SSR – D. F. McKenzie “The Book as an Expressive Form”

McKenzie, D.F. “The Book As An Expressive Form.” The Book History Reader. Ed. David Finkelstein and Alistair McCleery. New YorkRoutledge, 2002. 27-38. Print.

Thesis: “I am convinced that the premise informing Greg’s classic statement […] is no longer adequate as a definition of what bibliography is and does […] The principle I wish to suggest as basic is simply this: bibliography is the discipline that studies texts as recorded forms, and the processes of their transmission, including their production and reception” (McKenzie 27-9).

paraphrased: McKenzie argues for a rethinking of Greg’s definition of bibliography, challenging the focus of bibliography as “scientific” or “objective” and arguing instead for the value of a “sociology of texts” approach, which focuses on the human presence, position and impacts of texts over time.

After a simple statement of intention, McKenzie opens the chapter, which was written originally as a lecture, by laying out the theoretical foundations of his argument (27 par.1-2). He cites Sir Walter Greg Scott, and positions the more recent work of Mr. Ross Atkinson in relation two it, before introducing the beginnings of his thesis in the next paragraph (27 par 3). What follows is a critical conversation with “Greg” and “Mr. Atkinson” in which McKenzie pieces apart the elements of their previous definitions of bibliography, pointing out limitations and challenging them in the context of today’s world (27 par 4 to 28 par 4). As part of this conversation, McKenzie includes a long block quote by Mr. Atkinson. Following this, in section 4, McKenzie offers an analysis of what biographers do, pushing beyond the discussions he previously laid out (28 par 5 to 29 par. 1). This sets him up for the second part of his thesis, in which he proposes and expands upon his definition of bibliography today (29 par 2). The next paragraph serves as an introduction to and transition for thorough definitions of the terms ‘text’ and ‘sociology’, which follow in the next section (29 par 3 to par 4). McKenzie concludes this section by turning back to his argument, having thoroughly defined the component parts of a ‘sociology of texts’, placing this definition once again within the discussions that came before it. This leads McKenzie back into a discussion of his thesis, in which he further justifies his position on bibliography as a ‘sociology of texts’ and discusses the limitations and impacts of holding onto previously held notions of bibliography as scientific or objective (30 par 5 to 31 par 1). McKenzie then turns, using a short introduction paragraph, to “the special case of printed texts.” This case study-like exploration first brings McKenzie back into a critical conversation with authors such as Erwin Panofsky, Marshall LcLuhan, Mr. Nicholas Barker, Mr. David Foxon, Mr. Giles Barber, Mr. Roger Laufer and others (31 par 2-3), and then into a lengthy analysis of an “exemplary case,” which he picks to be of the epigraph to ‘Intentional Fallacy’ by W.K. Wimsatt Jr. and M.C. Beardsle (31 par 4 to 35 par 3). Interwoven with this section, McKenzie models what bibliographic work as a ‘sociology of texts’ can look like. This section transitions, at the end of page 35, into a discussion of historical context, with McKenzie using this to bring new arguments and observations into his analysis of the epigraph (35 par 4 to 37 par 2). To conclude his chapter, or lecture, McKenzie turns back to his “larger theme,” summarizing and reinforcing the moves he has made to depart from Greg’s definition of bibliography.

– Use of positioning in parts of his thesis (page 37, paragraph 3)

– Attention to defining terms, and using this to strengthen one’s argument

– Final thought as a distillation of the ethos of the argument, stated simply