{"title":"‘Come parto imperfetto’: Paratexts and organization in a sixteenth‐century book of secrets","authors":"Ruben Celani","doi":"10.1111/rest.12898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay addresses the Secreti diversi etmiracolosi, one of the many books of secrets (collections of medical and craft recipes) crowding the sixteenth‐century Venetian book market. First published in 1563 and spuriously ascribed to the physician Gabriele Falloppia, this book underwent significant structural changes already in occasion of its second edition (1565). The editors of the first and second editions, Giovanni Antonio Di Maria and Borgaruccio Borgarucci, discussed their respective choices regarding the arrangement of the collection in their prefatory letters. This contribution examines the prefatory and organizational paratexts of both editions, which reveal a tension between the readability of the book and there liability of its contents. It will be argued that the different paratextual strategies sued by Di Maria and Borgarucci had profound impact on the contours of ‘Falloppia'’s literary identity, on the functions envisioned for the collection, and on the epistemological value of the recipes therein. The editorial history of the Secreti diversi also prompts broader considerations on the success of books of secrets, showing how this was not only a matter of content but also, and often more importantly, how that content was presented to the readers.","PeriodicalId":45351,"journal":{"name":"Renaissance Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Renaissance Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rest.12898","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This essay addresses the Secreti diversi etmiracolosi, one of the many books of secrets (collections of medical and craft recipes) crowding the sixteenth‐century Venetian book market. First published in 1563 and spuriously ascribed to the physician Gabriele Falloppia, this book underwent significant structural changes already in occasion of its second edition (1565). The editors of the first and second editions, Giovanni Antonio Di Maria and Borgaruccio Borgarucci, discussed their respective choices regarding the arrangement of the collection in their prefatory letters. This contribution examines the prefatory and organizational paratexts of both editions, which reveal a tension between the readability of the book and there liability of its contents. It will be argued that the different paratextual strategies sued by Di Maria and Borgarucci had profound impact on the contours of ‘Falloppia'’s literary identity, on the functions envisioned for the collection, and on the epistemological value of the recipes therein. The editorial history of the Secreti diversi also prompts broader considerations on the success of books of secrets, showing how this was not only a matter of content but also, and often more importantly, how that content was presented to the readers.
这篇文章讨论了secret diversity etmiracolosi,这是拥挤在16世纪威尼斯图书市场的众多秘密书籍(医学和工艺食谱的集合)之一。这本书于1563年首次出版,并被虚假地归因于加布里埃尔·法洛皮亚医生,在其第二版(1565年)中已经经历了重大的结构变化。第一版和第二版的编辑Giovanni Antonio Di Maria和Borgaruccio Borgarucci在他们的序言中讨论了他们各自对该系列安排的选择。这一贡献检查了序言和组织两个版本的文本,这揭示了书的可读性和它的内容的责任之间的紧张关系。本文认为,迪玛丽亚和博尔加鲁奇所采用的不同的双文本策略对《法洛皮亚》文学身份的轮廓、对这部文集的功能设想以及其中的食谱的认识论价值产生了深远的影响。《秘密多样性》的编辑历史也促使人们对秘密书的成功进行更广泛的思考,表明这不仅是内容的问题,而且往往更重要的是,内容如何呈现给读者。
期刊介绍:
Renaissance Studies is a multi-disciplinary journal which publishes articles and editions of documents on all aspects of Renaissance history and culture. The articles range over the history, art, architecture, religion, literature, and languages of Europe during the period.