The Misleading Legend of The Castle of Otranto

An enticing introduction grabs the audience's attention. Whether the medium is literature, films, or even journalism, stories that include a hook enhance the audience's desire to learn more. Two excellent examples of very different hooks were written by one author: Horace Walpole. In the first and second printing of Walpole's "The Castle of Otranto," the author writes unusual prefaces for each, which identifies the polarization of his intentions with each publication of his novel.

In the original preface, Walpole claims he is the translator of an antiquated Italian manuscript "in black letter, [written] in the year 1529" (Walpole 5). Asserting the story is a relic from ancient times, Walpole achieves the hook for his readers. By making readers believe the document was written over two hundred years prior, Walpole gives the readers an additional tale to discuss (5). Using the translator alias William Marshall, Walpole freely praises the "beauty of the diction" (5). The resurfaced manuscript claim is an ingenious marketing ploy.

However, marketing is not the only benefit Walpole gains from the first preface. He knows this story is unique to its time. He includes a disclaimer, stating the author "is not bound to believe them himself, but he must represent his actors as believing them" (6). This disclaimer reveals the dark fantasy on which the readers will soon embark. Walpole prepares the masses for his unique tale without taking responsibility for the writing. This disassociation with his text reveals an uncertainty in the public's willingness to appreciate the dark tale. The uncertainty continues as the translator admits he is "not blind to my author's defects," stating a desire for a more useful moral to the story (7).

In the second preface, Walpole claims authorship for the novel while including an explanation for his initial persona as translator. Frequently mentioning his respect for Shakespeare's works, Walpole asks the reader, "Is not the eloquence of Antony ... artificially exalted by ... the mouths of their auditors?" (11). Essentially, Walpole is comparing the actors who portray Shakespeare's characters to the false persona he adopted in the first edition of his novel. While his defense has merit, the two are not entirely parallel situations.

Asking for "pardon of his readers," Walpole admits insecurity about the public's acceptance of his "attempt to blend the two kinds of romance, the ancient and the modern" (9). Redefining the standard for Gothic meaning with this apology, Walpole admits his authorship for the novel because "the public have honored it sufficiently" (14). The popular success of the novel encouraged Walpole to come forward and accept public acclaim for his work.

Located at opposite ends of the spectrum, Walpole's first and second prefaces provide the reader with different views of the novel. The purpose of his first preface was to entice readers while the second's purpose was to take ownership of the popular and influential tale. While each preface had a different purpose, both introductions provided hooks which left the reader wanting to read more.