I had not yet discovered that the work of editor is not transactional; it is not a matter of “simple transposition” in which one objectively replicates a text (Pierazzo 58). Editing is personal. It demands an ethics of care, an awareness that all “editions are mediations of some kind” (MLA Committee 3). As the “caretaker” of the “Memoir of Zulma Marache,” I am sensitive to my role as mediator of a text that has already been so highly mediated. 1 Each layer of mediation—from multiple sources to manuscript, from manuscript to printing press, from printing press to page—adds to the complexity of editorial decisions. Even the tiniest decision felt weighty, and there were many times when I froze, unable to commit. I wondered, was my allegiance to the text itself or those who would be reading it?

In making these decisions, I have looked to sources that outline best practices for editing critical (or scholarly) editions ([MLA]; MLA Committee). These sources stress the importance of an edition’s rhetorical situation, especially its audience and purpose, as well as being transparent about the choices an editor has made. To that end, I will say the choice I most agonized over as I worked on this edition of the “Memoir” and on Beyond Seduction and Abortion: the Life and “Memoir” of Zulma Marache more broadly, was how to spell Napoleon Loreaux’s name. The historical record consistently registers it as L-o-r-e-a-u-x, but the “Memoir” and New York City’s newspapers routinely spelled it as L-a-r-e-u-x. When I had prepared other pieces of scholarship on Zulma Marache and the “Memoir,” I had been unaware of (or perhaps not yet concerned about) the disparity in spellings.

As I wrote Beyond Seduction and Abortion, I felt strongly that Loreaux’s name should appear as the historical record depicted it and, indeed, as even it appeared in the Herald’s French-language version of the “Memoir,” which appeared immediately before the English translation. To represent his name any other way would, I thought, be disrespectful and an act of willful rhetorical violence. Yet, readers (including myself) primarily knew Loreaux through the Herald, an English-language publication that Americanized his name as L-a-r-e-u-x or similar spellings. To change the more than 50 references to Lareaux in the “Memoir” to L-o-r-e-a-u-x seemed to disregard the text as a historical artifact. I had little help in making a choice, as the two scholars who have written about Marache split ways: one honored the historical record and the other, the textual record. I have chosen yet a different way. In the text of Beyond Seduction and Abortion, I refer to Loreaux as he referred to himself and as his friends and family knew him. Yet, in the edited text below, I have maintained the Herald’s spelling of L-a-r-e-u-x because that is how its readers encountered him in its pages.

I do not know if there is a “right” choice in this instance, but it is the choice that I felt most comfortable with. I have followed a similar principle with John Abeille, whose name appears accented in the “Memoir” but not elsewhere.

I have kept editorial interventions to a minimum. I silently corrected inconsistent spellings of names and have silently corrected a few errors with the potential to confuse readers. In a couple of instances, I've added words that the Herald omitted; these I have indicated with brackets. In two instances, and in solidarity with readers squinting at their screens, I have included paragraph breaks to make the reading experience easier. I have footnoted those interventions. Finally, I have included explanatory footnotes and definitions to clarify or contextualize the text.

Works Cited