Pessoa Marginalia, Ferrari

7/22/2019 Pessoa Marginalia, Ferrari

1/49

Luso-Brazilian Review: ISSN -, by the Board o Regentso the University o Wisconsin System

On the Margins of FernandoPessoas Private Library

A Reassessment of the Role of Marginalia in the

Creation and Development of the Pre-heteronyms

and in Caeiros Literary Production

Patricio Ferrari

A actividade pre-heteronmica de Fernando Pessoa no se limitou aodomnio da escrita, mas tambm leitura da sua biblioteca por parte dealguns dos seus pre-heternimos. Neste ensaio, interrogamo-nos precisa-mente sobre a gnese do desenvolvimento heteronmico a partir desse outroespao, a biblioteca, onde, j nos tempos de Durban, o poeta comeara a

cultivar o seu fascnio pela alteridade. A relao entre a marginalia nosvrios livros assinados por alguns dos pre-heternimos (Pip, David Merrick,Lucas Merrick, Sidney Parkinson Stool, Charles Robert Anon e AlexanderSearch), as listas de projectos, certos poemas e outros escritos breves destasprimeiras personalidades literrias demonstram a que ponto a experinciado desdobramento esteve ligada, desde cedo, a uma efervescente actividadede leitor de escritor-leitor e, gradualmente, de leitor-escritor. A presenados pre-heternimos, enquanto proprietrios de livros, estende-se ao longo

de quase uma dcada, desaparecendo por volta de , uns anos antes daecloso dos heternimos. Contudo, esta viragem no fechar a biblioteca gura de Caeiro, cujo nome, como veremos, aparece de forma diversicadanas margens, capa interior e sobrecapas de algumas obras desta bibliotecaplural.

In his youthful journal he [Edward Gibbon] notes how the reading of onebook would open up to him many trains of thought [. . .]

John Mackinnon Robertson


2/49

Luso-Brazilian Review48:2

On November , while lying in bed at the Hpital Saint Louisdes Franais, Fernando Pessoa wrote his last words: I know not what to-morrow will bring (g. ). In the translation o an epigram by Palladas oAlexandria, published in the rst volume o the Greek Anthologyand stillextant in his private library, we read the ollowing pencil-marked closingline: o-day let me live well; none knows what may be to-morrow (g. ).Whether this depicts the consummation o a lie consecrated to literatureor the vast memory o Pessoa, that EuropeanFunesJorge Luis Borges nevercame to surmiseit reconrms the act that Fernando Pessoas writingsemerged (and more ofen than critics have heretoore acknowledged) rom

an intense contact with books, with thousands o pages in different oreignlanguages, written by the most diverse authors. So stimulating was this lie-companionship that still, at the end o , numerous intertextual instancesremain to be unveiled. For, like Friedrich Nietzsche, to mention just one othe most thoroughly researched writers private libraries, where almost ahundred years afer the philosophers death scholars continue to lay handson inuential primary sources,Pessoas enquiring and prehensile mind ap-proached reading creatively.

But books were not only sources; their margins, title and contents pages,

yleaves and dustcovers served as the physical space where Pessoa both re-ected upon and wrote literature. Tis reminds us o that active approachto reading cultivated by many a romantic; Samuel aylor Coleridge, orinstancewho coined the word marginalia or writings in the margins obookswas one o those voracious readers who read with pen-in-hand, andwas certainly introduced to Pessoa in his ormative Durban days (see Fer-rari, Fernando Pessoa as a Writing-reader ). And yet we may affi rmsans ambages that there is one peculiarity in the Portugueses marginalia

practice that sets it aside rom that o his predecessors as a cunning literaryperormance without equal in the history o any other literary tradition: theplurality o its writing-readers and reading-writersall o them created,and minutely molded, by him.

A brie look at someones library, i.e., without the opening o a single vol-ume, conronts us immediately with the readers preerences and interests,preoccupations and aesthetic inclinations . . . A different, more complex,

Figure . Detail rom page o Maria Jos de Lancastres Fernando Pessoa. Umafotobiograa.


3/49

Ferrari

discerning experience arises when one views, alongside the author o the

book, the indelible marks o those long-lasting and secret companions, thewriting-reader and the reading-writer. Tis is the experience that a small (yetastonishingly original) part o Pessoas -book-library offers (this num-ber, , is uid: new items are continually being discovered;on Pessoasprivate library, see Pizarro, Ferrari, and Cardiello). For, unlike Flaubert,who attributed some o his own readings to Bouvard and Pcuchet (Pierrot,Mouchard, and Nees ), Pessoa, instead, ingeniously turned his main pre-heteronyms into book-owners. It is this book-assignment strategy, alongwith the underlining, markings, and annotations (by these writing-readers)

taken up into some o their own writings (thus reading-writers), that provethe signicant importance that Pessoa attributed, rom early on, to matterso inuence and evolution within the establishment o a literary lineage.Tis was a practice, though, that rom onward he decided to modiy,to drastically alter. For one noteworthy aspect that arises when we delveinto the private library is the act that, unlike the pre-heteronyms, neitherAlberto Caeiro nor any o the other heteronyms and/or hal-heteronyms(e.g. Bernardo Soares) will become book-owners.Nevertheless, tendency tosymmetry not being the ultimate rule o Pessoas aesthetic conduct, numer-ous instances lead us to question whether the coteries master accessed theshelves o the private library.

In Pioneer Humanists, written by the most represented author in the li-brary (see Barreto ), John Mackinnon Robertson, we read the ollow-ing pencil-marked passage: In his youthul journal he [Edward Gibbon]notes how the reading o one book would open up to him many trains othought (). It is in this book, signed Fernando Pessoa,that we nd apoem with the heading Caeiro. Among the evident questions that may be

raised, those pointing to issues o authorship and literary inuence are oneswe could rst expect. However, i we rerain rom asking in the most cur-sory manner, we soon realize that coming to grips with these matters entailsone prerequisitetrying to elucidate the role o the writing-reader and itsdevelopment as reading-writer. For the semantics o a given marginal note

Figure . Detail rom vol. I, page o William Roger Patons Te Greek Anthology.


4/49


in Pessoas plural library (along with their cross-literary implicationsbeit a poem or an aesthetic appreciation, among others) depend, as we shallobserve, on our contextualization o both the reader who (eventually) writes(the writing-reader) and the writer using the material read or the creationo a new text (the reading-writer).

One thing is straightorward and rather clear: not only were the pre-heteronyms (until ) shaped explicitly rom within the library but in eachcase, at least, one o the books owned had been written under a pseudonym,dealt with problems o attribution and literary imitation, and/or involveddubious authorship. Tus, rom the outset, we are conronted with an aes-thetic mechanism that we shall consider both rom the intertextual sphere

and rom within the poetics o such dialogueand which places Pessoastake on authorship and inuence under re-evaluation.While having basically transcribed the totality o the marginalia (in-

cluding underlining and markings) o both editions o Whitmans Leaves ofGrassextant in Pessoas library, Susan Brown never quite problematized theact that, or some time, Alexander Search was not only the writing-readero Poems byWalt Whitman, but also a subsequent reading-writer. In ,six short notices entitled O que liam os heternimos were published inPblico, a national Portuguese newspaper. In several o these critical pieces,

any case o intertextuality was presented as a direct reading by the hetero-nym in question (Zenith et al. ). Last but not least, in her doctoral the-sis, AMarginaliade Fernando Pessoa, the most extensive study devotedto Pessoas marginalia to date, Maria do Cu Estibeira not only disregardedthe existence o several Pessoan studies on this subject (existing works wereagain unmentioned in ; see Estibeira, Uma perspectiva daMarginaliade Fernando Pessoa n) but ailed to expose the complexities underlyingthe polyphonic instances o marginalia in the libraryneither mentioningthe book-ownership o some early pre-heteronyms (e.g., Lucas Merrick, Da-vid Merrick, and Sidney Parkinson Stool) nor drawing a clear distinctionbetween Pessoa as writing-reader and those writing-readers created by him(e.g., Alexander Search) (see Estibeira, AMarginalia, and ). Pes-soa sets up the pieces, providing a series o implicit rules around which hisliterary concepts are webbeda rich network likely adumbrated when suchrules are ignored and/or misinterpreted.

Te scope o this article is thus twoold: ) to bring to light the act thatthe pre-heteronymic book-ownership and their literary production (the in-

terplay between the writing-reader and the reading-writer) was not basedsolely on intertextual grounds, or the web presents itsel as a rst explora-tion o different notions o authorship (c. ); and ) to gather all thedifferent instances o marginalia and quasi-marginalia involving Caeirowhile touching upon most o them, both rom the standpoint o inuence in


5/49

Ferrari

his works and o the poetics regarding Pessoa and Caeiro and their relation-ship with books (post-early March ).

I. The private library as a source for the creation anddevelopment of certain pre-heteronyms (c. 19011910)

While marks o ownership are the most common and thus perhaps themost insignicant types o marginalia, proprietorship becomes, when en-tering Pessoas library, a eature that needs to be taken into account care-ully. One o the earliest traces o this kind may be ound in William SmithsPrincipia Latina, used when Pessoa attended the th or th standard at the

convent school run by Irish nuns, in the British colony o Durban. On theinside ront cover and ront ylea, written with different ountain pens (butmost likely dating rom the same period) we nd the ollowing inscription:V II MDCCCXCVIII| F Pessoa | Latinbook| Durban | Natal|Africa.Nothing out o the ordinary. And yet, not many years would elapse until thisall-too-orthodox mark evolved into the librarys most unique trait.

A. Pip

One o Pessoas rst literary personalities to ever sign a poem was Pip.Now, on the oldest and most recently published notebook we nd the ol-lowing annotations: Pip secretary and F. Pessoa (secretary) (BNP/E,B-r, v; CadernosI.). Nothing especially outstanding about this un-til we turn to one o the textbooks (used during Form VI, in , but alsoprior to that) and nd the two names on the same ylea (g. ):

Figure . Detail o the verso o the ront ylea o Benjamin Hall Kennedys Te RevisedLatin Primer.


6/49


Mere quaint names? Pure onomastic trials? Most unlikely, particularlywhen we read F Pipsaunderneath F. Pessoa and are almost led to inera jeu de miroirsone o the rst instances where Pessoas splitting o thesubject is so maniest. Asking or the exact reasons why this urge to rag-mentation rst began is an enigma beyond our ken. Nevertheless, what wemay legitimately undertake is to explore its aesthetic mechanism as it actu-ally unolded. And or what is really at issue here the private library mustnot be avoided.

On the preace page o the book just mentioned we read: Pipitus | Pipitos |Pip; urther, on the upper right corner o page , there gures the ol-lowing marginalia: Pipitus, i. (in Kennedy) (Ferrari, Biblioteca ).

Pip is also written Pip. as i it were an abbreviation and may well takeafer the way the names o Latin writers were given throughout the text-book: Hor., Cic., and Verg., to name just a ew. In each o these cases we nd(at least once) the endings penciled by Pessoas own hand: Hor.ace, Cic.eroand Verg.il (in Kennedy ). It may easily be claimed that the name(or nickname) Pip could be a shortened orm o Pessoa, as the two namesco-existing on the same ylea might make us believe. But it is not until weperuse Pessoas readings o those Durban years that we get past this sphereo mere hypothesis. Te protagonist o Dickens Great Expectations, the

young orphan Pip, yearning or a more distinguished liestyle, could be atthe origin o this early pre-heteronym.What is more, the literary associa-tion does not stop here, or the name (or abbreviation) Pip was inscribedon one o the advertising pages o Lamare au diable(see CadernosI.), anovel written by George Sand, the pseudonym o Amandine Aurore LucileDupin (Ferrari, Biblioteca ). Also, this mark (Pip)whether oneo ownership or notin a book published under a nom de plume, as weshall shortly observe, does not seem to have been placed by chance and maybe at the core o one o Pessoas rst models or literary otherness and hisventuring into matters o authorship.

B. David Merrick

Shortly afer Pessoas return to Durban, in (ollowing a yearlong sojournin Portugal), two other literary gures were to step into the scene: David andLucas Merrick. What needs to be said about this pair, besides the ew proj-ects assigned to them and their one or two signed ragmentary writings, is

that each possessed a book. In , David penciled his name (and the date)on the contents page o Information Wanted and other Sketches, by SamuelLanghorne Clemensa book, once again, that had been authored under apseudonym (Mark wain). But this is not the only aspect that should retain


7/49

Ferrari

our attention regarding this book attribution. David, who had been given,among other tasks, the production o Simple ales, owned a book that waswell in accordance with some o his literary practices (BNP/E, v; Ca-dernosI.). It is through this example that we observe the procedure em-ployed or the pre-heteronyms, which could be reduced to the ollowing syl-logism: in order to write a certain piece, I need to own (and read) a book othat genre; I own (and read) a book o that genre; thereore, I write (or couldwrite) a piece within that genre. In short, Pessoas rst conception o an au-thor is, rom the outset, undertaken rom within the libraryrom a plurallibrary. His invented authors are, rst and oremost, writing-readersi.e.,readers who (eventually) write. David Merrick had signed wains book in

and his tasks were to be completed by the summer o (BNP/E,v; CadernosI.). In act, some o his titles (e.g., Te Business Mansale, Te Philanthropist) (BNP/E, v; Cadernos I.) may havebeen inspired by his reading o this book o simple narratives. Te ormer,a tale o bankruptcy, awe and terror, as we read next to the title, quitets the description o the plot o wains Information Wanted: a rich unclehas his money stolen, experiences different kinds o tropical evers, andeventually loses all his investments due to natural disasters (wain );the latter, Te Philanthropist, easily could have been the title or wains

John Chinaman in New York (wain ). But, so ar as we know, thestories were not writtenDavid, the writing-reader, did not evolve intothe reading-writer, i.e., a writer creatively composing rom his particularreading(s).

Tis mechanism or the distribution and actual execution o tasks, as weshall see, was to slowly begin with Charles Robert Anon and to ully developwith a later pre-heteronym, Alexander Search. David owned only one book,did not write the stories assigned, and his projects included a series o di-verse literary genres (poetry, novel, and stories) and a sub-genre (dramaticpoetry), all listed under Books to Come (BNP/E, v; Cadernos I.),which do not all seem to t within the book-ownership system. However,there is a curious writing signed by David Merrick that shows how in Pessoa had begun reecting upon how to establish a lineage o writerssuccessors naturally emerging rom specic elective affi nities, rom read-ings prompting new texts.

Te only critical piece signed David Merrick thus ar ound in Pessoasarchive consists o what appears to be the beginning o a text that opens

with a reerence to the rhythmical prose o the author commented upon(whose name is never revealed) (BNP/E, r;CadernosI.). As orthe method used by David, it is seemingly rooted in his sonorous sensibility.Part o the description o the unknown prosaist stems rom certain words


8/49


organized in a list under the heading Picturesque words, beginning withsa, all extracted rom the Gem Pocket Dictionary(Ferrari, Biblioteca )and written out in a column on the lef margin o the unnished text. Aquick look at this list reveals the generative role o the key terms in some othe descriptions: Never vulgar, never descending to satire, which is some-times worse than coarseness, he yet possessed a delightul gif o sarcasm asarcasm which was not bitter, which was not deep or cruel; yet a sarcasmwhich was essentially telling and undeniably true (BNP/E, r; Ca-dernosI.). On an initial reading one might identiy the author discussedby David with the North American humorist and satirist, Mark wain.However, a particular passage towards the end o the piece might lead to an

author rom a time preceding wain, considered by some the ather o therst great North American novel (Yet great praise does he deserve; scantpraise does he get. Te cloyed minds o modern novel-readers, accustomedat length to the scurried productions o a void generation, cannot appreciateully the psychological matter that is readable in his glittering paragraphs)(BNP/E, r; CadernosI.). Henry Fielding, the English novelist bornin , known or his humor and satirical art, could well be this authoran author whose Te History of the Adventures of JosephAndrews(subtitledWritten in Imitation o Te Manner o Cervantes, Author o Don Qui-

xote) was to be owned by two o Pessoas pre-heteronyms. In short, Pessoasearly literary undertakings seem to be constructed around a questioninginot a redeningo what an author is, or better yet, how he comes into be-ing. And in this redenition we are at the core o some o the Lusitanianslietime concerns: tracing, establishing, and even oreseeing the evolution oa line o writers.

C. Lucas Merrick and Sidney Parkinson Stool

Lucas, a story-writer, appears as one o the ormer owners o FieldingsJo-seph Andrews. We say ormer because his name, along with that o SidneyParkinson Stool, was eventually crossed outPessoas signature being theonly one kept (and most likely initially inscribed). As or the chronologyo the pre-heteronyms ownership, it may be contemporary to one particu-lar list o different short-stories, originally assigned to Lucas Merrick andthen to S[idney] P[arkinson] Stool (BNP/E, r; c. CadernosI.)(Ferrari, Biblioteca ).

Now, the particularity o this comic romance, originally published in, was its diverting rom the accepted popular literature o the time (e.g.,Richardsons Pamela), introducing bawdy humor (an objection to the cur-rent moral and literary aesthetics) and a variety o incidents and characters.


9/49

Ferrari

Some o these eatures, namely the arousal and provocation o laughter aswell as the existence o a wide variety o characters, are explicitly present inthe titles chosen or the ve short-stories. In act, we can say without leadingthe reader astray that two o the titles in the list, Te American Mission-ary and A Rogues Escape (CadernosI.), derived directly rom Field-ings novel. In Book I (the novel is divided into our books and then intochapters), Parson Abraham Adams, afer having been mugged, meets Jo-seph Andrewsan author o several sermonsin a nearby inn (); thethie (also reerred to as a rogue) is brought to the inn but later that nightmanages to escape (, ). Last but not least, this novel not only offered theideas or titles (assigned to Lucas and then to Sidney Parkinson) but the sort

o name a writer o such stories needed to have. Te choice o a noun suchas Stool, with its scatological implications, seems to ollow Fieldings useo comical names, an aesthetic choice present throughout the book (e.g.,Whipwell and Suckbribe, to just name two).

Tis novel was deliberately assigned to the pre-heteronyms by Pessoa orin it, again, there are issues tightly connected with various matters that even-tually became central to the constitution o the heteronymy. Fieldings novelsets out rom some scenes ound in Cervantes Don Quixoteand MarivauxsPharsamon, and it is spiced with allusions to Richardsons Pamela(Ehren-

preis ). In all, Fieldings book is a novel about literature, providing thedenition o genres, reerence to and quotes rom different books, and thecase o a work written under a ctitious name (e.g. noting the scant valueo sermons, unless they come out with the name o Whiteld or Wesley, orsome other such great man, as a bishop or those sort o people) (). Tislatter aspect, namely the signing o a work under a alse name, reects aninterest that Pessoa seems to have emulated while assigning some o thebooks. It is a ction that Pessoas British education had likely taught him all-too-well. I not, why would Charles Robert Anon come to be owner o TePoetical Works of Tomas Chatterton?

We know that Chatterton, a poet rom the eighteenth century, orgedsome o his compositions, attributing them to Tomas Rowleie, a ctitiousBristol cleric born three centuries earlier and whose writings were treatedas genuine by some commentators or a dozen years afer the poets tragicearly death in , aged (Groom ). Te name Tomas Rowley was takenrom a memorial in the church o Saint John-in-the-Wall, Bristol, althoughChatterton adapted the spelling o the name (Rowleie) and took no other

details rom the memorial, so the clerics literary production was a completeinvention. Coleridge, Keats, and Wordsworth are among those who wroteverses in Chattertons memoryand Pessoa (who through Anon would be-gin a lie-long-literary-crusade in a dazzling array o different voices) could


10/49


not but inscribe Anon in this romantic circle o poet-admirers (Ferrari,Inditos ).

In this short period (), most o the pre-heteronyms arise as Pes-soa effusively discovers new readings, i.e., new genres and a great varietyo writers. And it is this heterogeneity that certainly contributed to theirrapidly coming into existence and to their substitution. At this time, unlikewhat shall be one o the conditions sine qua nonduring the heteronymic pe-riod, Pessoa hands down tasks to literary personalities who not only do notdiscuss literature among each other but also lack a thoroughly well-ormedliterary personality. Pessoas initial attempt to cultivate the latter is soughtthrough the creation o various literary affi nities. On the one hand there are

book-owners who are to be inuenced by their readings (their projects aswe have observed above show this), but by the same token the readings arenot taken urtherthe reading-writer is still a gure whose role is ar rombeing developed. But this is no surprise or at this time, i.e., in (aferPip, the Merricks, and Stool) the name o Charles Robert Anon (the mostimportant pre-heteronym until ) shall appear on the same ylea and/or manuscript alongside characters rom the realm o literature. In otherwords, Pessoas conception o what an author is (and at the same time owhat a reader should be within this multiarious literary system) has not yet

attained a clear position, a solid stance.

D. Charles Robert Anon

On the back yleaves o a school textbook we nd the names o the detec-tive-characters Kenyon Fordand Sherlock Holmes along with that oCharles Rob[ert] Anon (see Hall and Knight). Tis was no arbitrary ges-ture or we know that Anon was well acquainted with detective stories (thisdocument is missing; see Lopes II: ). Now Anon, a pre-heteronym whopublished some English verses in a Durban local newspaper (Pessoa [Anon];BNP/E, ar; publication listed in BNP/E, B-r), lef his signaturein several books. On certain occasions, as in the book just mentioned,while there might be a relation (mathematical thinking and the solving oa case in a given detective story, or example), it is not a case o ownership.We also nd non-ownership signatures in the Latin textbook by Kennedy(Ch. R. Anon is written on the back ylea), the one by Milton (on the toplef corner o page o Paradise Lost, B. I. , we read CRA), and

in another textbook, the one edited by Gardiner (CRA appears betweenmaps number and i.e., o England and France, respectively). Again,though not an indication o proprietorship, the presence o Anons namein these three particular books may derive rom certain literary exercises:


11/49

Ferrari

) in a loose bi-olio o an early notebook Charles Robert Anon jots down anadapted metrical model o a Horacian ode (BNP/E, Dv); ) some stan-zas o Anons Ode to the Sea and Ode to the Storm are shaped afer Mil-ton (Ferrari, Fernando Pessoa, pote-lecteur-thoricien); ) Anon wrote inEnglish and at least two verses in French (see Quillier ).Anons namein different parts o those books is a sign that, still in , Pessoa was notsure about his way o handling the construction o a literary heritage.

Te pre-heteronyms previously mentioned (who own books) and theirwork-assignments, though in strict relation with the book-ownership, is notexplored urtherthe lineage-establishment remains embryonic. CharlesRobert Anon will be the turning point. But beore examining such a key

moment, let us rst acknowledge the common eature underlying mosto the authors and/or works that these pre-heteronyms encounter: pseud-onyms, alse names, and imitation. In other words, the chie trait o thisinitial cont(r)act between the pre-heteronyms and the library goes beyondmere intertextual matters. Tis constitutes the very mechanism o a uniqueaesthetic practice, a trait that stands out in the markings and marginalia lefin Woods Te Nuttal Encyclopdia.

It is in this inormative source (signed Fernando and F. A. N. Pessa)where, through a symbol-technique devised by the student-artisan Pessoa

with the intent o differentiating the entries listed, we ace again the oneliterary ascination that continues to appear: notions o authorship and cer-tain nuances that this subject comprises. Next to physicians, economists,jurists, proessors, dramatists, novelists, poets and poetesses, among oth-ers, he writes a cross () (in some cases he even accompanies the crosswith the age o the person when he/she had already passed away). A spiral-like symbol () appears when the names are literary characters, whethermade up, as with Samuel Pickwick () and Sherlock Holmes (), or di-rectly inspired rom real lie, as with Dick urpin (); this symbol alsoappears by anonymous published novels, as withAdam Bede(); by the titleo a romance written partly in Spanish and partly in French by differentromancers rom the feenth century (); by poets descriptive names, as inthe case o the Swan Mantuan, or Virgil (); by the real names o writersand their pseudonyms, as in the case o Dickens () and Tackeray ();by the titles o literary works (, ); by the name o a theory (); and byreligious works (), among others.

Even with a brie inspection o this list, one theme that stands out signi-

cantly is that o authorship and its numerous acets. Bearing this in mindand in order to illustrate the issue more concretely, I wish to quote, almostin ull, one example rom Te Nuttal Encyclopdiathat was also signaledby a spiral:


12/49


Te Marprelate racts: a series o clever but scurrilous tracts publishedunder the name o Martin Marprelate, but which are the work o differentwriters in the time o Elizabeth against prelacy, and which gave rise to great

excitement and some inquisition as to their authorship. ()

Tis case, as others also marked, reveals to what extent, and at what an earlystage, Pessoa had already identied what became one o the principal en-gines o the heteronymy: the multiarious aspects traversing the question oauthorship. And there is more. In the entry or Isaac Bickerstaff, an Irishdramatist o th century, whose name was adopted as a nom de plumebySwif and Steele, it is not irrelevant to add that Pessoa wrote both symbols(). Here a gure rom real-lie, the Irish dramatist Isaac Bickerstaff (?-

?), was dened as someone whose name had been appropriated (used asa pseudonym) by Jonathan Swif and Richard Steele. Te inormation heregiven, though, is not quite exact. As part o a hoax to predict the death othe almanac-maker and astrologer John Partridge, Swif wrote Predictionsor the Year , a letter under the name o Isaac Bickerstaff Esq. publishedin January . Te prank gained so much popularity at the time that Par-tridge was even thought to be dead. A year later, Steele took up the ctitiousIsaac Bickerstaff Esq. and named him as editor o his newspaper, Teatler.Pessoa might not have known these exact details, but what remains doubt-less rom the symbols lef at the margin o this entry is that on the blurryborders between lie and ction (through the issue o authorship) he hadound the possibility o establishing a direct dialogue. Tis is in tune withthe co-existence (on the ylea o a book, as mentioned earlier) o literarycharacter names and the names o pre-heteronyms. But let us illustrate thisthrough another concrete example.

In the Encyclopdiawe nd, on one o its back pages (g. ), CharlesRobert Anons signature alongside that o F. A. n. Pessa and the name

Zuleika. Now Zuleika, a woman o distinguished beauty and represented,among other numerous literary works, in one o Byrons oriental tales, TeBride o Abydos, was an entry in the Encyclopdia(; also see Ferrari,Fernando Pessoa as a Writing-reader ).

It is likely that F. A. n. Pessa and Zuleika (as well as Pro Guikel)

were written around the same time; Anons various signatures may daterom a slightly different period. Nevertheless, they are not to be regarded ascompletely unrelated, or all o these marks show that Pessoas urge towardsmaking real writers is still at this time not entirely alien rom the realm

o literary characters,particularly when we take into account one o lit-eratures richest eaturesre-enactment. In act, as or the origin o Anonsname, which many a critic has attributed to the word anonymous, it maybe traced in the libraryin the way in which Palgrave had rendered the


14/49


anonymity o eleventh-century poets (Anon.) (see Bell , , ,, ).Concerning his rst name, Charles Robert, who in a biographi-cal note states his interest in science (see BNP/E, Cr; CadernosI.),it may come directly rom Darwins (Krabbenhof ).

Pessoas system lies in the potential o re-using gures anew; thus, a lit-erary character (Dickens Pip), anonymous poets (rom Palgraves anthol-ogy), and historical gures (such as Darwin and Alexander the Great) wereto be the ctive and real raw material or the shaping o some o his c-tive but all-too-real writers (e.g., Pip, Charles Robert Anon, and AlexanderSearch). But the trait that ends up bringing dynamism to this system is abook-ownership based on the introduction o different elds and various

genresrom which new works will arise.It is likely that Anons loose signatures precede the three inscriptionso ownership, particularly since two o them were made with his sealC. R. Anon: A Practical Introduction to Latin Prose Composition, byTomas K. Arnold; An Introduction to the Philosophy of Herbert Spencer,by William H. Hudson (seal inscription); and Te Poetical Works of TomasChatterton (seal inscription) (see Ferrari, Biblioteca ). Tis latterbook-ownership, as we mentioned earlier, still shows Pessoas ascinationor a literature crafed around a ctitious-dubious authorship. It is through

Chatterton that the rst example o the reading-writer ully comes into thepicture. Anon, owner o Chattertons works, not only leaves the beginning oa critical piece in the back inside ront cover (see Ferrari, Inditos), but alsowrites Elegy (see BNP/E, B-ra r; Poemas InglesesII.), versesinspired afer o a Friend on his Intended Marriage and An Elegy on theMuch Lamented Death o William Beckord, Esq. (see Chatterton and). Te ormer poem was signed by Chatterton, but the latter, though cred-ited posthumously to him in , is o very doubtul attribution.CharlesRobert Anonwriting about and through Chattertonbecomes Pessoasrst attempt to render dynamic the pre-heteronymic system, a dynamismconstructed rom within the library: the writing-reader (i.e., a writer whoreads to eventually create) nally matures into the reading-writer (i.e., awriter using the material read or the creation o a new text).

E. Alexander Search

By the time the Anon-Search substitution takes place (some poems signed

by Anon, as well as other projects will be attributed to Search), we moverom the ownership o three books and some scattered writings in En-glish (prose and poetry) (c. ) to twenty-ve books in ve differ-ent languages (English, French, Portuguese, Spanish, and Greek) (Ferrari,


15/49

Ferrari

Biblioteca ), as well as to a more prolic production and a moremature reading-writer. It is with this latter pre-heteronym that Pessoa tookurther the direct (dependent) relation between the books owned and thewritings. Now, numerous were the books that Pessoa read and reread dur-ing his lietime. One o them, precisely, was signed by Alexander Searchin December, and happened to be a Greek drama associated withattribution problems: Prometheus Boundby schylus, whose true author-ship has been controversial since the nineteenth century. Tis reveals theact that, when assigning a book, Pessoa never ceased to center solely on itssubject and the personality o the pre-heteronym in question. By means othe pre-heteronym as the owner o a work with authorship problems or with

particularities such as Montagu (an English aristocrat who avoided publish-ing in order to avoid personal attacks and who only allowed her poetry tocirculate, in manuscript orm, within her own close circle), Pessoa deliber-ately creates a mise en abymeo this literary issue.

But let us look at another book that served or several readingsand thus,or different writing-readers and reading-writers, Poems by Walt Whitman. Itwas through this book, along with a notebook dated rom that, in ,Yvette Centeno was able to undo Eduardo Lourenos perplexity regardingPessoas encounter with Whitman (Loureno, Walt Whitman ). In

the notebook, under the letter , we nd the reerence to a work that hadbeen published only a year prior: . rimble (W[illiam] H[eywood]): Walt

Figure . Detail rom the title page o Whitmans Poems by Walt Whitman.With Alexander Searchs signature (A Search) and monogram (AS).


16/49


Whitman and Leaves o Grass (BNP/E, H-v; CadernosII.n.p.). DatedSeptember, and signed Alexander Search (BNP/E, H; CadernosII.n.p.), the notebook might be contemporaneous with the acquisition oPoems, the rst book through which Pessoa, and Alexander Search beorehim, read a selection o the poems o Leaves of Grass.

Tis book, perhaps Pessoas only direct access to Whitman until ,when he acquired a more complete edition o Leaves of Grass, underwentthe ownership and the usage o two different writing-readers and reading-writers: Alexander Search (circa our/ve years) and Pessoa (who kept ituntil his death, but who most likely used it between c. and ). Asa result, the underlining, markings, and marginalia belong both to differ-

ent periods and to different owners. In short, it is a book whose stratiedinterventions amount to a palimpsest to which Brown did not attach dueweight (see Brown appendix B ; c. Ferrari, Fernando Pessoa as a Writ-ing-reader ). Te marginal annotation rue Blake, next to the verseand the running blackberry would adorn the parlours o heaven (),might make us think o Search, as responsible or it, since it reveals an a-nity that could have well caught the romantic-decadents attention and notPessoas (in the other edition o Leaves of Grass this verse is neither com-mented upon nor marked; see Ferrari, Biblioteca ). Moreover, the

poem By the City Dead-House, included in the section Songs o Sex (notpart o Pessoas edition), was marked in Searchs edition. Portraying adecadent atmosphere built upon the dead body o a prostitute and the ruinso the house o madness and sin, Whitmans poem seems to have movedthe rst owner o the book, Search, who marked it and wrote adm[irable]in the margin (). On October , Search signs Epitaph, a poemthat takes up all o the elements employed in By the City Dead-House, butwith a certain twist. It is set by the tomb o a mad poet where, among othermarginal characters o lie, a prostitute will walk (see BNP/E, r tor; Poemas InglesesII.). Search may be proud o not having a teacher(I might be great, yet none to me hath taught) (BNP/E, r; PoemasInglesesII.), but this certainly does not exclude having literary reerencesto take up and develop. And thus, through the library, numerous projectsand writings assigned to Search revolved around his books (literature, lit-erary criticism, politics, sociology, religion, science, cheirosophy, philoso-phy, medical-philosophy, psychology, and occultism), a heterogeneous rela-tion concentrated on intertextual instances that never really step into the

realm o spontaneity, irony, and humor that both Campos and Pessoa, lateron, will show in their take on Walt Whitman. So crucial is the library orthis pre-heteronym that it is with Searchas writing-reader and reading-writerthat some o the central elements or the heteronymic development


17/49

Ferrari

will be dealt with or the rst time: eigning, doubt, echolalia, psychiatricmatters, and historicity, all o them rom within the library.

On May , Pessoa begins to read Nordaus Dgnrescence(BNP/E, B-r; EscritosII.). Searchs initials appear on our different read-ing-notes (quasi-marginalia), reerences to quotes, and/or paraphrased pas-sages (see BNP/E, v, EscritosII.; Pizarro ). For some critics,the borderline o these annotations may not be that cleari.e., it is diffi cultto attribute them always to Search or ) in some cases it seems to be Pessoawho, interrupting himsel in the middle o the phrase, thinks o Search,and adds his initials, or simply adds the initials at a later moment, whilerereading the annotations in the hunt or poetic material related to Searchs

own interests; ) they could be the initials that Pessoa (acquainted withSearchs works) leaves as he nds a Searchian echo in his own reading oNordau. What is true, though, is that some o these reading-annotationswith Searchs initials point to certain literary mechanisms (deepened lateron within the heteronymical system) just mentioned above. One o them hasto do with historicity and re-enactment:

W[agner] ascinated by Wandering Jew.C. Shelley (A[lexander] S[earch])

(BNP/E, v; EscritosII.; Pizarro )

Alexander Searchs initials, placed by Shelleys name, call or an explana-tion. Among the books owned by this pre-heteronym, we nd Te CompletePoetical Works of Shelley(see Pizarro ). Tis is a act Estibeira acknowl-edges, while completely overlooking that Search is the reader who has anno-tated this book.We know that the English Romantic poet was the subjecto one o the Critical Essays Anon had been assigned to write (BNP/E,B-; Miraglia ). His time ran out and the critical essay was never writ-ten; instead, it is Search who, in turn, is given the task o composing both asonnet and an epitaph bearing the English bards name. Te latter gures inat least two different lists o other poetical compositions mostly attributedto Search (see BNP/E, B-r, B-r; Poemas InglesesII., ). NowShelley, author o Te Wandering Jews Soliloquy, Song rom the Wan-dering Jew, and Fragment rom the Wandering Jew (Shelley ), hadtaken up a legendary gure (just like Wagner, as Nordau tells us inDgn-rescence[I.]). Tis was not only known to Search the writing-reader (as

mentioned above, he owned Te Complete Poetical Works of Shelley), butalso to Search the reading-writer, who acknowledged it in what might bean epitaphor rather in the ragment o an epitaphmost likely writtenbetween and :


18/49


Shelley

what wert thou?

Tou wert a madman[.] Is everything said?

Tou wert a madman even a ChristAs roppmann Caesar Shakespeare Lacenaire.(BNP/E, Av)

Comparing Shelley to Christ (and to certain gures o human historywhose livesand deathsled to a posthumous myth about them), Alex-ander Searchs verses (Search had also written epitaphs to/about himsel)shed light on the quasi-marginalia as ar as the reason why his initials were

placed. Like the people mentioned in his epitaph, Search seals his ownmythand thereby accentuates the penchant towards a literary mechanismthat, years later, will become central in the poetics o the heteronymic proj-ect, namely, the re-dening o literature rom the realm o its central gure,the author. It is this that sets Alexander Search apart rom the previous pre-heteronymsa ascination not only with madnessper se, or instance, butor what it contributes to the characterization o a personality. It is not bymere chance then that, unlike Anon, we do not nd Searchs signature cte--ctewith literary characters.

Some ve years beore the rst publication o the Livro do Desassossego,in , Eduardo Loureno reerred to Pessoas literary enterprise as one wo-ven amidst vrias mediaes, considering it the product o a writer whocannot (and should not) be thought o as a creator ex nihilo(Walt Whit-man ). But Pessoa himsel ofen told us this: see, or example, the listo inuences he wrote in a letter to Armando Crtes-Rodrigues (Cartas deFernando Pessoa a Armando Crtes-Rodrigues), that memorable pagethat begins o whom can Caeiro be compared? (BNP/E, ; c. P-ginas ntimas

). Nevertheless, Loureno warns us about the straightor-wardness o some o these Pessoan conessions:

[t]udo parece pois passar-se como se Pessoa no quisesse conessar publi-camentea relao ou liao de Caeiro em Whitman, clamando ostensiva-mente pela simples existncia dos seus poemas whitmanianos essa liaoem relao a Campos [. . .]. Na minuciosa lista das inuncias, j nascidoCampos, esquece-sede mencionar Whitman. Ora nos textos exumados porG. Lind e J. do Prado Coelho [ . . .] Pessoa desloca o seu oco [afer havingmentioned Whitman] para Pascoaes e mesmo para Francis Jammes. (Fer-

nando Pessoa)

Loureno wrote this without previous knowledge o that succinct list o di-erences between Whitman and Caeiro that Pessoa himsel had concludedthus: We are convinced there is no inuence at all (BNP/E, B-r; or


19/49

Ferrari

a ull transcription o this document see Appendix I). It is all as i evincingCaeiros inuences was somewhat problematic or, at least, that it involvedcertain strategies as we may observe in several documents (e.g. BNP/E, and ; c. Pginas ntimas; see also BNP/E, to ; c.Pginas ntimas)more nished writings likely elaborated rom thesuccinct list o differences just mentioned, a direct product o Pessoas read-ing o Walt Whitman: his life and workby Bliss Perry. In act, one o the so-called strategies was the breaking away rom the pattern o book-ownershipand text production. Te ragmentary translators preace written by TomasCrosse (see BNP/E, to ; c. Pginas ntimas), though evi-dently inuenced by Perrys work, no longer needed a recognized source.

In other words, afer (and even more afer the heteronymic eruption inMarch ) Pessoas literary lineage establishment shifstraces o inu-ence becoming subtler, less explicit. For instance, in a loose manuscript dat-ing rom the end o we nd a reerence to Christopher Marlowes A Pas-sionate Shepherd (see BNP/E, v). Moreover, this poem was includedin Te Golden reasury of the Best Songs and Lyrical Poems in the EnglishLanguageselected and arranged by Francis Palgrave (see Palgrave ), a bookpurchased by Pessoa afer . Now, Caeiros O Pastor Amorosocycle, con-ceived in , undeniably echoes Marlowes verses. Yet, within Pessoas sys-

tem, we cannot consider Caeiro a writing-reader o the Elizabethan drama-tist and poet. Te same goes or the case o Sir Philip Sidneys Sheepe inpart XIV o the pastoral novella Te Countess of Pembrokes Arcadia, datingrom (My sheepe are thoughts, which I both guide and serue, appear-ing almost la lettre in Caeiros poem IX (Te sheep are my thoughts)(Sena ). Te explanation is straightorward: Caeiro, in order to be uniqueas Pessoa ofen claimed, could have never received the status o a writing-readerat least o the writing-reader as we know until Search. Even when itcomes down to Shakespeare and Caeiroas Monteiro pointed out, quotinga passage rom Pessoas Rplica ao Dr. Adolo Coelho ()the dramaticpoet is not brought orth when discussing the master.

For some critics this may point to a purposeul omission. But rather thanconcentrating on omissions, on the claim o a masking o inuences, weshould consider certain traces that directly or indirectly take us to certaininterests cultivated by Pessoa in the years preceding the heteronyms.

It must have been around (a year beore Search stopped writingpoetry) that Pessoa began everishly studying and reecting upon the

Shakespeare-Bacon controversy (Pizarro , ). A quick look at the titlesin Pessoas library (see Flor , ), along with some unpublished readingnotes on this very subject, will do to realize how well-documented the Por-tuguese author was (see Castro ). Now, the true authorship o Shake-speare and o Homer(or he also reected on it) both brought up on the


20/49


same page with two historical-mythical gures should not surprise us: inan undated ragment, Shakespeare, que toda a gente, and the impes-soal Homer co-exist with Jesus and Buddha (BNP/E, D-r; Livro doDesasocego II.)all o them gures in which biography and myth areintertwined. At times Pessoa works with pairsmirrors. One must note aswell that this interest around biography and myth cannot be altogether de-tached rom the cessation o book-ownership. Te intellectual affi nities othe pre-heteronyms were explicit, which is something that prevails with theheteronyms but under a different poetic mechanism. One explanation orthis alteration, one which needs a thorough study o its own, may be oundin some o the readings and writings regarding the authorship question.

owards the end o the nineteenth century Shakespeares works becameattributed to Francis Bacon. A ew decades later, around the beginning o Pessoa most likely purchased the Philosophical Works of Francis Bacon.Whether acquired or the sole purpose o the authorship question or not, themarkings and annotations show that the reading exceeded it. In the endpa-per o the book we read: stage-playing. Tis type o note was the sorto reminder-index (page number | theme) that Pessoa was used to leavingin his most consulted books, particularly when they proved to be a reliablesource o inormation or an ongoing and/or uture project. Upon turning

to page , we nd ourselves at the end o Chapter IV o De AugmentisScientiarum, a chapter dealing with the training o the aculties o the mind.Starting off with the description o the art o transmitting knowledge, bothrom its critical and its pedagogical aspects, Bacon brings orth (or the caseo the ormer) the role o writing and reading books, and stage-playing(or the case o the latter). It is by the pedagogical aspect that Pessoa leavesa penciled, vertical bar:

[S]tage-playing: an art which strengthens the memory, regulates the tone

and effect o the voice and pronunciation, teaches a decent carriage o thecountenance and gesture, gives not a little assurance, and accustoms youngmen to bear being looked at. (Bacon )

Tis passage is ollowed by an anecdote that Bacon takes rom acitus.It deals with Vibulenus, rst an actor and then a soldier, who, through hisacting skills makes himsel credible and thus succeeds in duping his oppo-nents. Needless to mention is the eature that must have struck Pessoa whilereading this. It will not be amiss to underscore here the more subtle elements

in this passage connected to one o the devices that Pessoa worked on mostwhile developing his heteronyms: tone and effect o voice and assurance(Bacon ). As or voice (in poetics we could translate this as style), it isprecisely one o Pessoas highest merits, both aesthetically and critically atwork throughout the coterie. Not only will each heteronym have specic


21/49

Ferrari

intellectual interests, but each one, particularly the poets, will express themthrough a specic verse rhythm. As or assurance, through which Baconmeans bearing to be looked at, we could say that it is exactly what Pessoasheteronyms (unlike the pre-heteronyms) all possessa capacity o bearingthe public, i.e., o being able to consciously expose themselves to the outerworld. And how does Pessoa accomplish this? By having the heteronymssparsely interact with one another through literary discussions, by havingthe heteronyms criticize one another, by having the heteronyms publish (attimes even in the same literary magazines), by recognizing Caeiro as themaster o the coteriea gure in whom the heteronyms (as well as Pes-soa) will nd a reerence and inspiration. Unlike with the pre-heteronyms,

where books were a prerequisite or creation, in this later stage, the non-explicit dialogue with the library stems rom the vassalage the heteronymsand the orthonym pay to Caeirotheir only master and uneducated poet.With Caeiro at the center, both the roles and constitutions o the writing-reader and the reading-writer undergo a re-evaluation. In all, the possibilityo judging these two gures rom the manuscripts alone is rather limited,or Pessoa seems to have girded himsel or the tackling o what became hisown authorship problem. And or such a matter the act/art o reading hadto be reconsidered.

II. Some instances of Caeiro in Pessoas books

Ricardo Reis reers to Caeiro as somebody who was quasi ignorante daslettras (BNP/E, ; c. Pginas ntimas), thereby undoubtedly con-tributing to Pessoas myth o having a master ree o inuences. What shouldbe said immediately is that, rom the beginning, Pessoa seems to have wantedto establish a strong intellectual lineage or both his pre-heteronyms andheteronyms; however, the way in which it was accomplished ended up beingalmost opposite. From the outset, the pre-heteronyms leave marks on thepages read while in Durban and during the rst our/ve subsequent yearsin Lisbon; urthermore, it may be possible to trace materially not only someo their works but also their interests. Searchs weakness or madness, as wehave briey discussed through his poetry, is also illustrated by the owner-ship o at least our books on psychiatric matters (see Ferrari Biblioteca). In the case o the heteronyms (and in the our or ve years prior tothem, e.g., Vicente Guedes and Antonio Mora), writings and affi nities will

not require de acto ownership o books. Tus, at least or what took placeafer , and particularly rom March onward, it is as i Pessoa hadincreased the spotlight on Caeiro and his striking inuence on his disciples.Now, Caeiros position regarding his reading behavior is bluntly stated (seepoem XII, or the very last, XLIX, in OGuardador de Rebanhos). In poem


22/49


XXVIII, or instance, he tells us how the reading o a mystical poet (clearlymeaning eixeira de Pascoaes) makes him laugh. Also, when in poem III hementions a ervent reading o Cesrio Verdes book, in the ollowing verseshe divulges his pity towards him.It is as i Caeiro had ound in Pascoaesand Verde his anti-models (Quillier ; or a critic on the ormer see alsoFeij, A constituio dos heternimos et seq.). Tis is an attitude that,curiously enough, reminds us o the very image that Whitman, the man,pretended to make or himsel: Numa recenso do seu livro apensa a Folhasde Erva, Walt Whitman pretende que nunca requentou homens de letras,nem leu nada. Exactamente como Caeiro evocado por lvaro de Campos(Loureno, Walt Whitman ). In his Walt Whitman: his life and works,

Perry tells us that the North American poet took actual inormation downrom his readings. On the other hand, Caeiro did not have a notebook to doso; even i he did, he would never have taken such notes, as Pessoa writesthrough his reading o Perry (see BNP/E, B-v; in Annex I).

Interestingly enough, in the closing stanza o the very rst poem o thecycle, Caeiro greets all those who will read him. Reading as well as reerenceto writers (whether explicitly or not) are part o his Guardador; neverthe-less, Tomas Crosses translators ragmentary preace tells us that Caeirocomes apparently out o nothing, more completely out o nothing than any

other poet. Te one Portuguese poet whose inuence he supposes himsel tobe under is so remote rom him both in quality and strength o inspiration,that it is idle to do more than say so (BNP/E, ; c. Pginas ntimas). In another piece, afer distinguishing Caeiro and Whitman vis--vis nature and their way o apprehending it, the translator states: Whitmanhas really a sense o metrical r[h]ythm; it is o a special kind, but it exists.Caeiros rhythm is noticeably absent. He is so distinctly intellectual, that thelines have no wave o eeling rom which to derive their rhythmical move-ment (BNP/E, ; c. Pginas ntimas ). Tis very reection maybe traced to those notes that Pessoa, the reading-writer, had taken throughhis contact with Perrys work. By now, the Pessoan system has turned itsocus rom the library; Crosse will write about Caeiro, but shall not quotethe sources that serve him or the critical introduction o his translation.Te English public to whom Caeiro will be presented is to encounter noveltywithout precedence. Bearing this in mind, though, what status shall we as-sign to Caeiros name as it appears in several books in Pessoas library?

One thing is certain: none o the name instances are on a ront y-lea,

title page and/or contents page. Rather, it is atop a set o verses quoted inthe introduction to Poems by Walt Whitman, where the North Americanpoet best expresses his universalist creed, that Pessoa notes: explanationor Caeiros (g.; also see Ferrari, Fernando Pessoa as a Writing-reader):


23/49

Ferrari

Beore turning to the meaning o this marginal annotation, let us tracehow these verses reappear in O Guardador de Rebanhos. From the sectionBy the Roadside entitled I Sit and Look Out, we immediately recognizeCaeiro, the grand spectator o his surroundings, who, in the opening opoem I, appears sitting down, merely contemplating nature without intend-ing to interpret it. Moreover, i we pay close attention to the marginalia, we

observe that Pessoa writes by the reproduction in the introduction othe key verses o poem LI o Song o Mysel: Do I contradict Mysel? |Very well then I contradict mysel, | (I am large, I contain multitudes.). It isregarding this aspectinherent to Caeiros mechanismsthat Pessoa com-ments on how Caeiro (the apologist or no-thinking) explains and rational-izes his eelings: Embora parea espontanea, cada sensao [in Caeiro] explicada (BNP/E, r; Sensacionismo). Caeirojust like the poeto Leaves of Grassbuilds his poetry upon contradictions. Tus, Pessoasmarginal annotation may be read in the ollowing manner: explanation or

Caeiros [contradictions]. So signicant is Whitman or the ormation oCaeiro that even the number o poems (in the most complete index preparedor O Guardador deRebanhos) takes us straight to the edition extant inthe library. On a loose manuscript, at the bottom o the page, we read (tryto reach , or, at the very least, ) or (BNP/E, r; Sensacionismo

Figure . Detail rom page o Whitmans Poems by Walt Whitman.


24/49


), practically the number o poems that makes up Song o Mysel inthat particular edition ( poems). Last but not least, like Caeiros poems,Whitmans were untitled and divided by roman numerals.

Only time and more research will tell what value the connections justintroduced may hold; what seems rather obvious however is that Pessoasallusion(s) to Caeiro in any o the books rom his library will not be lim-ited to an intertextual commentary, or much more, as we shall observe, isconstantly at stake. It is Pessoa, beore the acquisition o the other edition oLeaves of Grasson May , who makes such a comment. With this ges-ture, more than unveiling a source, more than telling us that it is in Whit-man that he ound a ground upon which to build his Caeirohe is, rather,

setting a distance between himsel and the heteronymy. Here Pessoa ap-pears as someone who, knowledgeable o Caeiros works (a reader, just likeourselves), nds in Whitman a particular explanation. In other words, it isas i through a cross-reading reerence Pessoa had arrived, in those versesby Whitman regarding contradiction, at a better understanding o one oCaeiros somewhat hidden mechanismscontradiction. It is when we turnto the other Caeiro instance in this book (perhaps the rst one that tookplace)that this interpretation gains, i not a certain credibility, the compo-nent o detachment to which I just alluded.

In the best Borgesian way, Pessoa, connoisseuro Caeiros poetry, ndsCaeiro as a orerunner o Whitman. When he writes Caeiro,that is tosay, la manire deCaeiro, it is as i Whitman had been a reader o themestre, as i the poet rom Huntington could have somehow known thatpoem written in Portugal on October , whose inuential verses readthus: Acceito as diffi culdades da vida porque so o destino, | Como acceito

Figure . Detail rom page o Whitmans Poems by Walt Whitman. (Also see Brown, c. appendix B ).


25/49

Ferrari

o rio excessivo no alto do inverno| Calmamente, sem me queixar, comoquem meramente acceita, | E encontra uma alegria no acto de acceitar|No acto sublimemente scientico e diffi cil de acceitar o natural inevitavel(BNP/E, r; c. Poemas de Alberto Caeiro). When Pessoa writes thatWhitman is the poet Caeiro resembled most, he also adds that even a-ter Whitman, C[aeiro] is strange and terribly, appa[l]lingly new (BNP/E,; c. Pginas ntimas). I Fernando Pessoa is not shifing the sphereso inuence hereas the marginalia may make us believehe is, at least,preparing the battleground or a air and equal conrontation.

On the one hand, Whitman is absent rom the list o inuences Pes-soa sent to Crtes-Rodrigues, as Loureno wrote, but when publicly men-

tioned alongside the name o Caeiro, it is always within the scope o com-parison where the mestreit goes without sayinggets the better hand. Inthe second part o Apontamentos para uma Esthetica No-Aristotelica,where Campos qualies Whitmans poems as assombrosos, Caeiros aresaid to be mais que assombrosos (Pessoa [lvaro de Campos] ). Evenwhen Pessoa admits Whitmans imprint on Caeiro (He resembles Whit-man most) (BNP/E, ; c. Pginas ntimas), it is done through thesubtlety o deviation. Tis is an affi liation that Pessoa never comes to recog-nize ullybut why? asked Loureno unabashedly. Simply because Caeiro

representa, por assim dizer, uma vitria to excessiva que nela se esquece oadversrio, enquanto que Campos nos mostra o combate em vias de reali-zao (Loureno, Fernando Pessoa). Tis removal o the adversary awayrom the spotlight is hinted at within the library. Te marginal annotationinscribed in Paradoxes Psychologiquesby Max Nordau (see Pizarro , ),where an allusion to Caeiro is made (C. | Caeiro.), contributes in a likemanner to an analysis o Pessoas readerly ormulae as used in the masterscanon ormation.

Dealing with the idea that thinking is the source o all our mistakes,Nordaus words remind us directly o Caeiros philosophy, o the ounda-tions o his novelty: his objectivity. Once again Pessoa, the cross-reerence-reader, nds in the Hungarian thinker a point o comparison. Trough thismarginal note, Pessoa tells himsel (and us, ulterior readers) how to readCaeiro. It is as i he were writing about him and quoted Nordau in order toelucidate the meaning o one o the poems that best presents Caeiros phi-losophy (e.g., poem X).

In these marginalia (in Whitman and in Nordau), Pessoa could well

have written or Caeiro or simply Caeiroas a quick reminder or laterutilization. Instead he leaves the very marks that we, uture readers, mightleave. Pessoa writes the marginalia that we might jot downor better yet,by writing explanation or Caeiros, Caeiro, and C. | Caeiro he in-stills in us, readers o Caeiros writings, (new) ways to approach the coteries


26/49

Figure . Detail rom page o Max Nordaus Paradoxes psychologiques.


27/49

Ferrari

master. Tis same thrust regarding Pessoas explanation o Caeiros writingsoccurs on the dustcover o one o Robertsons books, Te Baconian Heresy:a confutation (BNP/E, B-r; Pizarro and Ferrari; c. Lopes II. andZenith ).

Signed Fernando Pessa, TeBaconian Heresymight have been a book

bought around the time o the heteronymic eruption and in relation to theShakespeare question. Tis ragment displays a series o notes where Pes-soa, besides enumerating Caeiros three innovations, writes about Caeiroscontradictions, adding that he (Caeiro) has oreseen the critics aware-ness o them. Here, unlike the previous examples, Pessoa is not perorm-ing a cross-reerence but rather elaborate literary criticism. He becomes areading-writer in a way that had not been done during the pre-heteronymicperiod: the reading-writer here opens a web o interconnections springingto and rom Caeiro. Te library becomes a stage or literary discussion. Te

uniqueness o this piece is that Pessoa, or the benet o his argument, willquote one o the oldest poems rom the Guardadorcycle. In this manner, heintroduces one o Caeiros most subjective poems, all as i it were unrelatedto the reading o Robertson. Unrelated, or it is Pessoa who quotes Caeiro on

Figure . Detail rom the dustcover o John Mackinnon Robertsons Te Baconian Her-esy: A Confutation.

Caeiro has created

() a new sentiment o Nature

() a new mysticism() a new simplicity, which is neither

a simplicity o aith, nor a simplicity

o sadness (as in Verlaines case) nor a

simplicity o abdication rom thought

and . Much as he likes to prove his

irrationalism, he is a thinker and a

very great thinker.

Nothing is so ennobling as this

aith that declares the senses superior

to the intellect, that speaks o intellectas o a Disease.

He has contradictions very slight,

but he is conscious o all o them

and has orewarned his critics. His

c[ontradicti]ons are o kinds: () in

his thought, () in his eeling, () in

his poetical manner.


28/49


the dustcover and not Caeiro who directly writes the marginalia (BNP/E,B-v; c. Poemas Completos de Alberto Caeiro).

Clearly, numerous passages marked throughout Te Baconian Heresyapply to Caeiro. One o them is where Robertson reminds us how Jonson,Drayton, Milton, and Digges did not detect any scholarly knowledge inShakespeare; or them, in Robertsons words, his writings did not demon-strate any hint o learning (). Furthermore, Robertson touches uponamous writers whose biographies were unknown or known only scantily

(e.g., John Lilly, Tomas Dekker, and Tomas Heywood), acts that surelydid not escape Pessoa. Te case o Spencer, whose lack o biography is mostsignal (), and that o Cervantes, the most amous writer o Spain,whose record is just as scanty (), are the passages actually marked andmay have been relevant elements or Moras introduction to Caeiro (seeBNP/E, A-, ; c. Lopes II: ). But just like Crosse, Morain orderto write about Caeirowas not turned into a book-owner. It is as i throughtheir readings o Caeiro they had access to the vast corners o literatureaparadoxical access or the mestrewho supposedly never read.

Te critical piece conceived on the dustcover is deeply engrained in thephilosophy o Francis Bacon. According to Pina Coelho, Bacon was one othe rst philosophers who initiated a more systematic explanation o thenoetic problem; he thus sees a direct connection between Bacon and Caeiro:como F[rancis] Bacon, Caeiro aspira a uma libertao interior de todos os

Figure . Detail rom the dustcover o John Mackinnon Robertsons Te Baconian Her-esy: A Confutation.

Tere in thought are almost none,but such as they are, he explains

this way:Estas canes, escrevias estandodoente. | Agora caram escriptas eno *allo mais nellas | Gozemos,se pudermos, a n[ossa] doena, |Mas nunca lhe chamemos sade, |Como os homens azem.|

O deeito dos homens no seremdoentes: |

chamarem sade sua doena, |E por isso no buscarem a cura |Nem realizarem o que sade edoena.


29/49

Ferrari

preconceitos, de tudo o que impea uma viso ntida e gratuita das coisas(). In act, it is this ability to understand without preconceptions thatunderlies the three innovations Pessoa laid out on the dustcover. It is a newunderstanding that Pessoa, as literary critic, comes to grasp in light o thisparticular reading.

Figure . Detail rom the inside back cover o John Mackinnon Robertsons PioneerHumanists.


30/49


But Pessoa takes Caeiros instances in the library even urther. Withoutdescriptive acts about Caeiros lie, he ingeniously nds a way to inscribehim in the history o mankind. Upon a title as inviting as Robertsons Pio-neer Humanistshe will have his master summarily seal his voice.

Caeiro

Gosto do ceu porque no creio que elle seja innito.Que pode ter comigo o que no comea nemacaba?No creio no innito, no creio na eternidade.Creio que o espao comea numa parte e numa parte acabaE que aquem e alem disso ha absolutamente nada.Creio que o tempo tem um principio e ter um m,E que antes e depois disso no havia tempo.Porque ha de ser isto also? Falso allar de innitosComo se soubessemos o que so ou os pudessemos entender.No: tudo uma quantidade de cousas.udo denido, tudo limitado, tudo cousas.

Tough different than the other instances where Pessoa, the reading-writer, makes reerences to Caeiro (both in the marginalia and quasi-marginalia), here Caeiro seems to be responsible or the book intervention,

which most likely occurred afer September .Yet the aesthetic thrustas such does not lack complexity, or when we consider it careully it isar rom being unequivocal. rue, the poem ashions a solid explanationo Caeiros own philosophy and vehemently exudes sel-consciousness; itstrengthens what Loureno said decades ago, that Caeiro is the author oPessoas most intellectual poems (Fernando Pessoa ); it echoes someverses written on November in which Caeiro brings orth his apolo-getic liking, expressing a voice conscious o itsel (). Apparently spon-

taneous and simple, these verses also t the denition put orth by Reis re-garding some o Caeiros poems:

rigorosamente unicados por um pensamento philosophico que no s oscoordena e concatena, mas que, ainda mais, prev objeces, antev criticas,explica deeitos por uma integrao delles na substancia spiritual da obra.Assim, dando-se Caeiro por um poeta objectivo, como , ns encontramol-o,em quatro das suas canes, exprimindo impresses inteiramente subjecti-vas. (BNP/E, ; c. ObraPotica)

And there is more. When we skim through the pages o Pioneer Humanists,we soon recognize the relevance o numerous markings: [ . . . ] the logicalorm is only the last renement o eeling: it is the determined reduction toreasoned statement o eelings whereo the entire sincerity can be provedin so ar only as they can be shown to be logically consistent ()said


31/49

Ferrari

about Edward Gibbon, a man against theories (). Concerning Gibbon,Robertson adds: movements should be as that o a man lightly clad, ree inall his limbs, the lie dening itsel continuously to the watching eye (),while he reers to Carlyle in the ollowing manner: [. . .] the need to eelthat he saw truth intuitively [. . .] (). Caeiros diffi cult task o unlearn-ing(see poem XLVI) consists also o the ontological discourse that, thoughpresented as spotless amidst its effulgence, does not arise without a trace;or instance, when we read the marginal annotation (um Deus innito impereito (?) | alm do bem e do mal) above the poem in Robertsons book,we think o Nietzsche, an author who the English critic had paraphrased inhis opening page on Spinoza as one o those men who could transcend the

spell o inheritance and reach [. . .] a new valuation (). Tis very passage,underlined in pencil, should be kept in mind as we read the ollowing mar-ginal annotation, written (also in pencil) on the other back y-lea o PioneerHumanists: A leitura no ensina seno para no ensinar. All o this adds towhat Loureno rst pointed out and what Gusmo later recognized as beingan operational necessity, namely, the distinction between what Caeiro isand what he says he is (Gusmo ), which amounts to a mise en abymeothe heteronymic system itsel.

Tat the inuence o this book has spurred thought or these verses is

evident; yet the poems main drive is not to describe, prove, evoke, cajole,or move any o the evidences just listed above: its inclusion in this specicbook should not be solely interpreted as another affi nity and/or inuence.It is much more complex and yet so straightorward; just like in the quasi-marginalia example quoted above, Pessoa, the reading-writer, transcribesa poem by Caeiro. And in so doing, i.e., by placing the poem at the veryend o Pioneer Humanists, he claims that the mestreis the last one o sucha lineageas natural o an evolution as the one Pessoa jotted down whilereading Perry: Blake Whitman Caeiro (BNP/E, B-c; see Annex I).

A Final Note and Caveat

In an essay entitled Te Disadvantages o Education, written in andsigned F. Pessa, we encounter the ollowing passage: Te principal dis-advantage o modern education is its tendency to suppress original thought.He states urther: A man accustomed to read, but not to think, will onlysee hal the meaning o a book; to the man who looks well on nature no

book ought to seem as i he could not write it. | What makes the differencebetween two mens ways o expressing their thoughts is their different char-acters [. . .]. At the top, by the title, written a ew years later, the ollowingremark: Stupendous Nonsense | A[lexander] S[earch] (BNP/E, A-to ). Not only do we have the pre-heteronym as reader (and laconic critic


32/49


o a piece written by Pessoa) but the very elements around which the drama-em-gentewill revolve (and evolve) as well, viz., inuence, originality, andcharacterall seen rom different perspectives.

As David Jackson has stated: [t]he rewriting and rethinking o Westernliterary traditions in the work o Fernando Pessoa involves the question ogenre as much as it does that o personality and authorship (). Pessoasplural marginalia (and quasi-marginalia) represent, indeed, an empiricalcorpus, i not o a new genre, then o a sub-genre in literature, where ques-tions regarding the rupturing and the disruption o the subject, authorship,literary inuence and the establishment o a lineage may be examined in anew light. For not only did Pessoa writepre- and heteronymically, but he

also readpre-heteronymically. As or reading heteronymically, we have ob-served specic mechanisms in Pessoas dynamic system that invite critics toreconsider certain affi rmations such as those ound in the article entitled Oque liam os heternimos (see Zenith et al.). For Caeiros relationship withbooksan avoidance o explicit appropriation (and thus domestication)ishere paradigmatic. As or Camposs and Reiss (and not in a lesser degreeo importance, Soaress, Moras, Baldayas, eives and Crosses), the subjectremains to be urther studied.

What I have attempted to accomplish here has been the gathering o a

marginalia-corpus, the laying out o a brie analysis o intertextuality andthe constant presence o a subtler poetic schema that underlies and exceedsitall in order to explore and chart, rom a different angle, the very gradualprocess towards heteronymy and the porous ramications o its complexity.I we ask the ollowinghow does Pessoas concept o heteronymy unctionand under what rules (or set o rules) has it been ormed?we are inexo-rably orced to reect upon it (also) rom the humbler (but never inactive)role o Pessoa, the reader, and thereby o the writing-reader(s) and reading-writer(s). Our coming to grips with the evolution o this ormer gure aswell as with the output o the latter may elucidate key aspects o Pessoasmultiarious literary system that manuscripts alone do not (and cannot)necessarily expose.

Notes

. Parts o the Caeiro section are drawn rom examples I delivered at theAvatars(Person, Heteronyms, Pseudonyms) Tird Annual Graduate Student Conference ofthe Department of Comparative Literatureat Stanord University on April .A brie note on the reerential system used in this article to cite Pessoa and to listthe books in his library: today, Pessoas books, magazines, and newspapers are to be


33/49

Ferrari

ound in ve different places in Lisbon; hence, the archive number or each item ispreceded by one o the ollowing abbreviations in order to indicate its location:

CFP: Casa Fernando Pessoa.BNP/E: Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal, Esplio (National Library o Portugal/Ar-chive ).MN: Manuela Nogueira, Pessoas niece (daughter o Pessoas hal-sister, HenriquetaMadalena).LMR: Lus Miguel Rosa, Pessoas nephew (son o Pessoas hal-sister, HenriquetaMadalena)MFC: Miguel Freitas da Costa, grandson o Pessoas cousin (Maria Madalena Nogueirade FreitasMrio Nogueira de Freitas sister).

Jernimo Pizarro, Antonio Cardiello, and I have co-directed the digitalization

o Fernando Pessoas private library, available on-line since October (http://casaernandopessoa.cm-lisboa.pt/bdigital/index/index.htm). Te paper publica-tion oA Biblioteca Particular de Fernando Pessoa(), which accompanies thesite, gathers in one volume all o the books, magazines, and newspapers that were inPessoas possession at the time o his death on November . Lastly, as or citingPessoa, I always offer both the BNP number and a reerence to where that text hasrst been published; when the two cited texts differ in some way (e.g., orthography)I use c. to denote the discrepancy.

. Antnio Feij () attributes Pessoas nal phrase to the inuence o Hor-

aces Ode IX : Quid sit uturum cras, uge quaerere [. . .] [Do not ask whattomorrow may bring].

. Te description o Zarathustra by Friedrich Anton von Hellwald in his Cul-turgeschichte in ihrer natrlichen Entwicklung bis zur Gegenwartserved Nietzscheor outlining the protagonist (character-concept) in his philosophical novel (seeDIorio ).

. In the introduction to Reading Notes, a Variantsnumber dedicated to vari-ous literary and non-literary matters connected to marginalia, Dirk Van Hulleand Wim Van Mierlo draw a distinction between two classes o book annotatorswriting readers and reading writers: Te rst category o readers does not use itsnotes directly to produce a new text, but this should not mean that writing readersare less active than reading writers (). In the present article I employ both terms,the ormer though (besides Hulles and Mierlos connotation, i.e. readers who mark,underline and/or annotate a book) also carrying another meaning. Te denitionand distinction between the writing-reader and the reading-writer, as used here,will be explained below and throughout sections I and II. Note: in the article en-titled Fernando Pessoa as a Writing-reader(see Ferrari), writing-reader is an en-compassing term or writing reader and reading writer according to Hulles andMierlos denition.

. Since the publication o Pizarro, Ferrari, and Cardiello, three other books havebeen ound and a ourth one is under reconsideration: History of Ancient Philoso-

phy, by A. W. Benn ( MFC); History of Modern Philosophy, by A. W. Benn (MFC); Histria da Revolta do Porto, by Joo Chagas and Coelho Manuel Maria( MFC). Tese volumes are digitally available (see note ). Te ourth book inquestion is Te Importance of Being Earnest, by Oscar Wilde, initially listed by Gal-


34/49


hoz () and later erroneously catalogued in (see Ferrari, Fernando Pessoaas a Writing-reader ). Tough this book has no marginalia (only Pessoas hal-sisters signature on page , H[enriqueta] Rosa), a recent document ound in the

small archive kept by Pessoas heirs (a telegram dated June sent to A. VictorLopes by Te Incorporated Society o Authors Playwrights and Composers) mightlead us to believe that Te Importance of Being Earnestcould have been part o Pes-soas private library. Te book is part o Manuela Nogueiras private collection andwill shortly be part o Pessoas digital library.

. Pessoan critics have tacitly agreed that the literary personalities preceding theheteronymic eruption (early March ) are to be called pre-heteronyms. However,the term alls short i we accept that the Portuguese poet developed the rudimentso his heteronyms through them. Te term pre-heteronym (never used by Pessoa)

turns its ocus onto the timerame o ormation but carries with it as well a sort odetachment rom the process itsel. In other words, it creates a cleavage betweenwhat took place in early March and what gradually developed up to that point.And this (as I try to show through Pessoas distinctive relation with the library) wasnot the case. Te denition o this term, which exceeds the scope o this article,needs to bring orth the slow, dynamic process involved in Pessoas pathway to theheteronymic construction. For instance, Pip, Eduardo Lana, and Dr. Pancrciocannot receive the same status (as I show in the article) as David Merrick, LucasMerrick, and Sidney Parkinson Stool. I use the word main in order to distinguishthe ormer group rom the latter. According to Pedro da Silveira, the act that Edu-ardo Lana has a biography gives him a different status: mais conta da biograaque dos versos, indierenveis dos do Dr. Pancrcio (). Yet as I show in sectionI, the handling o the private library will be key or the status that critics may wantto assign to each literary personality beore the emergence o the heteronyms. Inact, it will become clear that even the adjective main is too general or thereare pronounced eatures that differentiate the development o the Merricks romthat o Anon, or instance, or between Anons rom Searchs. Troughout the ar-ticle I shall employ the term pre-heteronym to designate the main pre-heteronyms,i.e., those ctional writers created by Pessoa who had a relationship with books.

Last but not least (and on a different line), uture work on the categorization othe pre-heteronyms should not disregard Carlos Reiss take on Fradique Mendes asuma entidade de perl heteronmico, a personalidade proto-heteronmica, andas someone characterized by a dimenso pr-heteronmica (, ). I owe thereerence o this article to Jorge Uribe; the passage on Pancrcios biography I oweto Lus Prista.

. Although two books were offered to lvaro de Campos (in , Se Gil Vi-cente Voltasse . . . and, in , Te Encyclopaedia of Wit), Pessoa was not the onemaking the offer (see Ferrari, Biblioteca ). In April , a book was offered to

Fernando Pessa and to the three heteronyms (Alvaro de Campos, RicardoReis, and Francisco Caeiro (see ront ylea o book by Martins). Now why didthe author o this book call Caeiro Francisco and not Alberto? Did he have inmind Saint Francis o Assisi (So Francisco de Assis in Portuguese)? (Note thatin a handwritten document where the main purpose is to sketch the differencesbetween Caeiro and Whitman, Pessoa compares Caeiro with Saint Francis o As-


35/49

Ferrari

sisi.) See BNP/E, B- a c; or a ull transcription o this document see AnnexI. In July o another book was offered to Fernando Pessoa and to the threeheteronyms (see title page o book by Dias). It should also be pointed out that be-

sides Caeiro (whose instances in the library are the subject o this articles secondsection) there was an inscription in Portuguese signed Campos (Silva ) on theback ylea o a now missing bookA History of English Literature, by Edward Jer-myn Mathew (). Judging this type o mark without the availability o the sourcewould leave us on completely hypothetical terrain. Let us recall that Campos doesappear as a critical reader o Pessoas O Marinheiro (see BNP/E, ; Pessoa[Campos] ). Last but not least, the verses that Reis wrote underneath a ew trans-lations rom the Greek Anthology(see BNP/E, ; Poemas deRicardo Reis,) should be considered Reiss own quasi-marginalia (or an explanation o this

term see note ) due to the act that the classical heteronym had been assigned thetask o translating a selection o this anthology (see BNP/E, A-; Mega Ferreira). Tis would show an entirely different handling vis--vis Caeiros relationshipwith books, which will be discussed thoroughly in section II.

. On September , Pessoa wrote to Crtes-Rodrigues inorming him o thealteration o his last name (see Cartas).

. I borrow this term rom George Whalley, the rst editor o Coleridges com-plete marginalia: Quasi-marginalianotes written by Coleridge in a notebook oron separate sheets o paper, o a kind that might well have been written in the bookthey reer to i it had been convenient or appropriate or him to do so. Tese typi-cally include the title o the book reerred to and page-reerences (: I.xxxi).

. Te symbol | should be understood as a change in line. For the transcrip-tions o the marginalia we have ollowed the symbols used by the critical editiono Fernando Pessoa published by the Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda(INCM): blank space; * conjectured reading; / / passage doubted by author; illeg-ible word; < > autograph segment crossed out; < > / \ substitution by overwriting( /substitute\); < > [] substitution by crossing out and addition inthe in-between line above; [ ] addition in the in-between line above; [ ] additionin the in-between line below; [] addition in the same line. When Pessoa underlines

a word/phrase he writes it will be reproduced in italics.. Silveira () published the poem entitled Os Ratos (signed Pip.)

dated March (BNP/E, v).. F Pips[ a]. Great Expectations, listed among other books that we know Pessoa read and/

or that are still extant in his library, appears check-marked on the advertisementpage or works published in the Nelsons Classics collection (see Bentley ).

. Marks o proprietorship were usually written on the ront ylea and/or titlepage. In this book, considering the act that Pessoas signature (F. A. L. N. Pessoa)

(see CadernosI.) also appears on another advertising page, the signature Pipcould also be interpreted as a mark o ownership. As or the L. in this signa-ture, did Pessoa have in mind his hal-brothers name, Lus Miguel, born in January? In any case, it may well be one o Pessoas rst instances o name play.

. wains sarcasm as expressed throughout Information Wanted and otherSketchesgoes hand in hand with the way in which D. Merrick describes the author:


36/49


His humour, never to be compared to the puns and quibbles o the literary mul-tum, had in it something so courteous, and withal so sad and pitiable, that we ofenwonder whether we must laugh or crywhether that humour was merry and spon-

taneous, or whether it was anything but a brave attempt to dissemble in laughter themost oppressing mental agonies (BNP/E, r; CadernosI.).

. Note that eresa Rita Lopes only mentions the act that the name Lucas Mer-rick was crossed out without ever alluding to the substitution (Lopes II: ). Tislapse is carried onto her amous list o Dramatis Personae, where the name SidneyParkinson Stool is omitted (I: ). Te same omission reoccurs in the largerHeteroniemenlijst [List o heteronyms] consisting o names and given in al-phabetical order by Stoker ().

. It was Maxwell Scott who came up with the character Kenyon Ford, the up-

to-date detective. From June to December , six stories eaturing this herowere published.. While the latter appear on the ront ylea or outside cover (common places

or owners to leave such marks), the ormer are written either on the back ylea oron the inside cover.

. Te particular status that Pips signature (in La mare du diable) as well asAnons (in these three books) should receive still needs to be studied urther. How-ever, I am inclined to believe that they do not represent ownership (i.e., these are notcases o writing-readers/reading-writers).

. Te ormer signature shows that the book was purchased around ; thelatter that Pessoa used it also in /.

. Tere is a document with two passages in English (presented as quotes) ol-lowed by the name Guikel (see BNP/E, v; extos FiloscosII. ). Accord-ing to Jernimo Pizarro, the different rst names or Guikel written in the insideback cover o Te Nuttall Encyclopdiamay indicate that the Proessor is anotherliterary personality created by Pessoa. In this case, the quotes would need to bestudied rom another perspective. I owe the indication o the Call number to JorgeUribe.

. Gaveston (a historical noble gure o Gascon origin and one o the char-

acters in Christopher Marlowes Edward II) appears in a manuscript alongsideAnons signature (BNP/E, r).

. We should not exclude the ollowing source, which is ound in one o Pessoasnotes dating rom /: Anon. (or non): little donkey. Abbreviated in En-glish may be taking away the circumex (EscritosI.).

. For an account o the the unreliability o the attribution see Donald S.aylors edition (Te Complete Works of Tomas ChattertonII.). I owe thisreerence to Nick Groom.

. Tat Pessoa ignored who Whitman was towards the end o his stay in Dur-

ban, i.e., in , we clearly iner rom a mark he lef on the Early Reviews of GreatWriters: , a book signed F. Pessa and most likely bought around . On the last page, midway through a list o great writers, next to Whitmansname, we read the ollowing annotation: ? . Another clue leads us to consider as the year in which Whitmans Poemswas acquired. Te signature that marksownership in this book (A Search) is practically the same one that we nd in


37/49

Ferrari

two different notebooks in which Pessoa writes, among other things, the name oSchopenhauer (see BNP/E, Br; CadernosI. and BNP/E, v; CadernosI.), a philosopher he began reading on August (BNP/E, N- r; Ca-

dernosI.).. assinada [a obra] em nome de Alexander Search, encontra-se anotada e su-

blinhada [. . .]. Encontra

Pessoa Marginalia, Ferrari

Documents