enquire about an attractive young girl he has met at the Princess’s ball— the girl with multiple identities we know from cahier 36. As in cahier 36 she is alternatively a member o f three different social strata. Mile de Vigognac is the daughter o f an aristocrat from Brittany, Mile Tronquin (or Tronchin) is the daughter o f a wealthy money-changer or an advocate and finally, Olga Czarski is the daughter o f a Polish musician.158 Each o f the girls’ surroundings seem infinitely more attractive to the hero than any o f the circles he 157 Alain Compagnon, ‘N otice’ , Pleiade, iii, 1209. Bernard Brun, ‘Inventaire de quelques cahiers des demieres parties du roman dans son etat primitif’ . 158 See Pleiade, iii, Esquisse VIII, 9 8 3-10 0 3.

P roust

i 81

himself frequents. Unfortunately, the three girls are all inaccessible: Mile de Vigognac hardly ever comes to Paris, Mile Tronquin/ Tronchin has a strict religious background which prevents her from frequenting Parisian high society and Olga Czarski has returned to her native Poland. Now, by virtue o f transposing the revelation o f Guercy’s true nature from the evening at the Princess Guermantes’s to a later performance at the Opera, Proust is able to link it with the story o f the unidentified young girl. This link is crucial for the economy o f the narrative, because it allows Proust to accommodate various important events within one setting, namely the evening at the Opera. Cahier 49 furthermore contains an expanded version o f the notion o f the ‘race maudite’ o f cahier 7. The most interesting part is a note on the versos where Proust justifies the term ‘inverti’ that he uses throughout the Recherche in comparison to Balzac’s usage o f the term ‘tante’ . It is very rare for Proust to explain the choice o f his language in such a way, and to refer directly to the constraints he suffers from having to conform to the taste and moral values o f his literary public. I shall therefore give this passage in full: ‘J e ne vous m en e pas ici votre Seigneurie, dit-il car c ’ est le quartier des tantes . . .

— ‘ H a o fit L o rd D u rh am et q u ’ est-ce? — C ’ est le troisiem e sexe,

M ilo r d .’ (Balzac Splen d eu r et M isere des Courtisanes). C e term e c o n v ie n drait particulierem ent, dans [tout cet] m o n o uvrage, [au m oins dans cette partie] ou les personnages auxquels il s’ appliquerait, etant presque tous v ie u x , et presque tous m ondains, (ils) e n * seraient [m agnifiquem ent] dans les reunions m ondaines ou ils papotent, m agnifiquem ent habilles et ridiculises. Les tantes! R ie n que [dans le m ot] on voit leur solennite, et toute leu r toilette, rien que dans ce m o t qui porte ju pes. on voit, dans une reu nion m ondaine leur aigrette et leur ram age de volatiles d ’ un genre different. ‘ M ais le lecteur fran^ais v eu t etre respecte’ et n ’etant pas B alzac je suis oblige de m e contenter d ’inverti. H o m o se xu el est trop germ anique et pedant, n ’ayant guere paru en France sau f erreur, et traduit sans doute des jo u m a u x berlinois, q u ’apres le proces E u len b u rg. D ’ailleurs il y a une nuance. Les h o m o sexu els m ettent leur p oint d ’ho n n eu r a n ’etre pas des invertis. D ’ apres la theorie, toute fragm entaire du reste que j ’ ebauche ici, il n ’y aurait pas en realite d ’hom osexuels. Si m asculine que puisse etre l’apparence de la tante, son go u t de virilite p rovien drait d ’ une fem inite fonciere, fut-elle dissim ulee. U n h o m osexu el ce serait ce que pretend etre, ce que de b o n n e foi s’im agin e etre, un inverti. (49: 6 0 V , addition in the m argin)159 159 See Pleiade, iii, Esquisse IV, 955. This addition is probably posterior to the Grasset proofs o f 19 13 . See Compagnon, ‘N otice’ , 12 17 .

1 82

Proust

According to Proust’s theory, then, there are no homosexuals, but only inverted males who would want to be homosexuals. They are indeed ‘inverted women’ (this is why Proust would have preferred the more suggestive word ‘tante’), a fact they try to conceal by virtue o f an exaggerated virility. Proust’s theory is clearly presented throughout A la recherche du temps perdu, but it could not be formulated in what he considered the most appropriate terms, because his readers might have taken offence. Thus, if Proust was able to convey his ideas (which one would expect to be far more shocking than their suggested formulation), it was only in mitigated lan160 guage. In the phase 1 9 1 0 - 1 1 when most parts o f the novel (except, o f course, the parts entailed by the invention o f Albertine) are being established, he Temps retrouve also begins to take shape. This part o f the avant-texte has been examined in detail by Brun, Bonnet and R o lo ff to whose work I shall refer here.16 1161 Theoretical fragments 0 which were constitutive o f the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve, and which were still interspersed in the cahiers after the first typescript, were used as a basis for the last part o f the novel. B y transposing and reworking elements from earlier cahiers, Proust eventually constituted a continu­ ous version o f Le Temps retrouve in cahiers 58 and 57, which were written in this order.162 Volker R o lo ff has given an example o f the way Proust transposed elements from earlier cahiers and used them in his work on Le Temps retrouve. He has shown that the passage on reading Frangois le Champi and the remembrance o f this reading figured together in one unit in cahier 10. Cahiers 9 and 10 have been used for the first ‘Combray’ typescript (which R o lo ff dates to approximately May 1910, but which, we now know, was written in November 1909). At the turn o f the year 1 9 1 1 / 1 2 Proust cut several pages concerning the remembrance o f reading Frangois le Champi out 160 For supplementary information on the Eulenburg affair and on the develop­ ment o f this theory o f homosexuality in the cahiers see Compagnon, ‘Notice*, Pleiade, iii, 119 6 -1 2 0 2 and 1 2 1 7 - 1 8 . 161 Bernard Brun, ‘Note sur la genese du Temps retrouve’ ; ‘ Le Temps retrouve dans les avant-textes de “ Com bray” Henri Bonnet, ‘Le Temps retrouve dans les Cahiers’ ; with Bernard Brun, Matinee chez la Princesse de Guermantes ; Volker Roloff, ‘ “ Francois le Champi” et le texte retrouve’ . 162 See Matinee chez la Princesse de Guermantes. Bonnet has edited cahier 5 1, that is the first version o f Le Temps retrouve (‘Bal de tetes’), the continuous version o f ‘Matinee chez la Princesse de Guermantes’ from cahiers 58 and 57 (written between 19 10 and 19 11) and notes for L e Temps retrouve from cahier 57 (written between 19 13 and 1916).

Proust

183

o f the typescript, and continued it in cahier 57. R o lo ff argues that the dispersal o f the narrative unit o f cahier 10 is a crucial example o f the way Proust modified the structure o f his novel. The most important structure o f the novel, namely the opposition between ‘temps perdu’ and ‘temps retrouve’, he argues, has emerged during the creation o f he Temps retrouve.163 Brun furthermore argues that Le Temps retrouve is the latest stage o f the Contre Sainte-Beuve project which Proust never finished in the form in which it was initially planned, but which, in its function as literary criticism and aesthetics, was transposed into the last part o f the emerging novel.164 The three cahiers that follow the continuous version o f Le Temps retrouve (cahiers 47, 48 and 50 that are) contain fragments on the Verdurins, on Padua and Venice, where the hero chases the chamber­ maid (this time with greater success), on the death o f the grandmother and many others.165 Brun has stressed that the emergence o f Le Temps retrouve is closely connected to the earlier parts o f the novel which have already been elaborated. And so Proust is mainly concerned here with interweaving the strands o f his text. Brun describes his poetics at this stage o f the plotting as follows: ‘Le desir de faire symetrique, au moyen des synesthesies, des reminiscences ou des simples souvenirs, est flagrant. Le parallele entre Combray et Venise en restera le plus important vestige.’ 166 Now, after Guermantes and Le Temps retrouve we find a second montage for ‘Combray’. After sketching all the parts o f the future A la recherche in its primitive form, Proust reverted to the beginning. His amendments to the text did not stop once the overall project had taken shape. On the contrary, even at this relatively advanced stage, the text was reworked further, and as we shall see, remained open for significant changes. Cahiers 1 1 and 68, where the second montage for ‘Combray’ is to be found, are similar in function to cahiers 8 and 12, which formed the first montage for ‘Combray’.167 They are comple­ mentary, but do not form a narrative sequence. Cahier 1 1 comprises 163 See ‘Francois le Champi’, and on the retarded revelations, also Brun, ‘L e Temps retrouve’ . 164 See lLe Temps retrouve’ , 7. 165 For a more detailed description o f these three cahiers see Brun, ‘Inventaire de quelques cahiers’ . There is some disagreement as to the order o f the cahiers Guermantes. Wada dates cahiers 58 and 57 after cahiers 47, 48, 50. The dates established by Bonnet and Brun, however, seem to be more likely in this case. 166 ‘Inventaire de quelques cahiers’ , 86. 167 See Wada, ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’ , 69.

1 84

Proust

fragments for Le Temps retrouve (FF 1-4) and for ‘Combray’. The ‘Combray’ part is not continuous and seems more like a draft cahier. Cahier 68 takes up fragments from the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve and the cahiers after the first typescript. It develops the hero’s first encounter with the Vingtons and the scene o f sadism at La Rousseliere from cahier 14, as well as the first meeting with Gilberte and the experience o f reading initiated by Bergotte and Bloch. The most striking part o f cahier 68 is a note on the bottom o f folio 1 where the process o f writing truly brings the writer back to the beginning: La 1 — phrase sera D ans les dem iers m ois que je passai a Paris avant d ’ aller v ivre a l’ etranger, le m ed ecin m e fit m en er une vie de repos. C o u c h e de bon ne heure je m ’ endorm ais parfois si vite.

This version o f the famous incipit is strikingly different from the ‘Longtemps je me suis couche de bonne heure’ o f the published text. Whereas in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve Proust has painstakingly developed the time-frame ‘autrefois’ versus ‘maintenant’, the ‘couche de bonne heure’ in cahier 68 seems to refer to the older man, who, owing to his poor health, retires to bed early in the evening. It takes place on the same time level as the first sentence, whereas in the version that Proust finally chose it is earlier than the narrator’s actual perspective. Although we are already at a fairly advanced stage o f plotting and composition, the temporal framework o f the novel is still malleable. Had Proust kept the incipit o f cahier 68, the whole timeframe o f A la recherche would have been very different. Shortly before summer 1 9 1 1 , Proust wrote a manuscript draft o f ‘Un amour de Swann’. Cahiers 15—19 together with Proust 21 (a collection o f loose leaves for Du cote de chez Swann) form the complete manuscript draft o f ‘Un amour de Swann’ . We have seen that elements o f Swann figure as early as the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve in the form o f short portraits and sketches. The first full account o f Swann’s love and marriage figures in cahier 3 1, and is expanded in cahiers 69 and 22, a montage for the second part o f ‘Un amour de Swann’ . In these cahiers Swann’s acquaintance with the demimondaine Odette de Crecy, his obsessive love for her, their marriage and the birth o f a daughter are treated together in one cahier. Now, in cahier 19, the last o f the series devoted to ‘Un amour de Swann’, the episode o f Swann’s surreal dream ends with the famous prise de conscience ‘Dire que j ’ai gache des annees de ma vie, que j ’ai voulu

Proust

185

mourir, que j ’ai eu mon plus grand amour, pour une femme qui ne me plaisait pas, qui n’etait pas mon genre’ (F29R). After this Proust draws a thick line which seems to signify ‘The End’ . The further development o f Swann’s love-affair (that is, his eventual marriage to Odette and the birth o f their child) has been omitted.168 According to all the evidence, Proust has decided here to make ‘Un amour de Swann’ a separate entity within the first volume o f the future A la recherche. Moreover, he creates a blank as to the reasons for Swann’s marriage, who, we conclude from his final statement, is cured o f his obsessive love. B y postponing the marriage and treating the Swann story as a separate unit within Du cote de chez Swann (or rather, within ‘Combray’ at this point o f the work’s genesis), Proust increases the element o f suspense in the story. The Swann story, which in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve had occasionally merged with that o f the hero in Querqueville, is, at this point o f the genesis, at least assigned a fixed place in the novel. After ‘Un amour de Swann’ , Proust writes a manuscript draft o f ‘Noms de pays’, the third part o f the first volume (cahiers 20, 21 and 24).169 Thus in 1 9 1 1 a first stage o f the whole novel— with the exception o f the developments entailed by the invention o f Albertine— existed in the form o f a typescript, drafts and manuscript drafts. In the period thereafter, Proust was mainly occupied with transform­ ing and developing the first parts o f the novel. He commissioned a typescript for Un amour de Swann and for the last part o f the volume which was then entitled he Temps perdu.170 In 1912 he published extracts from Combray in he Figaro and established a manuscript draft for the Guermantes cycle (cahiers 34, 35, 44, 45), which was typed in the spring o f 1913. Finally, he corrected the proofs for Du cote de chez Swann, which would be published by Bernard Grasset in November. 168 For a detailed discussion see Marion A . Schmid, ‘Swann’s Marriage in Text and A vant-Texte: A Genetic and Narratological Study’ . 169 ‘Nom s de pays’ was, on the insistence o f Grasset, later divided into two parts: ‘Nom s de pays: le nom’ and ‘Noms de pays: le pays’ . The first was published in D m cote de chez Swann in 19 13 , the second almost six years later in A Vombre des jeunes filles enjleurs. O n the editorial history see Pierre-Louis R e y and Jo Yoshida, ‘ D m cote de chez Swann: Introduction’ , Pleiade, i. 1048. 170 In Oct. 19 12 the novel was planned in two volumes, L e Temps perdu and Le Temps retrouve, with the overall title Les Intermittences du coeur.

EPILOGUE

In Defence o f Textuality

II s’agit de comprendre une oeuvre par son histoire et non plus par son seul aboutissement. Louis Hay

In D efence

of

T extuality

189

At the outset o f this study we posed the question o f how two diametrically opposed practices o f writing, one programmatic, the other immanent, influenced the macro-structural genesis and shaped the first provisional framework o f two main works o f French Modernity. Each o f the two practices under investigation is correlated to a specific type o f cognition which governed the way in which the two texts were produced and organized. As a rule, programmatic writers structure and organize their ideas and their fictional material in plans and scenarios before textualizing it. In other words, the phase o f conceptualization precedes that o f formal and stylistic elaboration. Immanent writers, on the contrary, engage with the writing process without a premeditated plan or structure in mind. Ideas, themes and narrative strands emerge during composition. The organization o f the emerging text is either carried out in retrospect or, more often, starts taking shape during the course o f writing. Tw o critical assumptions are invested behind the two cognitive models: ‘programmatic’ writing is associated with authorial control and therefore with ‘system’; ‘immanent’ writing is thought to be more experimental, and thus also more erratic, not to say chaotic. Flaubert and Proust are only to a certain extent representative o f the two basic modes o f writing under which they are commonly classified.1 It is true that Flaubert gained a relatively precise vision o f his project at a very early stage (in carnet 19), from which point on he proceeded more or less teleologically towards its realization, whereas, in contrast, Proust’s writing organized itself late and with difficulty. Flaubert’s notes in the early stages are elliptic and programmatic, Proust’s work is instantly textual and syntactic. Despite these general characteristics which qualify them as ‘programmatic’ and ‘immanent’ writers respectively, their practices show a number o f idiosyncrasies which, to a certain extent, defy classification. In Flaubert the different genetic stages, though seemingly distinct at first glance, tend to overlap. Documentation, planning and plotting and composition are complementary activities. Each phase o f the genesis anticipates the subsequent one in a movement o f constant projection forwards, and each document shows textual and linguistic characteristics that would be more readily associated with a later stage o f development: the carnets deploy an impressive discursive complexity, the scenarios, especially scenarios detailles and ulterieurs, approach an ever greater O n this point see also Gresillon, Elements de critique genetique, 10 4 -5 .

190

In D efence

of

T extuality

degree o f textual, narrative and linguistic complexity and cohesion. The interaction between the different working documents in the genesis o f L ’Education sentimentale introduced a textual impetus that counterbalanced Flaubert’s otherwise all too paralysing practice o f copying out earlier passages. The desire for authorial control was to a certain extent undermined by the dynamism o f the textual pro­ duction, more specifically by a textual pressure towards greater narrative and stylistic elaboration. Programmation and textual pres­ sure seem to have entered into a symbiotic but also conflicting relation in the scenarios. If Flaubert’s working manuscripts show a certain erratic and spontaneous development, Proust, on the contrary, was found to be far more systematic than one might expect from an immanent writer. A major change in his practice was observed after the creation o f a first montage for ‘Combray’ in June 1909.2 From that point onwards, Proust systematically used cahiers de montage to select textual units from previous draft cahiers and to reorganize them in view o f a coherent plot. He also increasingly composed in narrative series (for instance the cahiers for the future Guermantes and he Temps retrouve) and in groups o f cahiers that deal with the same theme (the love stories or artistic initiation, for instance). As for the invention o f new episodes, he frequently sketched them only briefly, and expanded them once they were assigned a relatively fixed place in the emerging narrative. Both practices, then, changed considerably over the years: Flaubert at first imposed a clear-cut structure on his text, but was soon carried away by the writing process; Proust started from unconnected textual units, but adopted a more systematic writing practice as soon as he had gained a clearer vision o f his project. Within each o f the two underlying modes o f writing, then, we find a highly idiosyncratic (but by no means unsystematic) method o f planning and producing complex narrative structures. During the period which generated a first narrative and thematic framework, the two avant-textes developed their specific ‘rhythm o f creation’ which is best evidenced by the emergence and instalment o f a number o f genetic parameters, and I shall now compare the two corpora from this point o f view.3 The semiotic component, to begin with a parameter suggested by Mitterand, was fixed far more rapidly in 2 Cf. Wada, ‘L ’Evolution de Com bray’. 3 For the notion o f the ‘rhythm’ o f the genetic elaboration see Neefs, ‘La Sphere des manuscrits’, 10, and my discussion in the Prologue.

In D efence

of

T extuality

191

Flaubert than in Proust.4 Flaubert, it will be remembered, introduced all o f the main characters with the exception o f Dussardier as early as carnet 19. Minor characters were introduced in the scenarios. With Proust, on the contrary, we observed a gradual explosion o f the narrative universe in the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve. Such a major character as Albertine was only invented in 1913, after the publication o f Du cote de chez Swann, but she was, o f course, accommodated and, indeed, to a certain extent, generated by the theme o f young girls, one o f the oldest in the avant-texte. With regard to the spatiotemporal organization, parameters were quickly set in both avanttextes. Whilst the 1848 revolution as a narrative backdrop was not yet contemplated in the first plans o f L ’Education sentimentale, the contrast between Paris and the provinces, a typical structural element o f any nineteenth-century Bildungsroman, was already envisaged. Temporal markers abound in the scenarios, but were partly eliminated during the draft stage.5 In the cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve, a complex timeframe based on the contrast between ‘autrefois’ and ‘maintenant’ emerged rapidly. The founding structural matrix for the novel o f remembrance, it also offered new possibilities for the evocation o f a multitude o f spaces remembered by the sleepless man. In the period 1908 to 1 9 1 1, we noticed a dialectic between three places (Combray, Paris and an anonymous seaside resort later called Saint-Valery, Querqueville or Rivebelle) around which the various textual units were organized. Finally, both avant-textes evolved within the con­ finement o f pre-established generic models which put a certain amount o f pressure on the genetic development. The future UEduca­ tion sentimentale started off as a cliched nineteenth-century bourgeois novel o f adultery, but soon parameters were set for a negative Bildungsroman centred around the young hero. Proust, as is well known, began with the project o f an essay on literary criticism and aesthetics which was narrativized in the course o f writing and eventually generated the novel o f retrospection. Theoretical frag­ ments that pertained to the essay were never truly eliminated from the text, but, rather, were assimilated into the dogmatic treaty on aesthetics in he Temps retrouve. Differences between the two genetic rhythms are most evident in 4 On the four components o f the genetic elaboration suggested by Mitterand see ‘Avant-propos’ in Legons d ’ecriture and my discussion in the Prologue. 5 Cf. Claudine Gothot-Mersch, ‘Aspects de la temporalite dans les romans de Flaubert’ , 2 7 -3 2 .

192

In D efence

of

T extuality

the formal (i.e. the linguistic, narrative and architectonic) elaboration o f the two avant-textes. Flaubert had a clear sense o f direction, but he only produced text and style slowly. Proust’s textual units, on the contrary, show a high degree o f textual and stylistic elaboration from the outset, but they are far from forming a coherent narrative. Flaubert rapidly defined the architecture o f his novel-to-be. A clear outline o f plot and story and even the circular ending, one o f the most highly commended features o f L ’Education sentimentale, were intro­ duced in carnet 19. All the main episodes, with few exceptions, already existed in 1864. Flaubert’s main concern at the stage o f scenarios, to highlight this point again, was to identify the most appropriate narrative structure to accommodate and present the fictional material. Crucially, the formal reorganization o f the narrative had important repercussions on the content and meaning o f a number o f episodes. A more distinctly negative and cynical tone developed in the scenarios. Proust, in comparison, took much longer to segment his emerging text. Whereas frail structural and thematic links emerged rapidly in the first cahiers Contre Sainte-Beuve, parts, chapters and titles for the future novel only took shape after the first typescript for Combray in November 1909. The novel o f 1 9 1 1 was superseded by the outbreak o f World War I and the creation o f Albertine. The avant-texte remained in a state o f constant transformation until the very end.6 There remains the question o f how much in the genetic elabora­ tion o f the two novels was due to authorial control, to internal or external demands or constraints. Investigation o f the working manu­ scripts and o f other related documents shows that both authors, even the more controlled Flaubert, happily engaged with the writing process in a heuristic manner. In Proust, the importance o f the textual momentum is immediately discernible from his cahiers, and need not be discussed further. From Flaubert’s correspondence we know that he acknowledged certain autonomous forces in the text. More importantly, we sense that, at times, he relied on the impact o f purely textual processes for giving his text direction and shape. Even if he actively programmed and controlled his writing, he none the less 6 Proust’s continuous practice o f revision is best illustrated by the example o f the last corrected typescript for Albertine disparue, in which, shortly before his death, Proust eliminated a substantial part o f the text, thereby jeopardizing the logical development o f the narrative and the links between La Prisonniere, Albertine disparue and Le Temps retrouve. For a synthesis o f the debate about Albertine disparue, see Jean Milly, ‘Propos genetiques et editoriaux a propos d’Albertine disparue

In D efence

of

T extuality

193

seems to have hoped that the ideal and unique form to which he aspired would eventually disclose itself to him and impose its own compositional demands on the genetic process. His practice o f continuous recopying and revision appears to have been instrumental in enabling him to approximate to the ideal form that would give his ideas unity and meaning. I have shown that in a number o f cases purely textual factors had their own shaping influence on the genetic process. Can we speak however o f a textual rationale? Is there evidence in the two manu­ script corpora o f a self-generative impetus o f the text? In Proust there were several examples o f how the introduction o f a new character entailed a new theme. Homosexuality, for instance, was introduced with the Due de Guermantes, and expanded with the figure o f Charlus. It did not exist as an abstract theme before the creation o f these two characters. In Flaubert, changes o f one o f the parameters in the avant-texte frequently had repercussions on the others: segmenta­ tion on plot and story, linguistic complexity on narrative complexity and so forth. But can we truly speak o f a rationale? What we encounter in Flaubert seems to be partly a clash between various levels o f the text that introduces transformations and makes the text move forward. With Neefs, however, I have also identified another important force in the avant-texte, which is characterized by a constant projection forwards o f one genetic stage o f development to the next. The genetic process can metaphorically be imagined as some sort o f ‘machine qui s’emballe’ . If we speak o f a ‘textual rationale’ it would be solely in the sense that the avant-texte in its own right seems to have pushed towards an ever greater degree o f linguistic, stylistic and narrative complexity. The issue o f textuality as a shaping force in the genetic develop­ ment o f a text is, I think, a crucial one that tends to be neglected in modem criticism. The question whether certain characteristic features which we observe in the published text were deliberately designed by the author, or whether they result rather from some external or internal constraint or development, has direct implications for our reading o f these texts. The analysis o f the compositional processes involved in the genesis o f a literary work may necessitate a reassess­ ment o f the often distorted readings that are based on the published text only. Evidence that derives from a manuscript corpus concerns not only the textual scholar. I have attempted to show that it also has direct bearing on the interpretative side o f literary criticism. In this

194

In D efence

of

T extuality

particular study, I have concentrated on our appreciation o f the mechanisms that made L ’Education sentimentale and A la recherche respectively ‘forerunners’ and ‘prototypes’ o f the Modem European novel. Modernity has, o f course, been defined rather differently for the two authors. Modernist Flaubert critics focus mainly on the narrative complexity and decreased readability o f his texts. Proust critics highlight the new concept o f the fragmented self and the feeling o f disorientation and loss so characteristic o f our own century and its literary output, whilst equally appraising the new narrative complex­ ity o f the work, best analysed by Genette in Figures III. The complex narrative features o f the two texts, in particular, have been considered as the result o f an intentional design on the authors’ part. Close investigation o f the working manuscripts invites us to reconsider some o f these assumptions o f immanent reading. I have argued that the decreased readability o f UEducation sentimentale is not exclusively the result o f conscious authorial design. Whilst, in a number o f cases, Flaubert apparently deliberately used a technique o f deferred ana­ gnorisis that impedes the understanding o f the text, it was also often textual processes, such as a dislocation o f relevant story material, that make the text appear more opaque to the reader. Similar phenomena are observed in Proust. The separation between experience and remembrance which was introduced during the creation o f he Temps retrouve (1910—n ), and, later, the enormous expansion o f the novel during World War I, caused the textual dislocation so characteristic o f A la recherche and so often deplored by readers. Proust’s practice o f inverting relations o f cause and effect and o f dispersing textual ‘compacts’, which I have also discussed, had a cumulative effect on this overall development. As with Flaubert, the problem is not so much that the text is less readable as such (i.e. that it does not contain the relevant material), but, rather, that readers reach their own limits (both in terms o f memory and, to no lesser degree, in terms o f patience) in evaluating a highly complex story. I have warned in my discussion that by granting the author a somewhat unrealistic competence, modem critics risk falling back into the intentional fallacy which they had themselves rejected. It is high time that we bridged the gap between author and text which was opened up by the Structuralist revolution o f the late 1960s, and that we eventually overcame the limitations o f immanent reading. Most critics today would subscribe to the concept o f ‘text as practice’, but

In D efence

of

T extuality

195

only a small minority would take this concept to include text production in a manuscript. More seriously, the literary establishment at large continues to ignore the findings o f textual and genetic scholarship in their interpretative practice.7 Over the past twenty years or so genetic criticism has slowly emerged from its splendid isolation as an essentially French philological method. It is time for a further rapprochement, this time between genetic scholars and critics o f the published text. The future o f the two disciplines lies in a new dialogue between author and text, and, ultimately, between avanttexte and published text. 7 O n this point see Graham Falconer’s critique in ‘Genetic Criticism’ , esp. 2 -3 .

APPENDIX

T

a b le

:

Chronology for Proust’s Cahiers from the end of 1908 to the second typescript (Summer 1911)

Source: Akio Wada, ‘L ’Evolution de Combray depuis l’automne 1909’ , unpublished doctoral dissertation, 2 vols. (Sorbonne, Paris IV, 1986), p. 237. D a te

M s T ype

C o n te n ts

C a h ie r

E n d 19 0 8

draft

Sa in te -B e u v e

3 ,2 , 5 ,1

4 , 31 , 36 , 7 ,6 5i

m on tage

C o m b r a y and

8, 1 2

Sp ring 1909

1st

Ju n e 19 0 9

Q u erq u eville

cy cle

co m p lem en tary cahiers

26, 32

O c t. 19 0 9

m ise au net

C o m b ra y

9, 10 , 63

N o v . 19 0 9

typescript

C o m b ray

D i (F F 1 - 1 5 6 ) D 2 ,R D (N A F r

D e c. 19 0 9

draft (m ontage)

C o m b ray Paris Q u erq u eville G u erm an tes L e T em ps retrou ve

16 7 5 2 )

Su m m e r 19 10

m on tage

2n d

1 2 , 2 5 , 69 2 2 , 2 7 , 2 3 , 2 9 , 1 4 , 28 38,

13, 30 , 37 , 51,49

G u erm an tes L e T em ps retrou ve C o m b ra y

47 , 48 , 50 ,

3 9 ,4 0 , 4 1 , 4 2 , 58, 1 1 ,6 8

43 57,

cy cle shortly bef. Su m m e r 19 11

m ise au net

C o m b ray Paris

Proust 2 1 1 5 , 1 6 , 1 7 , 1 8 , 19

Su m m e r 19 11

typescript

L e T em ps perdu

D i ,D 2 ,R D (N A F r 16 7 5 2 )

i st cycle: Proust intends to publish the beginning o f his work. 2nd cycle (entailed by Vallette’s and Calmette’s rejection): Proust attempts to finish his novel as a whole.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources (1) Flaubert Prim ary

F lau ber t , G u st a v e , L ’Education sentim entale.

L es

scenarios ,

ed .

Tony

W illia m s (Paris: C o r t i , 1 9 9 2 ) . -------- L ’Education sentim entale, ed . P . M . W e t h e r ill (Paris: G a m ie r , ‘ C la ssiq u e s G a m ie r ’ , 19 8 4 ). -------- Carnets de travail , ed . P ie r r e - M a r c d e B ia si (Paris: B a lla n d , 1 9 8 8 ) .

O ther

F lau ber t , G u sta v e , Correspondance , 9 v o ls. (Paris: C o n a r d , 1 9 2 6 - 3 3 ) . -------- M a d a m e B o va ry. N o u velle version precedee des scenarios inedits , ed . Je a n P o m m ie r a n d G a b rie lle L e le u (Paris: C o r t i , 1 9 4 9 ) . -------- Correspondance , ed. J e a n B ru n e a u , 3 v o ls. to date (Paris: G a llim a rd , ‘ P le ia d e ’ , 1 9 7 3 - ). -------- C orpus Flaubertianum , I: U n coeur sim ple ( 1 9 8 3 ) , II: H erodias , to m e

1

( 1 9 9 1 ) , t o m e 2 ( 1 9 9 5 ) , ed . G io v a n n i B o n a c c o r s o et al. (Paris: L e s B e lle s L e ttre s, 1 9 8 3 - ). -------- L es Cornices agricoles, ed. Je a n n e G o ld in , 2 v o ls. (G e n e v a : D r o z , 1 9 8 4 ) . -------- P a r les champs et p a r les greves, ed. A d r ia n n e T o o k e , 2 v o ls. (G e n e v a : D ro z, 19 8 7 ). -------- Voyage en E g y p te , ed. P ie r r e - M a r c de B ia si (Paris: G ra sset, 1 9 9 1 ) . -------- P lans et scenarios de M ad am e B o va ry , ed . Y v a n L e c le r c (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , 19 9 5).

(2) Proust (a) M anuscripts Carnets 1 - 4 , P aris, B ib lio th e q u e n a tio n a le , N o u v e lle s a c q u isitio n s fran^aises 1 6 6 3 7 - 1 6 6 4 0 , m ic r o film 5 3 0 .

C ahiers 1 - 3 2 , B N , N A F r 1 6 6 4 1 - 1 6 6 7 2 , m f 5 3 1 - 5 7 . C ahiers 3 6 - 8 , B N , N A F r 1 6 6 7 6 - 1 6 6 7 8 , m f 5 6 0 - 1 . C a h ier 5 1 , B N , N A F r 1 6 6 9 1 , m f 5 7 4 . C ahiers 5 9 - 6 2 , B N , N A F r 1 6 6 9 9 - 1 6 7 0 2 , m f 5 8 2 - 5 .

198

B ibliography

C ahiers 6 3 - 9 , B N , N A F r 1 8 3 1 3 - 1 8 3 1 9 , m f 1 6 9 2 , 2 2 9 2 , 2 2 9 1 , 2 9 3 2 , 2 2 9 0 , 16 9 3 , 16 9 4 .

C a h ier 7 5 , B N , N A F r 1 8 3 2 5 . First T y p e s c r ip t o f ‘ C o m b r a y ’ , B N , N A F r 1 6 7 3 3 , r n f 6 1 5 1 .

Proust 4 3 , B N , N A F r 1 6 6 3 6 , m f 5 2 9 . Proust 2 1 , B N , N A F r 1 6 7 0 3 . (b) Printed Sources Prim ary

P roust , M arcel , A la recherche du temps perdu, ed. J e a n - Y v e s T a d ie , 4 vo ls. (Paris: G a llim a rd , ‘ P le ia d e ’ , 1 9 8 7 - 9 ) . -------- C ontre S a in te -B e u v e , ed . B e r n a r d de Fallo is (Paris: G a llim a rd , 1 9 5 4 ) . -------- C ontre S a in te-B eu v e , eds P ie rre C la r a c an d Y v e s S a n d re (Paris: G a lli­ m a rd , ‘ P le ia d e ’ , 1 9 7 1 ) . -------- h e C arnet de 19 0 8 , ed. P h ilip K o lb , Cahiers M arcel Proust N o u ve lle S e rie /

Etu des Proustiennes 8 / I I I ( 1 9 7 6 ) . -------- ‘A p ro p o s d u “ sty le ” de F la u b e rt’ , in: C ontre S a in te-B eu v e , ed . P ie rre C la r a c a n d Y v e s S a n d re (Paris: G a llim a rd , ‘ P le ia d e ’ , 1 9 7 1 ) , p p . 5 8 6 - 6 0 0 . -------- ‘A a jo u te r a F la u b e r t’ , in : Contre S a in te-B eu v e , ed. P ie rre C la r a c an d Y v e s S a n d re (Paris: G a llim a rd , ‘ P le ia d e ’ , 1 9 7 1 ) , p p . 2 9 9 - 3 0 2 . -------- M atinee chez la Princesse de Guerm antes. Cahiers du ‘ Tem ps retrouve’ , ed. H e n r i B o n n e t a n d B e r n a r d B r u n (Paris: G a llim a rd , 1 9 8 2 ) .

O ther

P roust , M arcel , Correspondance de M arcel Proust, ed. P h ilip K o lb , 2 1 vo ls. (Paris: P lo n , 1 9 7 0 - 9 3 ) . -------- A lbertine disparue , eds. N a th a lie M a u r ia c an d E t ie n n e W o l f f (Paris: G rasset, 1 9 8 7 ) . -------- ‘Bricquebec’ : prototype d ,(A Vombre des jeu n e s jille s en J l e u r s ed . R ic h a r d B a le s (O x fo r d : C la r e n d o n Press, 1 9 8 9 ) . -------- A lbertine disparue , ed. J e a n M il l y (Paris: H o n o r e C h a m p io n , 1 9 9 2 ) .

(3) Other primary works L es Redactions en vers du couronnement de L ou is, ed. Y v a n G . L e p a g e (G e n e v a : D ro z, 19 78 ).

M u sil , R obert E dler v o n , G esam m elte W erke in neun B a n d en , ed. A d o l f F rise , 9 v o ls. ( R e i n b e k b e i H a m b u r g : R o w o h l t , 1 9 7 8 ) , i - v : D e r M a n n ohne

Eigenschaften. -------- D e r literarische N achlafi , ed. F rie d b e rt A sp e tsb e rg e r, K a rl E i b l a n d A d o l f Frise ( R e in b e k b e i H a m b u r g : R o w o h l t , 1 9 9 2 ) .

P o nge , F r a n cis , L a Fabrique du pre (Paris, 1971). -------- C om m ent une fig u e de paroles et pourquoi (Paris: F la m m a rio n , 1 9 7 7 ) .

B ibliography

199

V a le r y , P a u l , C ahiers 1 8 9 4 - 1 9 1 4 , ed . N i c o l e C e le y r e t t e P ie tri a n d J u d i t h R o b in s o n - V a l e r y , 5 v o ls. to d ate (Paris: G a llim a rd , 1 9 8 7 - ).

Z o la , E m ile , Carnets d ’ enquetes. U ne ethnographie inedite de la France , ed . H e n r i M itte ra n d (Paris: P lo n , 1 9 8 6 ) .

Secondary Sources A bram s , M . H ., T h e M irror and the L a m p : R om antic Theory and the C ritical Tradition (L o n d o n : O x f o r d U n iv e r s it y Press, 1 9 8 1 ; first p u b lis h e d 1 9 5 3 ) .

A lba l a t , A n to in e , h e T ravail du style enseigne p a r les corrections manuscrites des grands ecrivains (Paris: A r m a n d C o l i n , 1 9 0 3 ; rep r. 1 9 9 1 ) .

A u d ia t , P ierre , L a B iographie de Voeuvre litteraire. E squ isse d ’ une m ethode critique (Paris: C h a m p io n , 1 9 2 4 ) .

B ard eche , M a u r ic e , M arcel Proust romancier , 2 v o ls . (Paris: L e s S e p t C o u le u r s , 1 9 7 1 ) .

B arth es , R o la n d , ‘ U n e id e e d e r e c h e r c h e ’ , Paragone , 2 6 0 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 2 5 - 3 0 (repr. in Recherche de Proust , ed. G e r a r d G e n e tte a n d T z v e t a n T o d o r o v , Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 0 , 3 4 - 9 ) . -------- ‘ P ro u st et les n o m s ’ , in : L e D egre zero de I’ecriture, su ivi de N o u v e a u x essais

critiques (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 2 ) , 1 2 1 - 3 3 . -------- L e P laisir du texte (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 3 ) . -------- R o la n d Barthes p a r R o la n d Barthes (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 5 ) . -------- L e Bruissem ent de la langue (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 4 ) .

B edier , J a cq u es , L a Tradition manuscrite du L a i de Vombre. R eflex io n s sur Part d ’ editer les anciens textes (Paris: C h a m p io n , 1 9 2 9 ) .

B ellemin - N oel , J e a n , L e T ex te et V avant-texte: les brouillons d ’ un poem e de M ilo sz (Paris: L a ro u sse , 1 9 7 2 ) . -------- ‘ R e c h e r c h e s sur la g e n e se du t e x t e ’ , Litterature 2 3 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 1 2 2 —3 . -------- ‘ R e p r o d u ir e le m a n u sc rit, p re se n te r les b ro u illo n s, etab lir u n a v a n t t e x t e ’ , Litterature 2 8 ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 3 - 1 8 . -------- Vers Vinconscient du texte (Paris: Presses u n ive rsitaires de F r a n c e , 1 9 7 9 ) . -------- ‘A v a n t - t e x t e et le c tu r e p s y c h a n a ly tiq u e ’ , in : A va n t-tex te, texte, apres-

texte, ed . L o u is H a y a n d P e te r N a g y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S ; B u d a p e s t: A k a d e m ia i K ia d o , 1 9 8 2 ) , 1 6 1 - 5 .

B em , J ea n n e , ‘ S u r le sens d ’ u n d isco u rs c i r c u l a t e ’ , Litterature 1 5 ( 1 9 7 4 ) , 9 5 -10 9 .

B ernheimer , C h arles , Figures o f III R ep u te. R epresenting Prostitution in N in ete en th -C en tu ry France (C a m b r id g e , M a ss.: H a r v a r d U n iv e r s it y P ress, 19 8 9 ).

B ersani , J a cq u es , ‘L ’E q u ip e P ro u st: d e u x an nees d e tra v a u x ( 1 9 7 5 - 1 9 7 6 ) ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 4 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 7 - 1 2 (repr. as ‘ L ’A v a n t - t e x t e p ro u stie n

et sa tra n sc rip tio n ’ , in

L es M anuscrits: transcriptions,

edition,

signification , ed . J e a n - L o u is L e b r a v e , P aris, Presses d e l ’E c o l e N o r m a l e S u p e r ie u re , 1 9 7 6 , 6 9 - 7 6 ) .

200

B ibliography

B e v a n , D . G ., an d W etherill , P . M . (eds.), S u r la genetique textuelle (A m ste rd a m : R o d o p i , 19 9 0 ).

B iasi , P ierre-M arc d e , ‘V e r s u n e sc ie n c e d e la litteratu re: l ’ an alyse des m an u scrits et la g e n e se de l ’ c e u v r e ’ , in : Encyclopaedia U niversalis: S y m p o ­

sium (Paris, 1 9 8 5 ) , 4 6 6 - 7 6 . -------- ‘ F la u b e rt et la p o e tiq u e d u n o n -fin it o ’ , in : h e M anuscrit inacheve: ecriture,

creation, communication , ed. L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 8 6 ) , 4 5 - 7 4 . -------- ‘ L e M a n u s c r it sp ectacu laire. R e f le x io n s su r l ’ e sth etiq u e h u g o lie n n e de la m ise e n p a g e a u to g ra p h e ’ , in : H ugo, de Yecrit au livre, ed . B e a tr ic e D id ie r an d Ja c q u e s

N e e fs

(S a in t-D e n is :

Presses

u n ive rsitaires

de V in c e n n e s ,

‘ M a n u sc rits M o d e m e s ’ , 1 9 8 7 ) , 1 9 9 - 2 1 7 . -------- ‘ L ’E s th e tiq u e refere n tie lle : R e m a r q u e s sur les

Carnets de travail de

G u s ta v e F la u b e r t’ , in : Flaubert, Vautre. P o u r Je a n Bru neau , ed. F ra n c o is L e c e r c le 19 8 9 ), -------- ‘ L a

an d S im o n e

M e ssin a

(L y o n :

Presses u n iversitaires d e L y o n ,

17-33. C r it iq u e

g e n e t iq u e ’ , in :

Introduction a u x methodes critiques p o u r

Yanalyse litteraire, ed. D a n ie l B e r g e z (Paris: B o r d a s , 1 9 9 0 ) , 5 - 4 0 . -------- ‘ L es Carnets de travail de F la u b e rt: ta x in o m ie d ’ u n o u tilla g e littera ire’ ,

Litterature 80 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , 4 2 - 5 5 . -------- ‘ L ’ H o r iz o n g e n e t iq u e ’ , in : L es M anuscrits des ecrivains , ed. L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S / H a c h e t t e , 1 9 9 3 ) , 2 3 8 - 5 9 . -------- ‘ W h a t is a L ite r a ry D ra ft? T o w a r d a F u n c tio n a l T y p o l o g y o f G e n e tic D o c u m e n t a t io n ’ , Y ale French Studies 8 9 ( 1 9 9 6 ) , 2 6 - 5 8 .

B ischoff , J urg , L a G enese de Yepisode de la m adeleine: etude genetique d ’ un passage d ’ A la recherche du temps p e rd u ’ de M arcel Proust (B e rn e : P e te r L a n g , 19 8 8 ) .

B oie , B ernhild , an d F errer, D aniel (eds.), G eneses du roman contemporain: incipit et entree en ecriture (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ ,

I993)B olleme , G en evieve , L a Legon de Flaubert (Ju llia rd , 1 9 6 4 ) . B o n n et , H enri , M arcel Proust de 19 0 7 a 1 9 14 . C om m ent a ete congu A

la

recherche du temps p e rd u ’ (Paris: N iz e t , 1 9 5 9 , re v . 1 9 7 1 - 6 ) . -------- ‘ L e Tem ps retrouve dans les C a h ie r s ’ , C ahiers M arcel Proust 6 ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 111-6 2 .

B ourdieu , P ierre , L es R egies de Yart. G enese et structure du champ litteraire (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 9 2 ) .

B o w m a n , F rank P a u l , ‘ G e n e tic C r it ic is m ’ , Poetics today 1 1 ( 19 9 0 ) , 6 2 7 - 4 6 . B rooks , P eter , R ea d in g f o r the Plot: D esign and Intention in N arrative (O x fo r d : C la r e n d o n Press, 1 9 8 4 ) .

B run , B ernard , ‘ R e le c t u r e d u “ C a r n e t d e 1 9 0 8 ” ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 6 ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 1 7 - 2 8 . -------- ‘ L ’E d itio n d ’ u n b ro u illo n et so n in te rp re ta tio n : le p ro b le m e d u C ontre

B ibliography S a in te -B e u v e 1,

in :

Essais

de

critique genetique,

ed .

L o u is

H ay

201 (Paris:

F la m m a r io n , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r it s ’ , 1 9 7 9 ) , 1 5 1 - 9 2 . -------- ‘ N o t e su r la g e n e se d u Tem ps retro u ve , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 1 (19 8 0 ), 4 9 - 5 1 . -------- 'L e Tem ps retrouve dans les a v a n t-te x te s d e C o m b r a y ’ , B u lletin d ’ inform a-

tions proustiennes 1 2 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 7 - 2 3 . -------- “ ‘ L e D o r m e u r e v e ille ” : g e n e se d ’ u n ro m a n d e la m e m o i r e ’ , C ahiers

M arcel Proust N o u velle S erie/E tu d es proustiennes 1 1 / I V ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 2 4 1 - 3 1 6 . -------- ‘ L e D e s tin des n o tes d e le c tu re et de c ritiq u e dans L e T em ps retrouve ,

B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 4 3 - 7 . -------- ‘B ro u illo n s des a u p e p in e s ’ , C ahiers M arcel Proust N o u ve lle S e rie /E tu d e s

proustiennes 1 2 / V ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 2 1 5 - 3 0 4 . -------- ‘ H is to ir e d ’ u n te x te : les cah ie rs de la Recherche1, B u lletin d ’ informations

proustiennes 1 6 ( 1 9 8 5 ) , 1 1 - 1 8 . -------- ‘ P r e fa c e ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 7 ( 1 9 8 6 ) , 5. -------- ‘ T a b le

des m atieres

du

C ontre S a in te -B e u v e 1, B u lletin

d ’ informations

proustiennes 1 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 7 - 1 4 . -------- ‘ In v e n ta ire d e q u e lq u e s cah ie rs des d e m ie re s p arties d u r o m a n dans so n etat p r i m it if ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 8 5 —7 . -------- ‘A v a n t - P r o p o s ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 2 1 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , 5. -------- ‘B ro u illo n s

ve rsu s

M a n u sc rits:

de

l ’ art

p ro u stie n

d ’ e c r ir e ’ ,

E tu des

frangaises 2 8 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 8 3 - 9 0 .

B r u n ea u , J e a n , L es D ebuts litteraires de G u stave Flaubert. 1 8 3 1 - 1 8 4 5 (Paris: A rm a n d C o lin , 19 6 2 ). -------- ‘ L ’A v a n t - d e m i e r

C h a p itr e

de

L ’Education

sentim entale

d ’ apres

les

scen ario s d e la B ib lio th e q u e n a tio n a le ’ , N in ete en th -C en tu ry French Stu dies

12 (19 8 4 ), 3 2 2 - 8 . -------- ‘ S u r la g e n e se d e U E d u c a tio n sentim entale (a v e c des d o c u m e n ts in e d its )’ , in :

Flaubert e il pensiero del suo secolo. A tti del C onvegno Internazionale

(M essina,

1 7 - 1 9 febbraio 1984) (M e ssin a : U n iv e r s it y o f M e s s in a ,

19 8 5),

2 3 5 -4 8 .

B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 ( i 9 7 5 ) - 2 6 ( 1 9 9 5 ) .

C a l lu , F lo rence , ‘ L a T ra n s m is sio n des m a n u sc rits’ , in : L es M anuscrits des ecrivains , ed . L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S / H a c h e t t e , 1 9 9 3 ) , 5 4 67.

C en to , A lberto , II realismo documentario nelV ‘Education sentim entale’ (N a p le s : L ig u o r i, 1 9 6 7 ) .

C erquiglini , B ernard , ‘ E lo g e d e la v a ria n te ’ , Langages 6 9 ( 1 9 8 3 ) , 2 5 - 3 5 . -------- E lo g e de la variante: histoire critique de la philologie (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 9 ) .

C l a r a c , P ierre , ‘ L a P la c e d u Contre S a in te-B eu ve dans l ’ o eu vre d e M a r c e l P r o u s t ’ , R e v u e d ’ histoire litteraire de la France 5 - 6 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 8 0 4 - 1 4 . ‘ C la s s e m e n t c h r o n o lo g iq u e

des cah ie rs d e b r o u illo n

B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 7 9 - 8 0 .

de M a rce l P ro u st’ ,

202

B ibliography

C oleridge , S amuel T aylo r , Biographia Literaria , ed. G . W a t s o n (L o n d o n : E v e r y m a n ’ s L ib r a r y , i9 6 0 ) .

C ollot , M ich el , ‘ G e n e tiq u e et th e m a tiq u e : Gravitations de S u p e r v ie lle ’ , E tu des frangaises 2 8 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 9 1 - 1 0 8 .

C om pagnon , A nto in e , L a Troisiem e R ep u b liq u e des lettres, de Flaubert a Proust (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 3 ) . -------- Proust entre d eu x siecles (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 9 ) . -------- ‘D is p r o p o r t io n

d e P ro u st:

les carnets de la Recherche ’ , in :

Carnets

d ’ ecrivains , ed . L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u scrits’ , 19 9 0 ) , 1 5 1 - 7 6 .

C o n ta t , M ich el , ‘ L a Q u e s tio n de l ’ a u te u r au re g a rd des m a n u sc rits’ , in : L }A u te u r et le manuscrit, ed . M ic h e l C o n t a t (Paris: Presses u n ive rsita ire s de F ra n c e , 1 9 9 1 ) , 7 - 3 4 .

C uller , J o n ath an , Flaubert. T h e Uses o f Uncertainty (L o n d o n : E le k , 1 9 7 4 ) . D ebr ay -G en ette , R a ym o n d e , ‘ T h e m e , fig u re , ep iso d e: g e n ese des a u b e p in e s’ , Poetique 2 5 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 4 9 - 7 1 (repr. in : Recherche de Proust , ed . G e r a rd G e n e tt e an d T z v e t a n T o d o r o v , P aris, S e u il, 1 9 8 0 , 1 0 5 - 4 1 ) . -------- (ed .), Flaubert a Vceuvre (Paris: F la m m a rio n , ‘T e x t e s et M a n u s c r it s ’ , 19 8 0 ). -------- M etamorphoses du recit: autour de Flaubert (Paris: S e u il, 19 8 8 ) . -------- an d

N eefs , J acq ues (eds.), R om an s d }archives (L ille: Presses u n iv e rs i­

taires de L ille , 1 9 8 7 ) . -------- et a l., T ravail de Flaubert (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 3 ) .

D epecker , L o'i c , ‘L e s A v a n t -t e x t e s d e l ’ ap p a ritio n d u fu tu r S a in t -L o u p dans les cah iers d e b r o u illo n de M a r c e l P r o u s t’ , u n p u b lish e d m a ster’ s thesis (S o rb o n n e , P aris I V , 1 9 7 9 ) . -------- ‘ P re h isto ire M adam e

d ’un

e p iso d e

de V ille p a risis

du

rom an

p ro u stie n :

la r e n c o n tre

dans q u e lq u e s b ro u illo n s p o u r A

avec

Vombre des

jeu n e s f i l e s en fle u r s \ B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 7 ( 1 9 8 6 ) , 3 1 —4 .

D errida , J acq u es , ‘U n e id e e de F la u b e rt: “ L a L e ttre de P la to n ” ’ , R e v u e T h istoire litteraire de la France 8 1 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 6 5 8 - 7 6 .

D ezo n -J ones , E l y a n e , ‘E d ite r P ro u st: h ie r, a u jo u r d ’ h u i et p e u t-e t r e d e m a in ’ , Litterature 88 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 4 6 - 5 3 .

D o ubrovsky , S erge , L a Place de la m adeleine. Ecriture et fantasm e chez Proust (Paris: M e r c u r e d e F ra n c e , 1 9 7 4 ) .

D uq uette , J ean -P ierre , Flaubert ou Varchitecture du vid e; une lecture de ‘L ’Education

sentim entale> (M o n tre a l:

Les

Presses

de

l ’U n iv e r s it e

de

M o n tr e a l, 1 9 7 2 ) .

D u rry , M arie -J e a n n e , Flaubert et ses projets inedits (Paris: N iz e t , 1 9 5 0 ) . E spagne , M ichel , ‘ L e s E n je u x de la g e n e s e ’ , Etu des frangaises 2 0 ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 10 3 -2 2 . -------- ‘ L e s

E tu d e s

g e n e tiq u e s

et la

te le o lo g ie ’ , Jahrbu ch f u r Internationale

G erm anistik, R e i h e A , 1 9 ( 1 9 8 7 ) , 2 0 4 - 1 4 .

B ibliography -------- ‘ Q u e lq u e s te n d a n c e s de la p h ilo lo g ie a lle m a n d e ’ , G enesis 3 ,

203 (19 9 3),

31 - 4 4 .

E tu d es frangaises 2 8 - 1

(19 9 2 ),

‘L es

Lem ons

du

M a n u s c r it:

Q u e s tio n s

de

g e n e tiq u e t e x tu e lle \

F airlie , A liso n , ‘ “ M e n e - t - o n la fo u le dans les ateliers?” — S o m e R e m a r k s o n B a u d e la ir e ’ s V a r ia n ts ’ , in : O rder and A d ven tu re in Post-R om antic French

Poetry , ed. E . M . B e a u m o n t , J . M . C o c k i n g , a n d j . C r u ic k s h a n k (O x fo r d : B la c k w e ll, 1 9 7 3 ) , i 7 “

37-

-------- ‘ T h e S h a p in g o f A d o lp h e: S o m e R e m a r k s o n V a r ia n ts ’ , in : M elanges de

litterature frangaise m odem e offerts a G arnet R e e s , ed . C e d r i c E . P ic k fo r d (Paris: M in a r d , 19 8 0 ) , 1 4 5 - 6 4 .

F a lco n er , G rah am , ‘ R e a d in g L ’Education sentim entale : B e l i e f an d D is b e ­ l i e f ’ , N ineteenth C en tu ry French Studies 1 2 ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 3 2 9 - 4 3 . -------- ‘ L e

T r a v a il

de

“ d e b a lz a cie n isa tio n ”

dans la r e d a c tio n

de

M adam e

B o v a ry ’ , R e v u e des lettres modernes, G u stave Flaubert 3 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 1 2 3 - 5 6 . -------- ‘ O u en so n t les etu d e s g e n e tiq u e s litteraires?’ , T exte 7 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 2 6 6 - 8 6 . -------- ‘ G e n e s e et sp e cia lisa tio n ’ , in : S u r la genetique textuelle , ed . D . G . B e v a n a n d P . M . W e th e r ill (A m s te rd a m : R o d o p i , 1 9 9 0 ) , 1 8 7 - 2 0 5 . -------- ‘ G e n e tic C r it ic is m ’ , C om parative Literature , 4 5 ( 1 9 9 3 ) , 1 - 2 1 . -------- a n d

S and erso n , D avid H ., ‘B ib lio g r a p h ic des etu d es g e n e tiq u e s

litteraires’ , T exte 7 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 2 6 7 - 3 5 2 .

F a y o l le , R oger , ‘B ila n d e L a n s o n ’ , in : L ’H istoire litteraire au jou rd’ h u i , ed. H e n r i B e h a r a n d R o g e r F a y o lle (Paris: A . C o l i n , 1 9 9 0 ) , 1 2 —2 2 .

F errer , D a n ie l , ‘ L a T o q u e d e C le m e n tis . R e t r o a c t io n et re m a n e n c e dans les p ro ce ssu s g e n e tiq u e s ’ , G enesis 6 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , 9 3 - 1 0 6 . -------- a n d

L ebrave , J ea n - L ouis (ed s.), L ’Ecriture et ses doubles: genese et

variation textuelle (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r it s ’ , 1 9 9 1 ) .

F inch [W in to n ], A liso n , Proust's A d d itio n s. T h e M a k in g o f (A la recherche du temps p e rd u ’ , 2 v o ls. (C a m b r id g e : C a m b r id g e U n iv e r s it y Press, 1 9 7 7 ) . -------- ‘ T h e F a m ily in D ra fts o f A la recherche du temps perdu , A u stralian Jo u rn a l

f o r French Studies 1 5 ( 1 9 7 8 ) , 1 7 6 - 9 9 .

F leisch m an , S u z a n n e , Tense and N arrativity: fro m M ed ieva l Performance to M o d em Fiction ( L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e , 19 9 0 ) .

F o u c a u l t , M ich el , ‘ L a B ib lio th e q u e fa n ta stiq u e ’ , in : T ravail de Flaubert , ed . R a y m o n d e D e b r a y -G e n e t t e et al. (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 3 ) , 1 0 3 - 2 2 .

G enesis 1 ( i g g 2 ) - g ( 1 9 9 6 ) .

G en ette , G erard , ‘P ro u st p a lim p se ste ’ , in : Figures I (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 6 6 ) , 3 9 67. -------- ‘ S ile n c e s de F la u b e r t’ , in : Figures I (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 6 6 ) , 2 2 3 - 4 3 . -------- ‘ M e t o n y m ie c h e z P r o u s t ’ , in : Figures I I I (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 2 ) , 4 1 - 6 3 . -------- Figures I I I (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 2 ) . -------- Palim psestes: la litterature au second degre (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 2 ) . -------- N o u vea u Discours du recit (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 3 ) . -------- an d

T odorov , T zv eta n (ed s.), Recherche de Proust (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 0 ) .

204

B ibliography

G erard -G a il l y , E . , L e G ra n d A m o u r de Flaubert (Paris: A u b ie r , 1 9 4 4 ) . G laser , N in a , ‘ P ro u st d u c o te de c h e z S a n d : “ P r e m ie re n u it d ’in so m n ie et d e d e se sp o ir” ’ , Litterature 89 ( 1 9 9 3 ) , 4 4 - 5 7 .

G leize , J oelle , ‘ L e D e fa u t de lig n e d r o ite ’ , Litterature 1 5 ( 1 9 7 4 ) , 7 5 - 8 7 . G o n jo u , F r a n cin e , ‘ L e s P re m ie re s P a g e s d u C a h ie r 3 : u n e ec ritu re ta to n n a n te ? ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 1 5 - 2 7 . -------- ‘ L ’ O r d r e des fra g m e n ts dans le Contre S a in te-B e u ve ’ , B u lletin d ’ informa-

tions proustiennes 1 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 2 9 - 4 2 .

G othot -M ersch , C la u d in e , L a G enese de ‘M adam e B o vary ’ (Paris: C o r t i, 19 6 6 ). -------- ‘ D e

“ M adam e

B ovary”

a “ B o u va rd

et P e c u c h e t ” : la p a ro le

des

p e rso n n a g e s dans les ro m an s de F la u b e r t’ , R e v u e d ’ histoire litteraire de la

France 8 1 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , $ 4 2 - 6 2 (repr. as ‘ L a P a ro le des p e rs o n n a g e s ’ , in : T ravail de Flaubert , ed . R a y m o n d e D e b r a y -G e n e t t e et al. (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 3 ) , 1 9 9 22 1). -------- ‘ A s p e c ts de la te m p o ra lite dans les ro m a n s de F la u b e r t’ , in : Flaubert, la

dim ension du texte , ed . P . M . W e th e r ill (M a n c h e ste r: M a n c h e s te r U n i ­ v e r sity Press, 1 9 8 2 ) , 6 - 5 5 . -------- ‘ L e s E tu d e s d e g e n e se en F ra n c e de 1 9 5 0 a i 9 6 0 ’ , G enesis 5 ( 1 9 9 4 ) ,

i 75-

87.

G r a cq , J u lien , Proust considere comme term inus; su ivi de, Stendhal, B alzac, Flaubert, Z o la (B russels: E d itio n s C o m p l e x e , 1 9 8 6 ) .

G rafto n , A n th o n y , D efenders o f the T e x t: T h e Traditions o f Scholarship in an A g e o f Science, 14 3 0 -18 0 0 (C a m b rid g e , M a s s .: H a r v a r d U n iv e r s it y Press, 19 9 1).

G reim as , A . - J . , Sem antique structurale (Paris: L a ro u sse , 19 6 6 ) . -------- a n d C ourtes , J . , Sem iotique. D ictionnaire raisonne de la theorie du langage (Paris: H a c h e t te , 1 9 7 9 ) .

G resillon , A lm u th , ‘ L e s M a n u sc rits litteraires: L e te x te dans tou s ses etats’ , Pratiques 5 7 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 1 0 7 - 2 2 . -------- ‘ F o n c tio n s d u la n g a g e et ge n e se d u t e x te ’ , in : L a N aissance du texte , ed. L o u is H a y (Paris: C o r t i, 1 9 8 9 ) , 1 7 7 - 9 0 . -------- E lem ents de critique genetique. L ire les manuscrits m odem es (Paris: Presses u n ive rsita ire s de F r a n c e , 19 9 4 ) . -------- (e d .), D e la genese du texte litteraire: manuscrit, auteur, texte, critique: actes

du C olloque franco-sovietique: Institut des textes et manuscrits m odem es, C N R S (Paris): Institut G o rk i de litterature m ondiale, A cadem ie des sciences (M oscou): Paris, Inalco, 8 -9 octobre 19 8 7 (T u sso n , C h a r e n t e : D u L e r o t, 1 9 8 8 ) . -------- a n d

W erner , M ichael (eds.), Lemons d*ecriture: ce que disent les manuscrits

(Paris: L e s L e ttre s m o d e m e s , 1 9 8 5 ) . -------- L ebrave ,

J ea n - L ouis , an d V iollet , C ath erine , ‘ U n e h isto ire a

d o rm ir d e b o u t ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 4 3 - 5 4 . -------- “ ‘ Q u a n d tou s m es autres m o i sero n t m o rts

. . .”

R e f le x io n s sur

l ’ h o lo g r a m m e p ro u s tie n ’ , in : A lm u t h G re s illo n , J e a n - L o u is L e b r a v e an d

B ibliography

205

C a t h e r in e V io lle t , Proust a la lettre. L es intermittences de Vecriture (T u s s o n , C h a re n te: D u L e ro t, 19 9 0 ), 1 0 9 - 4 0 . -------- Proust a la lettre. L es intermittences de Vecriture (T u s s o n , C h a r e n t e : D u L e r o t, 1 9 9 0 ) . -------- an d

F u c h s , C ath erin e , ‘ F la u b e rt: “ R u m in e r H e r o d ia s ” . D u c o g n it if-

v isu e l au v e r b a l-t e x t u e l’ , in: U E c ritu re et ses doubles.

G en ese et variation

textuelle , ed . D a n ie l F e r r e r an d J e a n - L o u is L e b r a v e (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r it s ’ , 1 9 9 1 ) , 2 7 - 1 0 9 .

G u y o n , B ern ard , L a Creation litteraire chez B a lza c: la genese du M ed ecin de cam pagne’ (Paris: A r m a n d C o l i n , 1 9 5 1 ) .

H a m o n , P hilippe , L e Personnel du roman. L e System e des personnages dans les R ougon-M acquart d ’E m ile Z o la (G e n e v a : D r o z , 1 9 8 3 ) .

H a y , L ouis , ‘ D ie d ritte D im e n s io n d er L ite ra tu r: N o t i z e n zu e in e r “ c ritiq u e g e n e t iq u e ” ’ , Poetica , 1 6 ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 3 0 7 - 2 3 . -------- ‘ “ L e T e x t e n ’ e x iste p a s” : re fle x io n s sur la critiq u e g e n e t iq u e ’ , P oetique , 62 (19 8 5), 1 4 6 -5 8 . -------- ‘ H is to ir e o u g e n e s e ? ’ , E tu des frangaises 2 8 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 1 1 - 2 8 . -------- ‘B r ic o la g e et p r o g ra m m e : au lie u d ’ u n e c o n c lu s io n ’ , in : M im esis et

Sem iosis. Litterature et representation , eds. P h ilip p e H a m o n a n d J e a n - P i e r r e L e d u c - A d in e (Paris: N a th a n , 1 9 9 2 ) , 5 7 9 - 8 5 . -------- ‘ L e s M a n u s c r its au la b o ra to ire ’ , in : L es M anuscrits des ecrivains , ed . L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S / H a c h e tte , 1 9 9 3 ) , 1 2 2 - 3 7 . -------- ‘ C r itiq u e s de la c ritiq u e g e n e t iq u e ’ , G enesis 6 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , 1 1 —2 3 . -------- (ed .), Essais de critique genetique (Paris: F la m m a rio n , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u ­ scrits’ , 1 9 7 9 ) . -------- (ed .), L a

G enese du texte: les modeles linguistiques (Paris: E d itio n s d u

C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r it s ’ , 1 9 8 2 ) . -------- (ed .),

Le

M anuscrit inacheve.

Ecriture,

creation,

communication

(Paris:

E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 8 6 ) . -------- (ed .), D e

la lettre au livre. Sem iotique des manuscrits litteraires (Paris:

E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 8 9 ) . -------- (ed .), L a N aissance du texte (Paris: C o r t i, 19 8 9 ) . -------- (ed .),

C arnets d ’ ecrivains. I : H u go, Flaubert, Proust,

V alery,

G id e , D u

Bouchet, Perec (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r it s ’ , 1 9 9 0 ) . -------- (ed .), L es M anuscrits des ecrivains (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S / H a c h e t t e ,

1993 )-------- and

W oesler , W infried (eds.), L a Publication de manuscrits inedits

(B e rn e : P e t e r L a n g , 1 9 7 9 ) . ------------------ (ed s.), E d itio n et interpretation des manuscrits litteraires (B e r n e : P e te r Lang, 19 8 1). -------- a n d

N a g y , P eter (eds.), A van t-tex te, texte, apres-texte (Paris: E d itio n s

d u C N R S ; B u d a p e s t: A k a d e m ia i K ia d o , 1 9 8 2 ) .

H erschberg -P ierrot , A n n e , ‘E d it e r P r o u s t’ , C ahiers de textologie 2 , ‘ P r o b le m e s d e l ’ e d itio n c r it iq u e ’ (Paris: M in a r d , 1 9 8 8 ) , 1 2 1 - 3 1 .

206

B ibliography

H o lyo ake , J ohn , M ontaigne. Essais (L o n d o n : G ra n t an d C u t le r , 1 9 8 3 ) . H opper, P aul J . , an d T hompson , S and ra A . , ‘ T r a n s itiv ity in G r a m m a r an d D is c o u r s e ’ , Language 5 6 ( 1 9 8 0 ) , 2 5 1 - 9 9 .

H u lt , D avid F ., ‘ R e a d in g it R i g h t : T h e I d e o lo g y o f T e x t E d it in g ’ , R om an ic R e v ie w 7 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 7 4 - 8 8 . Inventaire materiel des cahiers M arcel Proust conserves a la Bibliotheque nationale.

Ishiki, T akah ar u , ‘ M a r ia la H o lla n d a ise et la n aissance d ’A lb e r tin e dans les m an u scrits d ’^4 la recherche du temps p e rd u ’ , u n p u b lish e d d o cto ra l disserta­ tio n , 2 v o ls. (S o rb o n n e , Paris I II, 1 9 8 4 ) .

J a cq u et , C laude (ed .), G enese de B a b el: Jo y c e et la creation (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 8 5 ) .

J en ck s , C harles , T h e Language o f P o st-M odem Architecture (rev. ed n . L o n d o n : A c a d e m y E d itio n s , 1 9 7 8 ) .

J urt , J oseph , ‘D ie W e r t u n g d e r G e s c h ic h t e in F la u b e rt’ s Education senti­ m e n t a l, Rom anistische Zeitschrift f u r Literaturgeschichte 1 / 2 ( 1 9 8 3 ) , 1 4 1 - 6 8 . -------- ‘ L ite ra tu r u n d A r c h a o lo g ie : D ie Salam m bo- D e b a t te ’ , in : Literatur und

Wissenschaft. Festschrift f u r R u d o lf B aeh r (T u b in g e n : S tau fF en b u rg, 1 9 8 7 ) , 10 1-17 . -------- ‘ L e S tatu t d e la litteratu re face a la sc ie n c e : le cas de F la u b e r t’ , in : G ra z ie lla P a g lia n o an d A n t o n i o G o m e z - M o r i a n a (eds.), Ecrire en France au X D C siecle (L o n g u e il: E d itio n s d u P re a m b u le , 1 9 8 9 ) , 1 7 5 - 9 2 .

K a w a n a g o , H iroshi, ‘ N o t e su r l ’ etat p r im it if d u C ontre S a in te -B e u v e ', B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 7 - 1 6 .

K eller , L u ziu s , L es A vant-textes de L ’E p isod e de la m adeleine’ dans les cahiers de brouillon de M arcel Proust (Paris: L u z iu s K e lle r / J e a n - M ic h e l P la c e , 1 9 7 8 ) .

K risteva , J u lia , Sem eiotike. Recherches p o u r une sem analyse (Paris: S e u il,

1969). -------- L a R evolu tion du langage poetique. L ’A vant-gard e a la f i n du X I X e siecle:

Lautream ont et M allarm e (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 4 ) .

K u nd era , M ila n , L es Testaments trahis (Paris: G a llim a rd , 1 9 9 3 ) . L an so n , G u stave , ‘ U n m a n u sc rit de P a u l et Virginie. E t u d e su r l ’in v e n t io n de B e m a r d in de S a in t -P ie r r e ’ , R e v u e du mois 5 ( 1 9 0 8 ) , 3 9 9 - 4 3 1 (repr. in :

E tu des d ’ histoire litteraire (Paris: C h a m p io n , 1 9 2 9 ) , 2 2 4 - 5 8 ) .

L e C a l v e z , E ric , ‘ N o t e s d e re p e ra g e et d escrip tio n s dans L ’Education sentimentale (E tu d e d e g e n e s e )’ , N euphilologische M itteilungen 9 4 ( 1 9 9 3 ) ,

359- 7 5 . -------- ‘V is ite g u id e e . G e n e s e d u ch a te a u de F o n ta in e b le a u dans L ’Education

sentim entale ’ , G enesis 5 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , 9 9 - 1 1 6 . -------- ‘A G e n e tic A p p r o a c h to T e a c h i n g M adam e B o v ary*, N in eteen th -C en tu ry

French Studies 2 3 ( 1 9 9 4 - 5 ) , 1 2 7 - 3 6 . -------- ‘ L a C h a r o g n e d e B o u v a r d et P e c u c h e t (g e n e tiq u e d u p a ra g ra m m e )’ , in :

Texte(s) et Intertexte(s), ed. E r ic L e C a lv e z an d M a r ie - C l a u d e C a n o v a G r e e n (A m ste rd a m : R o d o p i , ‘ F a u x T i t r e ’ , 1 9 9 7 ) .

B ibliography

207

L ebrave , J ea n - L ouis , ‘ L a C r it iq u e g e n e tiq u e : u n e d isc ip lin e n o u v e lle o u u n avatar m o d e m e d e la p h ilo lo g ie ? ’ , G enesis 1 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 3 3 - 7 2 . -------- ‘ L ’ H y p e r t e x t e et l ’ a v a n t -t e x t e ’ , in : Proceedings o f Electronic Publishing,

19 9 2 , ed . C . V a n o ir b e e k a n d G . C o r a y (C a m b r id g e : C a m b r id g e U n i ­ v e r sity Press, 1 9 9 2 ) , 2 3 3 - 4 6 . -------- ‘ L ’E d itio n g e n e t iq u e ’ , in : lu es M anuscrits des ecrivains , ed . L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S / H a c h e t t e , 1 9 9 3 ) , 2 0 6 - 2 3 . -------- ‘ H y p e r t e x t e s - M e m o i r e s - E c r it u r e ’ , G enesis 5 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , 9 - 2 4 . ------- ;( e d .) , L es M anuscrits: transcriptions, edition, signification (Paris: Presses d e l ’E c o l e N o r m a l e S u p e rie u re , 1 9 7 6 ) .

L ecler c , Y v a n , Crim es ecrits. L a litterature enproces au X I X e siecle (Paris: P lo n , 19 9 1).

L ejeu n e , P hilippe , ‘E c r it u r e et S e x u a lit e ’ , E u rope 5 0 2 - 3 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 1 1 3 - 4 3 . -------- ‘ A u t o - g e n e s e . L ’ e tu d e g e n e tiq u e des tex te s a u to b io g r a p h iq u e s ’ , G e n ­

esis 1 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 7 3 - 8 7 -

L eriche , F r a n ^ oise , ‘U n e n o u v e lle d ata tio n des d a c ty lo g ra p h ie s d u Tem ps perdu a la lu m ie re d e la Correspondance\ B u lletin d }informations proustiennes 1 7 (19 8 6 ), 7 - 2 0 . -------- ‘ N o t e sur le C a h ie r “ Q u e r q u e v il le ” , les theses d ’A k i o W a d a et d e T a k a h a r u Ish ik i, et su r l’ a c tiv ite d e P ro u st e n 1 9 0 9 ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations

proustiennes 1 8 ( 1 9 8 7 ) , 1 1 - 2 2 . -------- ‘ L o u is a / S o n ia , W a n d a , A n n a , M a d e le in e , C a r m e n , O d e t te , S u z a n n e ’ ,

B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 9 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , 5 9 - 8 4 . -------- ‘ D u n o u v e a u sur le C a h ie r 1 4 ’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 2 1 (19 9 0 ), 7 - 1 2 .

L ev a illa n t , J ean (ed .), ‘E c r it u r e et g e n e tiq u e te x tu e lle ’ , in : Ecriture et genetique textuelle.

Valery a Vceuvre (L ille : Presses u n ive rsita ire s d e L ille ,

19 8 2 ), 1 1 - 2 4 .

Litterature 1 5 ( 1 9 7 4 ) , ‘ M o d e m it e de F la u b e r t’ . -------- 5 2 ( 1 9 8 3 ) , ‘ L ’ In c o n s c ie n t dans l ’a v a n t -t e x t e ’ . -------- 88 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , ‘ P ro u st, ed itio n s et le c tu r e s ’ .

L h o m eau , F r a n c k , a n d C oelho , A l a in , M arcel Proust a la recherche d ’ un editeur: A la recherche du temps p e r d u 'fa c e a Vedition (Paris: O l iv ie r O r b a n , 19 8 8 ).

L u c ar ella , D a v io , ‘A M o d e l fo r H y p e r t e x t - B a s e d In fo rm a tio n R e t r i e v a l ’ , in : H yp ertex t: Concepts, System s and A p plications: Proceedings o f the First

E u ropean Conference on H yp ertex t , ed . N . S tre itz , A . R i z k a n d J . A n d r e ( C a m b r id g e : C a m b r id g e U n iv e r s it y P ress, 1 9 9 0 ) , 8 1 —9 4 .

M a i , H a n s -P eter , ‘B y p a s s in g In te rte x tu a lity . H e r m e n e u tic s , T e x t u a l P r a c ­ tic e ,

H y p e r t e x t ’ , in :

G ru y te r, 1 9 9 1 ) ,

Intertextuality , ed . H e in r ic h

F.

P le tt

(B e rlin :

de

30 - 5 9 -

M ar a n t z , E nid G . , ‘ L e s R o m a n s c h a m p e tre s d e G e o r g e S a n d dans la Recherche : In te rte x te s,

A v a n t-T e x te s

proustiennes 1 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 2 5 - 3 6 .

et

T e x te ’,

B u lletin

d ’ inform ations

208

B ibliography

M a r a n t z , E nid G ., ‘ L a G e n e s e de B l o c h o u la m ise en fic tio n d u traite de critiq u e et d ’ e sth etiq u e litteraires’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 1 6

(1985), 4 I - 5 7 -------- ‘ L a G e n e s e d u p e rso n n a g e p ro u s tie n ’ , B u lletin de la Societe des amis de

M arcel Proust 3 9 ( 1 9 8 9 ) , 5 3 - 9 .

M assis, Henri,

C om m ent E m ile Z o la composait ses romans (Paris: F a sq u elle,

19 0 6 ) .

M a u r ia c , F ranco is , h e P o m a n d e r et ses personnages (Paris: C o r r e a , 1933). M au riac D ye r , N ath alie , ‘ L e s M ir a g e s d u d o u b le : A lbertine disparue selo n la P le ia d e ( 1 9 8 9 ) ’ , B u lletin M arcel Proust 4 0 (1 9 9 0 ) , 1 1 7 - 5 3 .

M c G a n n , J erome J . , A

C ritiqu e o f M o d em

T ex tu al Criticism

( C h ic a g o :

U n iv e r s it y o f C h ic a g o Press, 1 9 8 3 ) .

M ela n ^ o n , R obert , ‘ L e S ta tu t de l ’ ceu vre: sur u n e lim ite de la g e n e t iq u e ’ , E tu d es frangaises 2 8 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 4 9 - 6 6 .

M esch o n n ic , H enri , ‘ P o e tiq u e d u m a n u sc rit c h e z H u g o dans L a F in de Satan ( B N n .a .fr. 2 4 7 5 4 ) ’ , in : H u g o : de Vecrit au livre , ed . B e a tr ic e D id ie r an d Ja c q u e s

N e e fs

(S a in t-D e n is :

Presses

u n ive rsitaires

d e V in c e n n e s ,

‘M a n u sc rits M o d e m e s ’ , 1 9 8 7 ) , 1 7 1 - 9 8 .

M illy , J ean,

Proust dans le texte et Vavant-texte

(Paris: Flammarion, 1985).

-------- ‘ P ro b le m e s g e n e tiq u e s et e d ito ria u x a p ro p o s d ’A lbertine d ispam e\ in :

M arcel Proust. Ecrire sans f in , ed. R a in e r W a r n in g an d Je a n M il l y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , 1 9 9 6 ) , 5 1 - 7 7 .

M itteran d , H enri , ‘ P r o g r a m m e et p re co n stru it g e n etiq u es: le d o ssier de L ’A s s o m m o if,

in :

Essais

de critique genetiqu e ,

ed.

L o u is

H ay

(Paris:

F la m m a rio n , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 7 9 ) , 1 9 3 —2 2 6 . -------- h e Discours du roman (Paris: Presses u n ive rsitaire s de F r a n c e , 1 9 8 0 ) . -------- ‘A v a n t - p r o p o s ’ , in : A lm u t h

hegons d }eariture, ce que disent les manuscrits , ed.

G re s illo n an d M ic h a e l W e r n e r (Paris: L e s L ettres M o d e m e s ,

1 9 8 5 ) , PP- i - x i v . -------- ‘ G e n e s e et c iv ilisa tio n ’ , in : L a N aissance du texte , ed . L o u is H a y (Paris: C o rti, 19 8 9 ), 8 9 - 9 1 . -------- ‘ C r itiq u e g e n e tiq u e et h isto ire cu ltu re lle . L e s dossiers des R o u g o n -

M acquart\ in : h a Naissance du texte , ed. L o u is H a y (Paris: C o r t i, 1 9 8 9 ) , 1 4 7 —6 2 . -------- Z o la , Vhistoire et la fiction (Paris: Presses u n ive rsitaires d e F ra n c e , 19 9 0 ) . -------- ‘ L e M e t a -t e x t e g e n e tiq u e dans les Ebauches d e Z o l a ’ , G enesis 6 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , 4 7 -6 0 .

M o zet , N ico le , ‘ P o u r u n e h isto ire des p ratiq u es d ’ ec ritu re : p e u t -o n c o m p a r e r les m an u scrits d e B a lz a c et c e u x d e G e o r g e S a n d ? ’ , in : S u r la

genetique textuelle , ed. D . G . B e v a n an d P . M . W e th e r ill (A m ste rd a m : R o d o p i, 19 9 0 ), 3 3 - 5 3 .

N atu r el , M ireille , ‘L e R o l e de F la u b e rt dans la ge n e se d u te x te p ro u s tie n ’ , B u lletin M arcel Proust 4 3 ( 1 9 9 3 ) , 7 2 - 8 1

B ibliography

209

-------- ‘ D e M a r ia a A lb e r t in e : R a c in e s fla u b e rtie n n e s d u p e r s o n n a g e ’ , B u lletin

M arcel Proust 4 5 ( 1 9 9 5 ) , 1 0 4 - 1 6 .

N eefs, J acques, ‘ D e

m a in v iv e : T r o is v e rsio n s d e la tran sm issio n des t e x te s ’ ,

Litterature 6 4 ( 1 9 8 6 ) , 3 0 - 4 6 . -------- ‘La

Sphere des manuscrits’, in:

D iderot, autographes, copies, editions,

ed.

B e a tr ic e D id ie r an d Ja c q u e s N e e f s (S a in t-D e n is : Presses u n ive rsita ire s de V in c e n n e s , 1 9 8 6 ) , 9 —1 1 . -------- ‘ L ’ lm a g in a ir e des d o c u m e n t s ’ , in : R o m an s d ’archives, ed . R a y m o n d e D e b r a y -G e n e t t e an d Ja c q u e s N e e f s (L ille : Presses u n ive rsita ire s d e L ille ,

1987), I75-89-

-------- ‘La

Critique genetique: l’histoire d’une theorie’, in:

D e lagenese du texte

litteraire, manuscrit, auteur, texte, critique , ed . A lm u t h G re s illo n (T u s s o n , C h a r e n t e : D u L e r o t, 1 9 8 8 ) , 1 1 - 2 2 . -------- ‘ L a P r o je c tio n d u s c e n a rio ’ , E tu d es frangaises 2 8 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 6 7 - 8 2 . -------- ‘ L ’E c r it u r e d u s c e n a riq u e ’ , in : M im esis et Sem iosis. Litterature et repre­

sentation,

ed .

P h ilip p e

H am on

an d Je a n -P ie r r e

L e d u c -A d in e

(Paris:

N a th a n , 19 9 2 ), 1 0 9 - 2 1 . -------- ‘ L e s T r e s o r s de l ’ e c r it ’ , G enesis 3 ( 1 9 9 3 ) , 1 7 3 - 6 . -------- ‘ L a P r e v is io n d e l ’ c e u v re ’ , G enesis 6 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , 1 0 7 —1 6 . ‘N o te s

su r les

in ve n ta ire s

des

cah ie rs

C o m b ray’,

B u lletin

d ’ informations

proustiennes 1 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 4 9 - 5 0 .

O rr, M ary ,

‘ R e a d in g th e O t h e r : F la u b e r t’ s U E d u c a tio n sentim entale R e ­

v is it e d ’ , French Studies 4 6 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 4 1 2 - 2 3 .

Parker, H ershel,

F la w e d T exts and Verbal Icons (E v a n s to n : N o r t h w e s t e r n

U n iv e r s it y Press, 1 9 8 4 ) .

Pierssens, M ichel, ‘ F r e n c h

G e n e tic S tu d ie s at a C r o s s r o a d s ’ , Poetics today 1 1

(1990), 617-25. Poe, E dgar A llan,

‘ T h e P h ilo s o p h y o f C o m p o s it i o n ’ , in : T h e C om plete

W orks o f E d g a r A lla n Poe, ed. J . A . H a rris o n , 1 7 v o ls. ( N e w Y o r k : A M S Press, 1 9 6 5 ) , x iv . 1 9 3 - 2 0 8 .

Poetics today 1 / 3 ( 1 9 8 0 ) , ‘ N a r r a t o lo g y I: P o e tic s o f F ic t io n ’ . -------- 1 1 / 2 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , ‘ N a r r a t o lo g y re v isite d I ’ . -------- 1 1 / 4 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , ‘ N a r r a t o lo g y re v isite d I I ’ .

Poetique 6 4 ( 1 9 8 5 ) , ‘D u th e m e en litte ra tu re ’ .

Pommier, J ean ,

Paul

Valery

et la

creation

litteraire

(Paris:

E d itio n s

de

l ’ E n c y c lo p e d ie fran ^aise, 1 9 4 6 ) . -------- Creations en litterature (Paris: H a c h e t te , 1 9 5 5 ) .

--------L T n v e n tio n et Vecriture dans ‘L a T o rp ille’ d ’H onore de B a lza c, avec le texte inedit du manuscrit original (G e n e v a : D r o z , 1 9 5 7 ) .

Popescu-P ampu, M ireille,

‘ L ’A v a n t-p r o u s t ia n is m e d e F la u b e r t ’ , Synthesis

14 (19 8 7 ), 7 8 -8 0 .

Porter, D ennis,

‘ F la u b e rt

an d

th e

D if fic u lt y

C en tu ry French Studies 1 2 ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 3 6 6 - 7 8 .

o f R e a d i n g ’ , N in eteen th -

2io

B ibliography

Prendergast, C hristopher,

T h e O rder o f M im esis: B alzac, Stendhal, N erva l,

Flaubert (C a m b r id g e : C a m b r id g e U n iv e r s it y Press, 1 9 8 6 ) .

Proust, J acques,

‘ S tr u c tu r e et sens d e L ’Education sentim entale’ , R e v u e des

Sciences H um aines 1 2 5 ( 1 9 6 7 ) , 6 7 - 1 0 0 .

Pugh, A nthony

R . , T h e ‘B irth ’ o f ‘A la recherche du temps perdu

( L e x in g t o n ,

K Y : F r e n c h F o r u m P u b lish e rs, 1 9 8 7 ) .

Q uemar, C laudine,

‘ L ’E g lis e d e C o m b r a y , so n c u re et le n arrateu r: trois

red a c tio n s d ’ u n fra g m e n t d e la v e rsio n p rim itiv e d e C o m b r a y ’ , C ahiers

M arcel Proust N o u v elle serie/E tu des proustiennes

6 /1

(19 73), 2 7 7 -3 4 2 .

-------- ‘ S u r d e u x v e rsio n s a n cie n n e s des “ c o te s ” d e C o m b r a y ’ , C ahiers M arcel

Proust N o u velle serie/E tu des proustiennes 7 / I I ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 1 5 9 —2 8 2 . -------- ‘A u t o u r

de

N o u v e lle s

trois

a v a n t-te x te s

a p p ro c h e s

de

des p ro b le m e s

l’“ O u ve rtu re”

de

la

Recherche:

C ontre S a in te -B e u ve \

du

B u lletin

d ’ informations proustiennes 3 ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 7 - 3 9 . -------- ‘E n

m a rg e

du

travail

de

P ro u st

sur

S a in t e -B e u v e :

T a b le a u x

des

c o rre sp o n d a n ce s en tre les n o te s d u C a r n e t 1 et les fra g m en ts d u v o lu m e 4 5 d u F o n d s P r o u s t’ , B u lletin d ’ informations proustiennes 6 ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 2 9 - 3 7 . -------- ‘ H y p o th e s e s sur le classem en t des p re m ie rs cah iers S w a n n ’ , B u lletin

d ’ informations proustiennes 1 3 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 1 7 - 2 4 .

R ambures, J ean L ouis de,

C om m ent travaillent les ecrivains (Paris: F la m m a -

rio n , 1 9 7 8 ) .

R ey , A lain, ‘ T r a c e s ’ , in :

D e la lettre au livre. Sem iotique des manuscrits litteraires,

ed. L o u is H a y (Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 8 9 ) ,

35 —5 5 R icatte, R obert, L a

G enese de ‘L a F ille E lis a ’ (Paris: Presses U n iv e rs ita ire s

d e F r a n c e , i9 6 0 ) .

R ichard, J ean-Pierre, Proust et le m onde sensible (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 7 4 ) . R iffaterre, M ichael, Sem iotique de la poesie (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 3 ) . R immon-K enan, Shlomit, ‘ Q u e s t - c e q u ’ u n t h e m e ? ’ , Poetique 6 4 ( 1 9 8 5 ) , 3 9 7 -4 0 6 .

R obin, C hristian,

‘U n e e d itio n d u “ C a r n e t de 1 9 0 8 ” ’ , Bu lletin ^ in fo rm a ­

tions proustiennes 6 ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 7 - 1 6 .

R obinson-V alery, J udith,

‘V a le r y

fa ce

a

la

m o rt

de

M a lla r m e :

de

l ’ im p o ssib le p ro se a la p o e s ie ’ , G enesis 2 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 6 1 - 7 9 .

R oloff, V olker, M u y la e r t ,

‘ “ F ra n c o is le C h a m p i” et le te x te r e t r o u v e ’ , transl. M a r c

Cahiers M arcel Proust N o u velle S erie/E tu d es proustiennes 9 / I I I

(1 9 7 9 ), 259-87. --------W erk und Lektiire. Z u r Literarasthetik von M arcel Proust (B a d e n -B a d e n : Insel, 1 9 8 4 ) .

R ousset, J ean,

‘ L e S ta tu t n a rr a tif d ’ u n p e rso n n a g e : S w a n n ’ , C ahiers M arcel

Proust N o u velle S erie/E tu d es proustiennes 7 / I I ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 6 9 - 8 6 .

R udler, G ustave,

L es Techniques de la critique et de Vhistoire litteraires en

litterature frangaise m odem e (O x fo r d : O x f o r d U n iv e r s it y Press, 1 9 2 3 ; rep r. S la tk in e , 1 9 7 9 ) .

B ibliography Sarraute, N athalie, ‘ F la u b e r t’ , S chehr, L awrence R., Flaubert

21 i

Partisan R e v ie w 3 3 ( 1 9 6 6 ) , 1 9 3 - 2 0 8 . and Sons. R ea d in g s o f Flaubert, Z o la , and

Proust ( N e w Y o r k : P e te r L a n g , 1 9 8 6 ) .

Schmid, M arion D e m id o ff . sce n a rio s

A .,

‘Ju le s J a n in ,

L ’ a p p ro p ria tio n

U E d u c a tio n

de

M adam e

d ’une

de

a n c e d o te

sentim entale’ ,

la

C arte

et le

b io g r a p h iq u e

B u lletin

C o m te

dans

les

F laubert-M au passant

3

(19 9 5 ), 2 7 -4 0 . -------- ‘ T e l e o l o g y an d T e x t u a l M is re p re s e n ta tio n : T h e N e w P le ia d e P r o u s t ’ ,

French Studies B u lletin 5 6 ( 1 9 9 5 ) , 1 5 - 1 7 . -------- ‘ S w a n n ’ s M a r r ia g e in T e x t a n d A v a n t -T e x te : A G e n e t ic a n d N a r r a t o lo g ic a l S t u d y ’ , Zeitschrift f u r Franzdsische Sprache u n d Literatu r 1 0 6 ( 1 9 9 6 ) , 4 0 -5 0 . -------- ‘ T h e J e w i s h Q u e s tio n in A la recherche du temps perdu in th e L ig h t o f N in e t e e n t h - C e n t u r y D isc o u rse s o n R a c e ’ , N eophilologus (fo r th c o m in g ).

Schor, N aomi, an d M ajewski, Henry

F . (eds.), Flaubert and Postm odernism

(L o n d o n : U n iv e r s it y o f N e b r a s k a Press, 1 9 8 4 ) .

Sebban, N icole, P ro u stie n s

‘ L a P u b lic a tio n des m a n u scrits in ed its. L iste des in ed its

p u b lie s

(19 2 2 -19 9 1)’,

B u lletin

d ’ inform ations proustiennes 2 2

(19 9 1), 1 1 1 - 4 2 . -------- ‘ L iste

des

in ed its

P ro u stie n s

p u b lie s

(su ite )’ ,

B u lletin

d ’ informations

proustiennes 2 3 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 1 3 7 —4 1 .

Sherrington,

R . J . , ‘ L ’E la b o r a tio n des plans d e L ’Edu cation sentim entale’ ,

R e v u e d ’H istoire Litteraire de la France 7 0 ( 1 9 7 0 ) , 6 2 8 - 3 9 . Speculum 6 5 (1 9 9 0 ) , ‘ N e w P h il o lo g y ’ .

Stiegler, B ernard,

‘ M a c h in e s a e c rire et m a tie re s a p e n s e r ’ , G enesis 5

(19 9 4 ), 2 5 - 4 9 .

Suzuki, M ichihiko,

‘ L e “ J e ” p ro u s tie n ’ , B u lletin de la Societe des A m is de

M arcel Proust 9 ( 1 9 5 9 ) , 6 9 - 8 2 .

T adie, J ean-Y ves, Proust

et le roman. E ssa i sur les form es et techniques du roman

dans (A la recherche du temps p e rd u ’ (Paris: G a llim a rd , 1 9 7 1 ) . -------- ‘ P o rtra it d e F ra n g o is e ’ , R e v u e d ’histoire litteraire de la France 7 1 ( 1 9 7 1 ) ,

755- 6 4 -------- L a C ritiqu e litteraire au X X e siecle (Paris: B e lfo n d , 1 9 8 7 ) .

T ammenoms-B akker, C arla a p a rtir

des

F ., ‘ U n e r e c o n s titu tio n d ’ U n am our de S w a n n

m a n u sc rits’ , B u lletin

d ’ informations proustiennes

14

(19 8 3 ),

37- 4 0 . -------- ‘ T h e F ig u r e o f S w a n n in th e C a h ie r s o f M a r c e l P r o u s t ’ , u n p u b lis h e d d o c to ra l d issertation (C a m b r id g e , 1 9 8 3 ) .

T odorov, T zvetan ,

‘ L e s C a t e g o r ie s d u re c it litte ra ire ’ , Com m unications 8

(19 6 6 ), 1 2 5 - 5 1 .

T ooke, A drianne, r e v ie w

o f R a y m o n d e D e b r a y -G e n e t t e , M etam orphoses du

recit: A u to u r de Flaubert (Paris: S e u il, 1 9 8 8 ) , in French Stu dies 4 3 ( 1 9 8 9 ) , 9 9 -

100.

2i2

B ibliography

T upinier, G eorgette,

‘A u t o u r d e c in q e b au ch e s de M ile d e S te rm a ria ’ ,

6 /1 ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 2 1 1 - 7 5 . V ial, A ndre, L a G enese d ’ ‘U ne v ie ’ (Paris: L e s B e lle s L ettres, 1 9 5 4 ) . W ada , A kio, ‘ L ’E v o lu t io n d e C o m b r a y d ep u is l ’ a u to m n e 1 9 0 9 ’ , u n p u b ­ Cahiers M arcel Proust N o u velle serie/ E tu d es proustiennes,

lish e d d o cto ra l d issertation , 2 v o ls. (S o rb o n n e , P aris I V , 1 9 8 6 ) . -------- ‘ L a C r e a t io n ro m a n e sq u e d e P ro u st: e tu d e g e n e tiq u e su r la p re m ie r e a p p a ritio n d e G ilb e r t e ’ , E tu d es de langue et litterature frangaises 5 4 ( 1 9 8 9 ) , 12 6 -4 0 .

W arning, W erner,

and

M illy , J ean

(eds.), M arcel Proust. Ecrire sans J i n

(Paris: E d itio n s d u C N R S , ‘ T e x t e s et M a n u s c r its ’ , 1 9 9 6 ) .

W aters, H arold

A . , ‘ T h e N a r ra to r, n o t M a r c e l’ , T h e French R e v ie w 3 3

( i9 6 0 ) , 3 8 9 - 9 2 .

W erner, M ichael,

‘ H e in e s fra n zo sisch e B e a r b e itu n g d e r L u te z ia u n d das

P r o b le m des Z ie lp u b lik u m s ’ , in : C a h ier H ein e 3 : ec ritu re et co n tra in tes, ed. M ic h e l E s p a g n e , A lm u t h E d itio n s

du

C N R S /C e n tre

G re s illo n re g io n a l

an d C a t h e r in e

d e p u b lic a tio n

V io lle t

de

(Paris:

P a r is /IT E M ,

19 8 4 ), 1 1 7 - 3 6 . -------- ‘ L a D ia le c t iq u e d e la c e n su re : a p ro p o s d e l ’a u to c e n su re dans les articles jo u m a lis tiq u e s de H e i n e ’ , in : Exercices de critique genetique , ed . M ic h e l M a lic e t , Cahiers de Textologie I (Paris: M in a r d , 1 9 8 6 ) , 5 - 4 0 . -------- and W oesler, W infried

(eds.), E d itio n

et manuscrits (B e rn e : P e te r L a n g ,

19 8 7 ).

W etherill,

P . M . , ‘ L e S ty le des th e m e s I; E t u d e sur le d e rn ie r m a n u sc rit

a u to g ra p h e d e L ’Education sentim entale’ , Zeitschrift f u r franzosische Sprache

und Literatur 8 1 ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 3 0 8 - 5 1 . -------- ‘ F la u b e rt et les d isto rtio n s d e la C r itiq u e M o d e m e ’ , Sym posium 2 5

(1971) , 271-9. -------- ‘ L e S ty le des th e m e s I I ’ , Zeitschrift f u r franzosische Sprache und Literatur 8 2 (19 72 )

, 1-5 2 .

-------- ‘ “ C ’ est la c e q u e n o u s a v o n s e u de m e ille u r” ’ , in : Flaubert a Voeuvre, ed . R a y m o n d e D e b r a y -G e n e t t e (Paris: F la m m a rio n , ‘ T e x t e s et m a n u sc rits’ , 19 8 0 ) , 3 5 - 6 8 . -------- ‘ M a n u s c r ip t M e c h a n is m s : F la u b e r t’ s Education sentim entale ’ , N eu p h ilo -

logische M itteilungen 8 5 ( 1 9 8 4 ) , 1 7 8 —86. -------- ‘A u x o rig in e s c u ltu relles d e la g e n e t iq u e ’ , in : S u r la genetique textuelle, ed . D . G . B e v a n a n d P . M . W e th e r ill (A m ste rd a m : R o d o p i , 1 9 9 0 ) , 1 9 —3 2 .

W illiams,

D . A . , ‘ T h e Plans fo r L ’Education sentim entale ’ , French Stu dies

B u lletin 2 ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 8 - 1 0 . --------fT h e H id d e n L ife at its Source’ . A

S tu d y o f F lau bert’s

L ’Education

sentim entale’ (H u ll: U n iv e r s it y o f H u ll Press, 1 9 8 8 ) . -------- ‘ L ’Education sentim entale. L e classem en t des sc e n a rio s’ , E tu d es normandes 3 (19 8 9 ),

47 - 5 1 *

-------- ‘ L a S tr u c tu ra tio n d u re c it dans les scen ario s d e L ’Education sentim entale ’ ,

B ibliography in :

S u r la genetique textuelle, ed . D .

G.

B evan

and P.

M.

213

W e t h e r ill

(A m s te rd a m : R o d o p i , 1 9 9 0 ) , 7 7 - 9 0 . -------- ‘ F r o m D o c u m e n t to T e x t : T h e “ T e rra sse d u B o r d d e l ’ E a u ” E p is o d e in L yEducation sentim entale , French Stu dies 4 7 ( 1 9 9 3 ) , 1 5 6 - 7 1 .

--------T h e Construction o f Character in Fiction (H u ll: U n iv e r s it y o f H u ll P ress,

1 9 9 3 ). -------- ‘A M is s in g S e c tio n o f a S c e n a r io fo r U E d u c a tio n sentim entale\ French

Studies Bu lletin 5 6 ( 1 9 9 5 ) , 1 2 - 1 5 .

W right, Iain ,

4 “ W h a t M a tt e r W h o ’ s S p e a k in g ? ” : B e c k e t t , th e A u t h o r ia l

S u b je c t an d C o n t e m p o r a r y C r itic a l T h e o r y ’ , in : C om parative Criticism , ed . E . S . S h a ffe r ( C a m b r id g e : C a m b r id g e U n iv e r s it y Press, 1 9 8 3 ) , 5 9 —8 6 .

Y ale French Studies 89 ( 1 9 9 6 ) , ‘ D ra fts ’ .

Y oshida, J o , m ere” : un

‘ S u r les trois j e u x de d a c ty lo g ra p h ie s d e la “ m o r t d e la g r a n d asp e ct d u

p ro ce ssu s

de

la c re a tio n

chez

M arcel

P ro u st’ ,

E q u in o x e 9 ( 1 9 9 2 ) , 6 3 - 7 4 .

Y oshikawa, Kazuyoshi,

‘E t u d e s sur la g e n e se d e L a Prisonniere d ’ ap res des

b ro u illo n s in e d its’ , u n p u b lis h e d d o c to ra l d issertation (S o r b o n n e , P aris I V , 19 76 ). -------- ‘V in te u il o u la g e n e se d u s e p tu o r’ , C ahiers M arcel Proust N o u v elle S e rie /

E tu d es Proustiennes , 9 / I I I ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 2 8 9 - 3 4 7 .

INDEX

Albalat, A n to in e

9, 10

A lb u fera, L o u is d ’

B ru n e a u , J e a n

56

131

anti-teleo lo gical fallacy

2 3 -7

cahier de montage, defin itio n o f 1 2 4

see also teleo lo gy

C a llu , F lo ren ce

16 6

A ra g o n , Lo uis

12

C a lm e tte , G aston

A u d iat, Pierre

y, 10

C e rq u ig lin i, B e rn a rd

A u stin , J . L .

46

16 6 , 16 9

Ch om sky, N o a m

authorial co n trol and intention

10 , 1 5 , 20 ,

C la ra c, P ierre

6, 7

2 1 , 30

13 2 , 134

3 1 , 40 , 4 1 , 7 8 , 7 9 - 8 0 , 9 2 - 3 , 9 4, 1 0 0 - 1 ,

C o le rid g e , Sa m u el T a y lo r

1 1 4 - 1 5 , 19 0 -4

C o llo t , M ic h e l

see a b o intentional fallacy; textuality ava n t-texte: definition o f and published text

B ach elard , G aston

15

1 8 - 2 7 , r95

4 1, 42

B alzac, H o n o re de

4 5 , 5 3 , 6 2 , 12 0 , 1 3 4 ,

14 0 , 1 4 5 , 14 8 , 16 8 , 1 8 1 B a rd e ch e , M a u rice B arthes, R o la n d

xiii, 1 1 , 1 2 , 18 , 1 1 4 29, 3 3 , 34, 13 4 , 15 7 ,

16 5, 176

B e lle m in -N o e l, Je a n

B ern hardt, Sarah

15 , 20, 2 1 , 2 2 , 34

x v , 3 , 16 , 1 7 , 2 3 , 2 4 ,

x iv , 40 , 5 5 , 8 2, 8 5 , 1 1 4 , 1 2 1 ,

B o n n e t, H e n ri

2 4 , 2 5 , 28

40

11 ,7 9

D es Portes, Elizab eth D id e r o t, D en is

61

157

5

D u p la n , Ju le s

57

B o u rd ie u , Pierre

9, 5 5

ecriture a processus see im m a nen t w ritin g endogenese and exogenese E q u ip e P rou st

19 3 , 2 9 , 30 , 3 1

44 9 8 , 10 4 12 3 , 12 4 , 12 8 , 13 4 , 15 9 , 17 4 ,

1 7 7 , 18 0 , 1 8 2 , 18 3

28 , 3 5 , 4 3, 46

124 , 12 5 , 12 7 , 128 , 129 , 1 3 1 26

16 , 7 2 , 7 3

12 5 , 17 7 , 18 2

B o rg es, Jo r g e Lu is

B ru n , B ern ard

D errid a, Ja cq u e s

E sp a gn e, M ic h e l

19 1 B o n acco rso , G io v a n n i

B re to n , A n d re

D e b r a y -G e n e tte , R a y m o n d e D em id o fF, C o u n t A n a to le

178

5 3 . 5 4 , 5 5 , 5 8 , 6 1 , 66, 6 8, 7 0

B ro o k s, P eter

37

D u r r y , M a r ie -Je a n n e

37

Biasi, P ie rre -M a r c de

Bildungsrom an

C u lio li, A n to in e

15 -16

6

B en ven iste , E m ile

51.

1 5 4 , 1 5 5 , 18 0

diplom atic editions and linearized editions

B e d ie r, Jacq u es

29,

C o m p a g n o n , A n to in e

critique g en etiqu e see gen etic criticism

D es G en ettes, M m e R o g e r

125

B audelaire, C h arles

xiii

35, 42

F alco n er, G ra h a m Fallois, B ern a rd de F errer, D a n iel

3, 1 1 , 44, 4 5 , 1 1 1 13 2 , 13 4

27

F lau b ert, G u sta ve

x iv , x v , 1 4 , 2 2 , 2 4 , 2 9 ,

32 , 34, 40, 44, 4 5, 5 1 - 1 1 5 , 1

19 ,

12 0 ,

1 2 3 , 1 2 4 , 1 2 8 , 1 3 1 , 1 4 1 , 1 8 9 - 9 5 passim B o u va rd et Pecuchet 3 3 , 58 , 68

216

Index

Flaubert, G u stave

Institut des T e x te s et M an u scrits M o d e m e s

(cont.)

Carnets de travail 1 6 , 5 1 , 5 5 , 5 6 , 5 7 , 5 8 - 7 3 ,

(IT E M )

3 , 1 3 , 14 , 4 6 , 1 2 4

8 1 , 8 2 , 18 9 , 1 9 2 U n coeur sim ple

16

L*E du catio n sentim entale x iv , x v , x v i, 3 2 , 36, 39, 40, 4 5, 5 1 - 1 1 5 , 1 2 1 , 1 4 1 ,

Jam es, H e n ry Ja n in , Ju les

45

40

1 8 9 - 9 5 passim L ’Education sentim entale. L e s Scenarios x v , 5 1 —1 1 5 passim , 1 4 1 , 18 9 , 19 0 , 1 9 2 H erodias

14 , 16 , 2 2

58 , 6 1 , 9 7 1 7 , 68

58

Voyage en E g y p te Fon d s Proust Fran k, A n n e

14 , 1 7 , 68

14 , 1 1 9 , 1 2 4 , 1 2 6 , 1 7 6 40

F ro eh n er, G u illau m e Fu ch s, C ath erin e

58

g enetique scriptique 2 7 - 8 , 3 7 , 4 3

G io tto

xv, 2 1 - 2

Lach m a n n , K arl

6

Lag ier, Su zanne

6 1, 62, 6 3, 65

Lanson, G u stave

L e cle rc, Y v a n

15 8

G o e th e , Jo h a n n W o lfg a n g v o n G o n jo u , Fran cine

44

14 8

9, 10 , 1 1 31 2 2 , 38

33, 34 1 5 , 16

L e co n te de Lisle, C h arles L ejeu n e, Philippe

Levaillant, Je a n

Grasset, B ern ard

9, 1 1 , 5 1 , 53

1 2 2 , 18 5

G resillon, A lm u th

x iii, x v i, 2 2 , 2 3 , 3 7 , 38 ,

43. 44. 46

17 3 , 17 5 , 176

2 3 ,2 4

M allarm e, Stephane

35

M an te -P ro u st, S u z y

119

m anuscripts:

m odem

4 -18

collectio n and status o f 5 - 6 editing o f 6 - 8 , 1 4 - 1 8 see a bo genetic criticism ; textual criticism

G u e rin , Jacq u es

12 6

M aran tz, E n id

G u y o n , B e rn ard

9 ,1 1

M a rtin du G ard , R o g e r Massis, H en ri

H a h n , R e y n a ld o

138

5, 1 2 , 16 5 17 -18

M au ro is, A n d re

im m anen t w ritin g

xv, 44, 119 , 1 2 1 , 18 9 -9 5

passim intentional fallacy

3 5 - 6 , 43 40

119

M itteran d , H e n ri

2 7 , 29, 3 0 -2 , 38, 39, 4 1 ,

19 0 m o d ern ity

7 8 - 8 0 , 19 3

x iv , x v , 5 5 , 5 7 , 9 2 - 3 , 1 0 1 , 1 1 5 ,

19 4 M o n ta ig n e, M ic h e l E y q u e m de M o n tesq u io u , R o b e r t de

92, 19 4

44

9

M a u ria c, Francois

3 , 1 3 , 30

h yp e rtex t/h yp erm ed ia

40

m aster-discourses

38, 4 3, 44

H e in e , H e in rich

ideal fo rm

16 5

40, 14 3

ancient and m edieval 4 , 6 - 7

G o th o t-M e rs c h , C lau d in e

H u g o , V ic t o r

138 , 179

32

15 1

H a y , L o u is

40

L a R o c h e fo u ca u ld , G ab riel de

Le rich e , Fran^oise

3 3 , 39, 19 4

‘ g e n o -te x t’ and ‘p h e n o -te x t’

G laser, N in a

L a C a rte , M arquise de

L eb rave, J e a n -L o u is

g enetique scenarique x v , 2 7 - 8 , 3 8 , 4 3 , 1 2 3

G e ra rd -G a illy , E .

xv, 1 1 , 12 , 2 1 , 2 2 , 3 2 , 33

L e C a lv e z , E r ic

xiii, x v i, 3 - 4 7 , 19 5

G en ette, G era rd

K risteva, Ju lia

Larousse, Pierre

22

gen etic criticism

14 9

126 , 13 2

1 1 , 1 4 , 1 5 , 16 , 5 1 , 5 4 , 5 5 ,

P a r les champs et p a r les grazes Salam m bo

18

K a w a n a g o , H iroshi K o lb , Philip

L a Leg en de de S a in t J u li e n Vhospitalier 53 M a da m e B o v a ry

K afk a, Franz

M u sil, R o b e r t

1 9 , 20

32

19

Index N ah m ias, A lb ert N e e fs, Jacq u es

172

8, 18 , 2 7 , 59 , 6 3 , 7 9 , 19 3

N e r v a l, G erard de N e w P h ilo lo g y

Paris, G aston

6 - 7 , 13

cahier 4

1 4 5 - 8 , 14 9 , 1 5 3 , 1 6 2 , 1 7 0

cahier 5

1 3 7 - 1 4 0 , 14 2 , 14 3 , 14 6 , 14 9 , 15 4 ,

cahier 6

40 22 12

79

Pleiade Proust, critique o f editorial rationale 12 9 -30 P o e, E d g a r A llan

xiii

P o m m ie r, Je a n

9, 1 1

P o n ge , Francis

x iii, 19

p ro gram m atic w ritin g

1 5 7 - 8 , 1 6 1, 16 2

cahier 7

1 5 5 - 7 , 1 5 8 , 1 6 2 , 18 0 , 1 8 1

cahier 8

1 6 0 - 3 , 16 4 , 16 6 , 1 6 7 , 18 3

cahier 9

16 6 , 1 8 2

cahier 10

16 6 , 1 8 2 , 18 3

cahier 1 1

18 3 -4

cahier 1 2

16 0 , 1 6 3 - 4 , 16 6 , 1 6 7 , 1 7 0 , 1 7 3 ,

18 3

P o u ch et, F e lix -A rc h im e d e

59 , 73 ,

1 3 5 - 6 , 1 3 9 , 14 0 , 1 4 2 , 1 4 6 , 1 5 7 ,

79

xv, 44, 5 1 , 53, 57,

7 8 , 10 2 , 1 1 5 , i i

9,

18 9 -9 5

cahier 13

177 -8

cahier 14

16 9 , 17 0 , 1 7 1 , 1 7 5 , 1 7 6 , 1 7 8 ,

18 0 , 1 8 4 cahiers 1 5 - 1 9

18 4

cahier 20

18 5

x iv , x v , 1 3 , 1 4 , 2 5 , 3 2 , 40,

cahier 2 1

18 5

4 2 , 4 5 , 7 8 , 7 9 , 1 1 9 - 8 5 , 1 8 9 - 9 5 passim

cahier 2 2

1 7 1 - 2 , 18 4 -5

passim Proust, M a r ce l

173

cahier 23

172 ,

cahier 2 4

18 5

14 , 3 2 , 4 2 , 1 1 9 - 8 5 , 1 8 9 - 9 5 p assim ; D u

cahier 2 5

170 ,

cote de chez S w a n n

cahier 2 6

1 3 8 , 1 6 4 - 5 , 16 6 , 1 7 1 , 1 7 3

(i) P rinted W o rk s: A la recherche du temps perdu

x iv , x v , x v i,

12 2 , 126 , 184 , 18 5,

173 173

1 9 1 ; A Vombre des je u n e s jille s en Jleu rs

cahier 2 7

172 ,

1 2 3 , 1 2 6 , 1 3 0 , 1 7 3 ; L e C o te de G u e r-

cahier 28

1 7 6 - 7 , 1 7 8 , 18 0

mantes

cahier 29

16 9 , 17 0 , 1 7 2 , 1 7 3 , 1 7 5

1 7 7 - 8 2 , 1 8 5 , 19 0 ; Sodom e et G om orrhe

cahier 30

177 -8

1 4 , 1 2 3 , 1 2 6 ; L a Prisonniere

cahier 3 1

14 8 -5 0 , 15 5 , 18 4

cahier 3 2

1 6 4 - 5 , 16 6 , 16 9 , 1 7 3

cahier 3 4

18 5

12 2 , 12 4 , 12 6 , 15 9 , 1 7 1 ,

1 3 0 ; A lh ertin e disparue T em ps retrouve

1 2 3 , 12 6 ,

12 3 , 130 ; L e

12 0 , 1 2 2 , 1 2 4 , 1 2 6 , 1 2 8 ,

1 4 7 , 15 0 , 1 7 1 , 1 7 7 , 1 8 2 - 3 ,

i

8 4 , 19 0 ,

1 9 1 , 19 4 C ontre S a in te-B e u v e

18 , 1 2 1 , 1 3 2 , 1 3 3 ,

cahier 3 5

18 5

cahier 36

1 3 8 , 1 5 0 - 5 , 1 7 3 , 18 0

cahier 3 7

1 7 7 -8 , 179 00

Plato

136-^ 7, 1 3 8 , 14 0 , 1 4 2

16 2 , 16 5 , 17 8 , 179

P erec, G eo rg es

P ico n , G ae to n

cahier 2 cahier 3

173

36 , 1 3 4 , 1 5 7

6

Petit, Jacq u es

1 3 4 , 14 0 , 1 5 0 , 1 5 7 , 1 5 9 , 16 0 , 1 7 2 , 1 7 7 ,

cahier 38

1 7 8 , 1 8 3 ; see also cahiers C ontre S a in te-

cahiers 3 9 - 4 3

Beuve

cahier 4 4 133

cahier 4 5

18 5

cahier 4 6

171

cahier 4 7

18 3

(ii) M anuscripts: cahiers C ontre S a in te-B e u v e (i.e. cahiers 1, 2 , 3, 4 , 5, 6, 7 , 3 1 , 36 , 5 1 )

12 0 , 1 2 3 , 1 2 6 ,

17 8 -8 0

18 5

117 , 171

Essais et articles Je a n Sa n teu il

cahier 48

18 3

cahier 4 9

17 7 -8 , 18 0 -2

1 2 8 , 1 3 0 , 1 3 1 - 6 0 , 1 6 0 - 8 5 passim , 1 9 1 ,

cahier 50

18 3

1 9 2 ; see also individual cahier num bers

cahier 5 1

15 8 -6 0 , 1 7 7 -8

cahier 5 7

1 8 2 , 18 3

cahier 58

18 2

cahier 63

16 4 , 1 6 6 - 7

cahiers G u erin (i.e. cahiers 6 3 - 7 5 )

126 , 12 7 ;

see also in dividual cahier num bers cahier 1

217

1 4 0 - 5 , 14 6 , 1 7 3

2 i8

Index

Proust, M arcel:

Sch iller, F riedrich v o n

(ii) M anuscripts (cont.)

Sch lesin ger, Elisa

cahier 6 4 1 2 6 , 1 2 7 , 1 6 9 , 1 7 2 - 5 , 1 7 6

Sch m id t, A m o

19

cahier 6 5

12 7 , 170 , 17 2 , 1 7 5 - 6

Searle, J o h n R .

46

c a h ie r6 6

12 7 , 178

S e v ig n e, M m e de

cahier 6 7

12 7 , 178

Skira, A lb ert

cahier 68

18 3 -4

‘ so cio -g en e tics’

17 1-2 ,18 4 -5

Stendhal

carnet 1

5

12

cahier 69

w/n'ers 7 0 - 7 5

44

3 2 , 36

2 9 - 3 2 , 3 4 , 36

18

structural genetics see genetique scenarique

12 6

12 0 , 1 3 1 - 4

‘ C o m b r a y ’ , first typescript fo r

Su perv ielle, Ju les

3 5 ,4 2

T a d ie , J e a n -Y v e s

1 2 9 , 1 3 4 , 13 8

124 , 12 7 ,

1 6 7 - 8 , 170 , 18 2 , 19 2 Proust 2 1

18 4

Proust 45

1 3 2 , 1 3 4 , 1 3 6 , 1 5 0 , 16 4

teleo lo g y

P u g h , A n th o n y R .

1 2 5 -6 , 16 1

Q u em a r, C lau d in e

1 3 4 , 1 3 6 , 14 0 , 16 6

8, 10 , 1 3 , 2 3 - 7 , 4 3 , 69, 1 3 0 , 18 9

textual criticism textuality

x v i, 3, 6 - 9 , 13

20 , 26 , 4 1 , 7 8 , 7 9 - 8 0 , 9 4 , 1 0 1 ,

115 , 19 2 -4 textualization

2 2 - 3 , 24, 25, 7 3 , 7 7, 1 19

textual rationale see textuality R a c in e , Je a n

40

T o m ash evsk i, B o ris

R am b u res, J e a n -L o u is de readability, decreased

12

T o o k e , A d rian n e

5 7 , 9 2 , 9 3 , 9 8 , 10 0 ,

1 0 1 , 10 2 , 1 1 3 , 19 4

41

17, 27

T o u r b e y , Je a n n e de T rio le t, Elsa

12

V a le ry , Paul

35

61

see a b o m o d ern ity R e n a rd , Ju les

176

R e y , P ierre -L o u is

1 3 0 , 16 6

‘ rh yth m o f creation ’ R ic a tte , R o b e r t

V ia l, A n d re

9

R ic h a r d , Je a n -P ie rr e R iffa te rre , M ich ael

R o b in s o n -V a le r y , Ju d ith R o b e r t , H u b ert

V o ltaire

38

5

4 1 , 98 34, 35

W a d a , A k io

14 3

1 2 3 , 1 2 7 , 1 2 8 , 1 5 9 , 16 9 , 1 7 2 ,

177

1 8 2 , 18 3

W e rn e r, M ich a el

2 9 , 30

9, 10

W eth e rill, P. M .

3 2 , 54 , 7 2 , 7 3 , 7 4 , 8 2 , 9 3 ,

R u d le r , G ustave

R iih m k o rf, V o lk e r R u s k in , J o h n

16 6

9

V io lle t, C ath erin e

41 33

R im m o n -K e n a n , Sh lo m it

R o lo fF , V o lk e r

V allette, A lfre d

2 7 , 59 , 19 0

19

101, III

1 1 9 , 138

W ild e , O sca r

120

W illia m s, T o n y Sain t-P ierre, B e m ard in de

10

S a in te -B e u v e , C h arles A u g u stin

87, 1 3 1, 132,

x v , 2 9 , 4 1 , 5 1 , 5 5 , 56 , 6 4 ,

95

W r ig h t, Iain

114

1 3 3 , 13 4 , 13 6 , 14 5 , 15 0 , 1 5 7 Sand, G e o rg e

45

Francois le C h a m p i L a M a re au diable Sartre, Je a n -P a u l

15 8 , 16 2 , 18 2 15 8 , 16 2

Y o sh id a , J o

13 0 , 16 6

Y o sh ik a w a , K azu yo sh i

157

40

scenarios d ’ensem ble and scenarios detailles, definition o f 5 2

Z o la , E m ile

94

1 3 , 3 0 - 3 1 , 3 8 , 40 , 4 4 , 4 5 , 59 ,