Estudios sobre el teatro español by Joaquín CasaldueroReview by: Carlos OrtigozaHispania, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Mar., 1964), pp. 196-197Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and PortugueseStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/337306 .

Accessed: 26/05/2014 15:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Hispania.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.248.197.151 on Mon, 26 May 2014 15:21:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

196 HISPANIA

provides a brief, yet very adequate history of the Amadis de Gaula and stresses Dr. Place's belief (now accepted by most scholars) that the medieval original of the version written by Montalvo was not first set down in Portuguese or in French, but in Spanish, and was in all probability penned under the patronage of Al- fonso XI from a copy of an older "Vulgate Amadis" which stemmed originally from oral versions.

This fourteenth-century text prepared at the court of Alfonso XI was not, according to Dr. Place, the work of a Spaniard, but of a pro- fessional writer from outside Spain, who was commissioned to write it in Spanish for the express purpose of popularizing the concept of chivalry and the glories it embodied.

Of great aid to scholars will be the section entitled "Bibliografla Descriptiva de las Edi- ciones, Traducciones y Arreglos del Amadis Libros I-IV." It contains a complete listing of all editions of the novel printed since 1508 in the various languages in which it appeared-- Spanish, Italian, French, Portuguese, English, German, Holland Dutch and Hebrew, as well as all translations and retellings.

In the second volume Dr. Place has main- tained the text of the original of 1508 with only the alterations and additions mentioned above. He has written a very valuable section entitled "Notas sobre el Lenguaje de los Libros I y ii," divided into parts labeled "Fonetica," "Fonetica, Sintictica y Morfologia," "Sintaxis," and "Semintica," which in combination offer an important addition and supplement to Vol- ume I. A complete list of errata found in Tomo ii of Montalvo's text is offered, as in the case of Tomo I. Other aids are a "Bibliografla," forty-one pages of "Notas Explicativas a los Libros I y Iv," and an interesting and valuable "indice de Materias Anotadas," which taken to- gether may be said to provide notes not found in Volume I, as well as notes apropos to Volume ii. An "Addenda et Corrigenda" for Volume ii appears also.

Both Volume I and Volume ii are attractively printed with the text in double columes in large and clear type. Volume III, now in press, can be expected soon. Univ. of North Carolina JOHN ESTEN KELLER

VERY, FRANCIS GEORGE, The Spanish Corpus Christi Procession: A Literary and Folkloric Study. Valencia: Estudios de Hispandofla, Tipografia Moderna, 1962, Paper. xiii + 160 pp. This work about the Feast of Corpus Christi,

one of the greatest festivals of the Church year of the Iberian people, draws on the ac- counts by travelers and chroniclers, the litera- ture of the Golden Age, and the erudite writ- ings of past and contemporary scholars. The limits in time are fixed between 1400 and 1800.

The chapters treat the following topics: estab- lishment of the feast, preparations for the feast, the procession viewed as a whole, the tarasca, the giants and the dancers. Such details as the music for the processions, the costs of produc- tion, the religious and allegorical interpreta- tions given to the various figures, the kinds and antecedents of the dances-all are discussed at length. Note is taken of the dichotomy which developed between the liturgical and popular elements: "the employment of grotesque figures, of the tarasca, of scenic representations, and dances, superimposed upon a basically austere liturgical procession." The Spanish people found an outlet for their rejoicing and enthusiasm for allegory in this elaborate spectacle which was frequently under attack by the clergy and moralists. The extensive notes and useful biblio- graphy are placed at the end of the volume. Under the heading of "Additional References" are listed the titles of books and articles which the author feels are relevant to the subject but which he was unable to consult. It is obvious that Very's book is systematically planned and skillfully executed. This stimulating, compre- hensive study will be useful to all who have an interest in the Spanish theatre, folklore, religious practices, music, and dance.

Indiana Univ. HARVEY L. JOHNSON

CASALDUERO, JOAQUIN, Estudios sobre el teatro espaiiol. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1962. Paper. 266 pp. Los autores que forman una parte de este

volumen son: Lope de Vega, Guillkn de Castro, Cervantes, Tirso de Molina, Ruiz de Alarc6n, Calder6n, Moratin y el Duque de Rivas. Me parecen excelentes los ensayos sobre El si de las nihias y el Don Alvaro, discretos los de Las mocedades, El vergonzoso, El Burlador, y La vida es snueio, objetables los de Ruiz de Alarc6n y Lope de Vega. En ambos casos el sefior Casal- duero rebaja su calidad maltratando injustifica- damente a dos ilustres hispanistas: Pedro Henri- quez Urefia y Marcelino Menendez y Pelayo. Al primero le hace aparecer como insensato demagogo (151-155), al segundo, como opor- tunista (10-11).

Al referirse a la conferencia de Henriquez Urefia sobre la mexicanidad de Ruiz de Alarc6n, dice que "se hizo rapidamente famosa y no por sus meritos literarios, sino por la carga naciona- lista depositada en ella. . . . Se da uno cuenta de que . . [Henriquez Urefia] iba a solicitar de su auditorio las pasiones cegadoras" (151). "Es claro que nos damos muy bien cuenta de que Urefia introdujo la cuesti6n del mestizaje por tratarse de 61 mismo y de parte de su audi- torio . . ." (152). Y a este tenor siguen despro- p6sitos que no deben tener cabida en un tra- bajo serio. Sin embargo, la mais grave objeci6n que hago es que no refuta las contribuciones valiosas que hizo el ilustre hispanista domini- cano, sino que se agacha: "Cuando entra Henri-

This content downloaded from 132.248.197.151 on Mon, 26 May 2014 15:21:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BooKs OF THE HISPANIC WORLD 197

quez Urefia verdaderamente en materia es al situarse en el terreno psicol6gico, terreno a donde precisamente no le seguiremos, porque en dando con la psicologia ya es cantar como querer" (153).

Pot lo que toca a Men6ndez Pelayo, cuyos juicios criticos sobre Fuenteovejuna me parecen acertados y valiosos (cf. sus "Observaciones pre- liminares," en Obras, RAE, x, pp. clix-clivii, y en particular la p. clxii), estos abren el ensayo del sefior Casalduero (9-10), quien inmediata- mente, fuera del contexto repite palabras in- conexas e incoherentes con las que pretende burlarse de Menindez Pelayo bajo el fuitil pre- texto de que se acerc6 a Fuenteovejuna "con la ideologia de su 6poca" (10). El sefior Casalduero despues de calificar los juicios del gran maestro como "desafortunadas piginas" (12) pasa a estudiar la famosa comedia de Lope, pero no aporta nada valioso, es decir, repite el parto de los montes. Para Casalduero "el protagonista no lo es el pueblo todo. Fuenteovejuna es la vibrante sacudida de la tragedia cristiana del amor pasi6n, con la mujer como vertice y como base los dos hombres de diferente coraz6n" (22). Esta re- ducci6n triangular se repite a lo largo del ensayo: "Este es el conflicto de la obra: escapar [Lau- rencia] de su mano [del comendador]. .. .el cual va circunscribiendo su figura como amor pasi6n opuesto a amor casto . . ." (15-17). Con esta interpretaci6n cerrada, a la que entreteje como correspondientes polos la ciudad y la aldea (14-38), analiza las tres jornadas hasta llegar a las escenas finales en que se "nos entrega el sentido de la obra: la lucha que contra la las- civia y los sentidos tiene que Ilevar a cabo la mujer y el hombre para unirse en el sacramento del matrimonio" (38). A pesar de que el tema de la lascivia del comendador se repite por todo el ensayo (17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36, 38, 39, 43, 44), disen- timos absolutamente de la forma triangular y "sentido" que da el sefior Casalduero a esta obra maestra. Pidnsese que hay lo menos una cin- cuentena de comedias lopinas cuyo conflicto lo forman la mujer casta, el hombre lascivo y el galin puro, pero s61o hay una Fuenteovejuna. Cierto que a veces disentimos de algunos juicios de don Marcelino, pero en este caso, si no lleg6 al fondo de Fuenteovejuna, si que lo vislumbr6. Por falta de espacio dejare el asunto para mejor oportunidad.

La Uiltima objeci6n grave que hago se refiere al desenlace. Para el sefior Casalduero la comedia termina con la reuni6n de Laurencia y Fron- doso "teniendo como fondo el tormento de todo el pueblo." Aqui termina la comedia, pero, como sucede con frecuencia . . . todavia hay un segundo final. Los Reyes aparecen de nuevo..." (38). No, Fuenteovejuna tiene s61lo un final y estA construida como monolito al que no sobra ni falta nada, y de ella no "se puede quitar miembro / que del contexto no derribe el todo" (Arte nuevo). Si Fuenteovejuna hubiera termi- nado con la reuni6n de los esposos, habria care-

cido de la validez universal que la inviste. Los reyes son meros portadores accidentales del valor moral cristiano, justicia social que, a pesar de arraigadas costumbres o ancestrales privilegios reconoce la dignidad de las personas y condena la irresponsabilidad moral del que tiene el poder y no gobierna bien. Este es el sentido que para mi claramente resplandece de la lectura atenta de Fuenteovejuna. Indiana Univ. CARLOS ORTIGOZA

VEGA CARPIO, LOPE DE, A Paleographic Edition of Lope de Vega's Autograph Play "La Nueva Victoria de D. Gonzalo de Cordoua." Ed. Henry Ziomek. New York: Hispanic Insti- tute in the United States, 1962. 211 pp. $6.

Any critical edition of one of the relatively large number of Lope de Vega's autograph plays still available is a welcome contribution to our first-hand knowledge of his actual way of writing plays. The present paleographic edition helps to fill this need with a comedia which, though not outstanding in dramatic qualities, offers a good illustration of Lope's technique in dramatizing contemporary events with the double aim of glorifying Spain and her military heroes on the one hand, and of entertaining the audience in the capa y espada style on the other. La nueua victoria de D. Gonzalo de Cordoua is a comedia de circunstancias composed by Lope in eighteen days as a sort of chronicle play after the battle of Fleurus, near Brussels (August 29, 1622), in which the great-great-grandson of the Gran Capitin and younger brother of Lope's Maecenas, the Duke of Sessa, distinguished him- self against the Protestant forces (though his victory was less complete and his rble less promi- nent than Lope pretends). But it is in the skill with which Lope succeeds in bringing to life with melodramatic force the not-too-exciting military events, intertwined with love plots of his own fancy, that the main interest of the play lies, as Prof. Ziomek has clearly shown in his Introduction.

The paleographic transcription is quite accu- rate, although the editor has seen fit to accept Menendez y Pelayo's punctuation without even giving evidence that the Spanish scholar fol- lowed the autograph MS. In two instances at least (vv. 414, 1248), that punctuation spoils the sense. There is some inconsistency in re- taining Lope's accentuation (or lack of it) and capitalization, while not even mentioning his punctuation, however arbitrary. Very useful, too, are the rather substantial variants from the four printed (1637, 1641, 1777, 1902), but one misses some comments on the main differences between these editions and on their mutual re- lationships. The editor does not even raise the important question of whether the various edi- tions are based on his autograph MS or on some stage copy, as was often the case and as the many omissions and additions (especially in stage directions) would suggest.

This content downloaded from 132.248.197.151 on Mon, 26 May 2014 15:21:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions