Where to start with all of this? We have our primary book, and we can already see where we will be pulling in other books to this discussion.
We’ll start at the beginning, I guess.
Oftentimes when we read any non-fiction book, there is some sort of preface or introduction. But what are those? What purpose do they serve?
Luckily, all we need is a quick Google search to help us find an answer. Effective googling can be a real skill, and easier than a lot of people realize. It’s generally a matter of typing various keywords and phrases until you find the information you want. For example, for some reason my Microsoft Word defaulted to dark mode. This means that everything was a very dark grey instead of the usual white. Sometimes I prefer dark mode (you can see it in the screenshot below), but I don’t like it in Word. So I googled the phrase “word turn off dark mode”.
You can also search the name of an item with a descriptor (green corduroy pants). Or do what I did and just type your question in:
Now you can scroll through the results and click through a few to evaluate what you see. The first result isn’t always the best result. Looking at multiple results allows you to check for accuracy and get additional context. If the first two results you look at have conflicting information, you know you need to look at a few more links.
Here are some of the links I clicked through:
https://thebookshelf.ltd/introduction-or-preface-is-there-really-a-difference
https://thecontentauthority.com/blog/introduction-vs-preface
https://www.masterclass.com/articles/preface-prologue-introduction-difference
Luckily, everyone is in agreement about what a preface and an introduction is. I also got some information about forewords and prologues.
In short, an introduction provides an overview of the book and gives some important context for the main portion of the text.
A preface is generally a more personal section where the author provides information about why they wanted to write the book, and may include information about the author’s experience.
Forwards are written by someone other than the author, and prologues are usually found in works of fiction.
Sometimes a work may have any combination of the above, and upon occasion, you may find a book with none of the above, as is the case with Dragonslayer.
The Introduction of the Point
The Coming of the Third Reich begins with a preface, hence all of this extra detail about introductions and prefaces and such. Might as well understand what we are working with.
Interestingly, Richard J. Evans states on the first page of his preface that his books are intended for people who know little about the Third Reich, and want to know more. So we have a similar goal, but our approaches are different. He is a scholar of the subject. I am a random person on the Internet who is trying to learn more, and share the learning journey.
The remainder of the preface is spent providing context about why Evans thought his book was needed. And there is the (maybe) unintended consequence of providing some further reading and historiography as he examines the existing literature and potential gaps. There is even a mention of the value of narrative history.
Finally, I want to draw attention to a sentence tucked into the middle of the paragraph:
“Although it should not be necessary to say this, it is well that I note at this point that Nazi terminology employed in this book simply reflects its use at the time: it should not be construed as an acceptance, still less approval, of the term in question as a valid way of of denoting what it refers to.”
At this point of the preface, Evans is explaining word choice, basically. In the context of the full paragraph and following sentences, his main focus appears to be on readability. But he is acknowledging that some people prefer to alter the language in an attempt to put space between them and the concepts they are discussing. Sort of like how a lot of people will say Yahtzee instead of Nazi on social media to get around filters. (Side note, Yahtzee was a favorite game of mine when I was a kid, and it pains me to see it used like this.)
But all this ties into a discussion I have been seeing more and more online. We should use the correct language when talking about difficult topics. Clear communication is important. And the fact is, history is littered with uncomfortable language, events, people, ideas, etc. You name it, some thing bad can likely be tied to it.
As Evans states, using the correct language does not mean you agree with the concepts being discussed. Using euphemisms, is to me, infantilizing. It undersells the seriousness of the topic. There is a time and place for euphemisms, but not here.
Now we have made introductions, talked about language, accidentally found some potential future readings, and learned about the basic parts at the beginning of some books.
Next we will start dipping our toes into some actual history.
Don’t forget to check the Works Cited page for a list of sources used for this post. Also, let me know if you would prefer the sources be listed at the bottom of the post, or if I should continue to list them on the separate Works Cited page.
