Sunday, November 06, 2022

Benito Pérez Galdós: 7 de julio

One

It's as if no time has passed. Everything is the same. See the street, the house, the goldfish swimming and revolving in incessant curves within their pools; see the cages of crickets hanging in clusters on each side of the door; observe the schoolroom window, and hear the sound of the little rascals that emerges through it. Nothing has changed, and Don Patricio Sarmiento, as punctual and immutable on his bench as the sun in the firmament, sheds the light of his wisdom across the whole territory of the classroom. Just as in the previous year, he expounds the disastrous history and tragic death of Gaius Gracchus; but his eloquent voice adds these fateful words:

-- Terrible days are on the way. Rome and Liberty are in danger.

Back then we were in February 1821; now we are in March 1822. During this year of anarchy, in the course of its 365 riots, the Calle de Coloreros has not suffered any important changes. Don Patricio doesn't seem older; on the contrary, one would think him rejuvenated by miraculous potions. He is more restless, more worked up, more lively; his eye shines with more brilliance, and the contraction and dilation of the venerable wrinkles on his brow reveal that within it there seethes a volcano of ideas.

When the hour of rest is sounded and the boys depart in haste, beating the ground with their impatient feet and filling the whole street with an ear-splitting clamour of shrieks, tomfooleries and caperings that, fortunately, doesn't last long, Don Patricio cleans his pens, arranges his cap so that no part of his cranium remains exposed, and sometimes with ruler in hand, sometimes with hands in pockets, goes out to the porch, intoning between his teeth a patriotic ditty. 

If Lucas is at his post, father and son chat a while before going up to eat. At other times Don Patricio plants his picturesque, majestic figure on the threshold, snuffs the temperature and wind direction, and if his legs feel stiff, takes a walk towards the Arch of San Ginés, setting his feet down firmly and noisily so as to warm them up. A few sonorous words escape his chest while he looks again at the sky, as if in its unalterable grandeur he sees an image of immortality. 

[The beginning of 7 de julio (The Seventh of July) by Benito Pérez Galdós (1876),  the fifteenth volume of the Episodios Nacionales, i.e. the fifth of the second series.]

Complete Spanish text of 7 de julio.

*

crickets: often kept as caged pets in Spain. 

little rascals : the word is moscardones. Literally a warble fly or gadfly, but figuratively referring to someone who is irritating or mischievous.

Gaius Gracchus: a legislator, tribune, and orator, of the 2nd century BCE. He died when violence broke out between Gracchus' supporters and his senatorial enemies, in particular the consul Lucius Opimius. By teaching the history of the Roman Republic rather than holy scripture, Don Patricio reveals his liberal sympathies. 

February 1821: a footnote refers us to the previous volume, El Grande Oriente

365 riots: probably referring to the lively, informal era of the patriotic clubs, replacing the stifling official ceremonials of the period 1814-1820, during which the constitution had been suppressed, as described in the first chapter of La fontana de oro, Galdós' first novel. 

Calle de Coloreros: a street in central Madrid. Galdós nearly always uses real locations. 

cap: Don Patricio wears the gorro, an emblem of his fierce liberalism and republicanism.

if his legs feel stiff: I'm inferring the meaning. The text says "si sus remos se han entumecido", which I think means "if his oars have gone numb". 

Arch of San Ginés: a nearby archway, with buildings above, that connects the Plazuela de San Ginés with the Pasadizo de San Ginés. Here's an excellent post about it, with photographs: https://www.pasionpormadrid.com/2013/09/el-arco-de-san-gines.html .

*

Whilst away in Spain and elsewhere, I finally finished reading 7 de julio, several years after starting it. My poor Spanish made it a significant challenge and, as you can see from the state of the jacket, it's a book that has lived rough. 



The fictional hero of the second series is Salvador Monsalud, a young liberal. Apparently he is set in contrast to an absolutist half-brother, but that doesn't emerge in this volume. Reading only 7 de julio doesn't reveal much of Monsalud's story, nor of such other matters as the misfortunes of Don Urbano Gil de la Cuadra, or the full details of why he hates Monsalud, or why Monsalud regards Soledad as his sister. Monsalud's character has intrigued some readers, as Octavio Paz testified, but in the Episodios Nacionales generally the interest consists less in these fictional protagonists than in Galdós' depiction of historical events and the effortlessly vigorous chatter of minor figures like the detestable Don Patricio.

Galdós churned out the early volumes of the Episodios Nacionales at Simenon-like speed; this fifteenth volume was written in Oct-Nov 1876, less than four years after the first volume, Trafalgar. At first glance these books seem quite old-fashioned, considering their date of composition; and even when they evoke Scott or Dickens or Balzac, it's in the simplest and most generic manner of those masters. Perhaps, I ponder, Galdós needed to sketch out a whole literature of early Spanish realism as the essential foundation for such complex and innovative novels as Fortunata and Jacinta. Anyway, it was the Episodios that were popular with readers and paid the bills.  

And they are still an excellent choice of reading, if you like historical novels and want to hone your imperfect command of Spanish!

*

She gazed around on all sides, showing an affectionate interest in the various objects of his living quarters, from the archive that occupied one end-wall, to the old, bad pictures that covered the other. These were portraits laid aside for lack of artistic quality, landscapes in the Flemish style, hunting scenes and absurd battles in which one might see dead horses resembling white pigs, arquebussiers aiming at the sky, serpents that vomited vermillion, and very polished towers on whose battlements appeared handsome archers bedecked with colourful plumes. 

To Sola this museum appeared most beautiful. After she had looked upon it with obvious signs of childish pleasure, she fixed her attention on the table and saw with surprise that it was not, as on other days, full of yellowing dusty papers, drafts, quires of paper, maps and account books; but instead of handsome volumes with gold edging and the finest paper quality; she saw also that her brother had before him several sheets of paper that did not have, as on former occasions, long ranks of numbers resembling armies drawn up for battle, but lines of continuous and flowing prose.

-- What are you doing? -- Sola asked her brother with friendly familiarity. 

-- From you there are no secrets -- the youth replied, lifting his eyes from the paper. This isn't accounts; it is a speech that the Duke has instructed me to write.

-- A speech?

-- Yes; for him to deliver the day after tomorrow in the Cortes. There isn't much left to do -- he added, picking up a book and leafing through it -- Let's see what Voltaire says on this point, for you ought to know that His Excellency likes a speech to have many quotations, and in every paragraph two or three philosophers speaking through his mouth.

(from Chapter II)

end-wall : guesswork, really. The word is testero, which can mean the head of a bed, but the context suggests walls. 

account books: "libros de asiento", literally entry books. 

the finest paper quality: "finísimas pastas". "Pasta" is the Spanish equivalent of "pulp". Wood pulp was not introduced until 1843; before that, the main source of paper pulp was used textiles ("rags"). 

From you there are no secrets: That proves somewhat ironic: Monsalud is fond of Soledad but he never lets her into his many secrets, as the rest of this chapter demonstrates. 

the Cortes: That is, parliament -- though the term "cortes" originated in a feudal age. In 1822 the Salón de Cortes was the church of the Colegio de doña María de Aragón (as described in Chapter 4). This building was subsequently absorbed into the Palacio del Senado. 


*

The novel takes place during the "Trienio Liberal", when the Spanish Constitution had been restored and there were three years of constitutional government, and the absolutist monarch Ferdinand VII was virtually confined to his enormous Palacio Real (where, however, he still possessed the right of veto and used it to sabotage nearly all new legislation). 

The most serious of several absolutist attempts at a coup d'état took place in July 1822, when the royal guards (Guardia Real) revolted and tried to take over the capital, but were defeated by the combined efforts of the national militia (Milicia Nacional).

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golpe_de_Estado_de_julio_de_1822 .

[The Liberal Triennium came to an end in 1823, when a French invasion restored Fernando VII as absolutist monarch. The Quintuple Alliance (Austria, Prussia, Russia, Great Britain and France) had decided that Spain's seeming drift towards republicanism was a threat to the security of Europe.]

*

Once he [the king] manages to cross the palace threshold, the drums of the guards buffet some of the locals, sticks are crossed, there are punches and kicks, and a number of youths shed their precious blood in the streets. There is suddenly a mass of weals, scrapes, bruises and bumps, and hundreds of noses drop redness on the ground. The occasional rib creaks as it snaps, and not a few gums find themselves freed of a decaying molar. Lumps appear on quite a few heads, the odd shoulder-blade caves in. It is not much more than lads' games; but this is how the tragic chapters of history tend to begin, in every country. 

It did not take much for the farce to turn into real drama. Growing ever more furious, the troops, when His Majesty had entered the palace, took possession of the upper parts of the Plaza de Oriente, ejected a reserve of the voluntary Militia, and, establishing a line from los Consejos to the Arco de la Armería, declared themselves in open and bare-faced insurrection. A number of shots were loosed off, seven locals and one member of the Militia fell to the ground. One young enthusiast, a son of Flórez Calderón, had the ill-conceived notion of haranguing the guards that were forming up next to the ministry building, and he was cruelly beaten and slashed. 

The drums were beating the attack, and the furious grenadiers were insulting the crowd, threatening to stab them if they didn't draw back. Women fell down in fits of faintness and anguish, some men swore loud oaths, others roared; and meanwhile you could see in one window of the palace, as in a box at the bull-ring, a group of eager palace flunkeys and court ladies, who were waving their handkerchiefs to stir up the soldiery. Those poor people simply could not reconcile themselves to living under the hateful yoke of the Constitution! Secreted in the midst of those graceful faces, like the snake among the flowers, Ferdinand gazed with avid eyes at the audacity of the janissaries. 

Among these there was one officer who dared to reassert the laws of the discipline that had been flouted. His name was Don Mamerto Landáburu, a liberal exaltado, a good patriot, a fontanista, a soldier of the clubs (a quality which certainly did not characterize the top caste of the soldiers), but at the same time a worthy and pleasant individual. This unfortunate officer spoke energetically to the soldiers, but received insuilts in reply. Blind with fury, he drew his sabre at the moment that another lieutenant, Goiffieu, was shouting frantically: Viva el Rey absoluto! Spurred by this cry, the grenadiers fell upon Landáburu, but major Herón and another officer whose name is not recorded managed to intervene and rescue him. The drew him away and led him into the palace, but the crowd of assassins followed, and within the eastern portal he received three shots in the back and fell forever, crying Viva la Libertad!

(from Chapter 14)

the king : his public appearance at the formal closure of congress on 30 June produced violent demonstrations of feeling on all sides. 

palace : the Palacio Real in central Madrid, the largest palace in Europe. 

the locals : paisanos, here not meaning countrymen but ordinary citizens of Madrid (as opposed to soldiers on either side). 

Plaza de Oriente : the square in front of (i.e. to the east of) the Palacio Real. (The current monumental layout of the square dates from 1844, when a number of medieval buildings were demolished.)

los Consejos : i.e. the Palacio de los Concejos, where the Calle de Bailén, running south from the Palacio Real, meets the Calle Mayor. The line thus established threatens an advance on the Plaza Mayor, the heart of Madrid.

grenadiers : these particular granaderos of the Guardia Real were not literally hurlers of grenades but, like them, were selected for being especially large and burly. They were placed at the forefront of the troop, with the role of leading assaults. 

janissaries : the household troops of the Ottoman Sultan -- here used figuratively to refer to Ferdinand's own household troops. 

Landáburu : see https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamerto_Landaburu .

fontanista, soldier of the clubs : that is, he was a regular at the Fontana de Oro, one of the patriotic clubs (and the setting for Galdós' novel of the same name). 

*

7 de julio is a novel about political events but it is not focussed on the decision-makers and power-brokers, but instead on relatively powerless people who are trying to make sense of what's going on around them. Many (especially the men) have fierce political views. Everyone speculates about what really happened, what it really means, what's really behind it, and what's going to happen next ... but for the most part they're filling a vacuum with guesswork, even if their guesses are sometimes right. They often like to give the impression that they know things (see e.g. Don Primitivo) but their peers are generally not taken in by this behaviour. They talk about what they are passionately interested in, and one reason for that passionate interest is precisely that they don't know. 

Galdós is brilliant at capturing the flavour of this kind of discourse which, of course, is still extremely familiar today. 

Unsurprisingly, a theme that kept arising for me was reason vs. unreason. The novel's characters skilfully appeal to reason when trying to dissuade others from their convictions or behaviour. Yet all carry within themselves a solid core of unreason, they are driven by their own convictions, which may lead to fanaticism and may lead to heroism, incredible sacrifice or blind selfishness, but always go beyond what reason can coldly approve. The two schoolmasters prove as unreasonable, or more so, than the ignorant maidservant Doña Rosa. And Soledad and Monsalud are just as helplessly bound to their own unreasonable courses (though driven by love and dreams of ambition) as the egotistical cynic Don Urbano or the incessant Don Patricio. Reason is good in itself, but Galdós is not "on the side of reason", because he sees that reason can never take charge of society, human nature just isn't like that. 

*

By the evening of the 6th he [Don Patricio Sarmiento] was hoarse and almost asthmatic, but none the quieter for that; and as Don Primitivo Cordero ventured (heinous notion!) to make excuses for the seven carbuncles -- i.e. the ministers -- Don Patricio made his apologia in some such terms as these:

-- What should become of a nation where the seat of state is occupied by a Rosita the Pastry Chef, gentlemen, a woman? All right then, I'll admit he's a man -- but what a man! Does he govern a nation while making verses? If at least they were like Virgil's! .... But instead he goes with Rabadán, no more nor less, for so I say. What does it matter that he pronounces pretty, polished speeches that are stuffed with lies? Some politicians! He started by oppressing our beloved idol Riego, and has ended by defending the aristocracy in the hope of them giving him a title. Yes, as for him ... he would be capable of selling Christ for thirty chambers (since he would never be content with just two) -- and for the absolute veto. I .... I am not saying this out of cruelty, gentlemen, I would hang him without the slightest scruple. And what should I say of the Apprentice, gentlemen, this infamous man who dreamt up the Regulation to ruin the Militia, this pedant who, while the country is in peril, busies himself in sowing Irish flax-seed in the fields of Calatayud? Why should I conceal it? If he were in my hands, I would hang him ...

(from Chapter 15)

seat of state : Don Patricio constantly selects or adapts terms that express his contempt. Doubtless he relishes using the word poltrona which is indeed a kind of seat but also means "poltroon". 

Rosita the Pastry Chef: nickname of Francisco Martínez de la Rosa, prime minister loathed by both the absolutists and the exaltados. The nickname implies a compromiser, someone who can always cook up an agreement (e.g. with the king) because they are willing to bend on matters of principle.

making verses: Martínez de la Rosa was also a dramatist.

Rabadán : I'm afraid I have no explanation for this. 

oppressing our beloved idol Riego: Riego had been imprisoned in September 1821, wrongly accused of republicanism following a failed republican revolt. 

content with just two: Martínez de la Rosa wanted to introduce a bicameral system in Spain (and some years later, he succeeded). 

the absolute veto: Don Patricio does not explicitly state his own republicanism, but it's implied by his loathing for the royal veto and for those who countenance it. 

Apprentice: Galdós' footnote tells us that this is José María Moscoso de Altamira, minister of the interior. 

Calatayud: city in Aragon, in an agricultural region.


*

7 de julio : Chapter Summary. 

1

March 1822. The schoolmaster Don Patricio Sarmiento brusquely directs the pale, gentle Soledad (who is asking for Salvador Monsalud) to the home of his employer, the Duque de Parque. Then, in private conversation with his son Lucas, he gives vent to various insulting remarks about her and more especially her disgraced father Don Urbano Gil de la Cuadra, and he lectures his son about the need to avoid inappropriate tenderness of heart when it comes to such people.

2

Soledad manages to find Monsalud at his work, writing a speech for his master to deliver to the Cortes. Monsalud regards Soledad as his "sister" and is covertly providing financial assistance to Soledad and her father (though without the latter's knowledge). Soledad is endlessly grateful and adulatory towards her "brother" -- evidently she is in love with him. But, perhaps in consequence, she tries to resist his controlling tendencies. She also asks questions about e.g. what Monsalud has actually done to earn her father's abhorrence, questions that he contrives by a mixture of slipperiness and authority to avoid answering. 

3

Monsalud's comic interview with the Duque, an eminent soldier who labours under the delusion that he is cut out for a brilliant career in politics. The Duque is delighted with the draft speech but demands various changes, such as dropping the eulogy to Riego (the Duque has ended up standing as a very liberal candidate, but his liberalism is evidently highly selective.)

4. 

At the Cortes, where the ultra-liberal Riego (now released from prison and elected to the Cortes) is hailed as a hero by most of the crowd, much to the embarrassment of the moderate government. Meanwhile the nervous Duque completely botches his delivery of the ghost-written speech. Monsalud has come along to support his master, but in fact he doesn't witness this debacle; he has spotted someone else in the crowd, someone who interests him far more than his employer does, and has hurried away. 

5. 

May 1822. We learn that Don Patricio detests Señor Naranjo, who is a schoolteacher like him but with diametrically opposed political views. It is Naranjo who is sheltering Don Urbano and his daughter at his house in the Calle de las Veneras. We find Don Urbano alone, apparently seeking a means to commit suicide. Soledad comes home and her father complains to her about her stifling care (e.g. hiding the scissors). He speaks of his despair, of not wishing to go out or see anyone, and of his one dream of Soledad marrying her cousin Anatolio and thus having someone to support her after her father's death. But Anatolio has not been in contact for a long time and seems to have forgotten the promise he made to his late mother (Don Urbano's sister), presumably because of their disgrace and poverty. 

6.

They hear the voices of Naranjo and an unexpected visitor, Don Patricio Sarmiento, dressed in the uniform of the national militia (which makes him even more inflated and rude). Naranjo confesses that this visit comes as a surprise. Sarmiento outlines their political differences (Naranjo is clearly a supporter of religion and absolutism), accuses him of being mixed up in conspiracies and warns him to watch his step, which Naranjo is offended by. But the apparently innocent reason for Sarmiento's visit is to bring a letter from Anatolio, at which Don Urbano faints with happiness and is carried to his bed. 

7.

Anatolio writes that he has been ill but is now on his way, arriving tomorrow or the day after. He is joining the Guards. Don Urbano notes that Soledad doesn't seem as excited as he is. In his excitement he actually wants to go out for a walk with his daughter. He tells her how much he has suffered for her sake (it's really the other way round), and admits he planned suicide for them both. Father and daughter go outside, where they run into Don Patricio, whom Don Urbano enthusiastically greets. Sarmiento says he hopes the letter contained good news about his business. Don Urbano, not perceiving Don Patricio's suspicions, says yes, very good news, and incautiously mentions that his nephew is joining the Guardia Real.

8.

Anatolio Gordón arrives two days later. He's broad-shouldered, good-natured, clumsy and none too bright, but he can do no wrong in Don Urbano's eyes. Apart from boasting naively about his inheritances, he says that he has a letter of introduction to the Duque del Parque who, he believes, owes him money. Soledad shows no inclination for him, but says she is happy to marry him to please her father.


Anatolio meets Don Urbano and Soledad (Chapter 8)

[Image source. This and the other illustrations come from an 1881 illustrated edition, a testament to the popular audience that these novels attracted. The title page says: Ilustrado por los SRES. GÓMEZ SOLER y ESTEBAN .]


9.

June 1822. Historical survey of the anarchic political situation throughout Spain. The absolutist king, moderate but weak government, and liberal-minded congress. The scabrous press, e.g the satirical publication El Zurriago (The Whip), representing the views of the ultra-liberals (los exaltados). Different parts of the army supporting different causes. The (voluntary) Milicia Nacional is relatively unified and has high morale; many boys of good family have now joined what was once a purely plebeian organization. 

10. 

Evening of 26 June. A group of Milicia Nacional relaxing in the Casa-Panadería. Introduces Don Primitivo Cordero, a loyal moderate. Upright and good-natured, but ignorant, a blind follower of Martínez de San Martín (Tintín de Navarra), unable to conceive that others could honestly hold any other political views than his own, so must have shady motives for seeming to do so. Tries to convey the impression that he knows all about everything already, via certain mysterious information channels. 

11.

Conversation, mostly between Don Primitivo and Don Patricio. About the royalist conspiracies, of course, the agents in Bayonne, etc. But the two are not entirely in accord. For instance Don Primitivo thinks that El Zurriago and the "anarchists" are being financed by the royalists (i.e. to destabilize the government). On the other hand Don Patricio suspects the government itself of being secretly absolutist, observing that they always seem to come down hard on the exaltados while turning a blind eye to the patent plotting of the royalists. Conspiracies are certainly rife. While the two are right in the general drift of their conspiracy theories, for instance about the imminent rising of the Guardia Real, Don Patricio is also shown as jumping to totally false conclusions about what Don Urbano and Anatolio are up to; it's obviously a deep royalist plot, he supposes. (We also meet Don Primitivo's uncle, Don Benigno Cordero, with small nose and gold spectacles; a great-hearted but most un-martial-looking volunteer.)

12.

Anatolio is at Aranjuez with the court. The wedding is planned for early July. An anguished Soledad goes to see her "brother" at the Duque's. Monsalud advises her to marry her cousin even though she does not love him. (He himself has now met Anatolio, who came to claim his debt from the Duque, and he approves of him.) He points out that they had better not meet any more, as Soledad no longer needs his support and it would be difficult to explain their relationship if Anatolio got wind of it. Monsalud is infuriatingly blind to Soledad's real feelings, and indulges in contrasting her happy prospects with his own turmoiled life. Monsalud is anxious for Soledad to leave; just as she is going, she sees a beautiful woman arriving in a coach outside. 

13.

Anatolio returns, dines with Don Urbano and Soledad and then falls asleep in the middle of playing cards with his uncle. They hear noises in Naranjo's quarters and, peeping out, they see the king's confessor (Victor Sáez) and senior commanders of the Guards (including the Conde de Moy); and also, the same mysterious beauty that Soledad glimpsed earlier in the day. Don Urbano warns Soledad to keep quiet about all this. He has had his fingers burnt by getting mixed up in conspiracies and doesn't want any involvement in whatever is going on in Naranjo's quarters. He tells Soledad, however, that an insurrection of the Guards seems likely (at which she suddenly feels a gleam of hope, thinking it might disrupt her dreaded wedding). Anatolio wakes up, and Don Urbano says he ought to leave the house immediately, in case he is spotted and wrongly associated with the conspiracy. (Anatolio is in fact planning to resign from the Guards as soon as possible.) Naranjo comes in and reiterates the need for absolute secrecy about this evening's visitors.  

14.

Outside, when Anatolio leaves, he is rudely assailed by Don Patricio and his son. There is a brawl; Lucas' nose is broken, but reinforcements arrive and Anatolio clears off. It's one of many scuffles in the last days of June. After the king's brief and turbulent attendance at the closure of congress (30 June), the insurrection begins, with the guards taking over an area outside the palace. The first real casualties, followed by days heavy with tension: "the town had become an encampment".  

[An ironic scene at the end. Some young officers of the guards, with liberal sympathies, have walked out on the rebellion and are being loudly acclaimed by the people. The name of one of them, Benigno Cordero informs Don Patricio, is Ramón Narváez. In later life he would become a famously reactionary prime minister.]


2 July: Madrid has become an ecampment (Chapter 14)


15. 

The government makes overtures to the palace, but no-one pays them any attention. General Morillo (by curious chance a senior commander in both the opposing troops) valiantly tries to maintain order, and over-rules Riego's hot-headed intention of attacking the palace; consequently Morillo himself becomes an object of suspicion. July 6. Conversation between Don Patricio, Don Primitivo and others. A long harangue by a hoarse Don Patricio, who thinks all the current ministers should be hanged. The ministers themselves have gone to the palace. Don Primitivo claims to have information about the Guards' plans but everyone laughs at him. Don Patricio once more raises the subject of raiding Sr Naranjo's house, as the probable source of the conspiracy leading to the insurrection. 

16. 

The abject Sr Naranjo is terrified, fearing that his guests' designs are going to fail and he will inevitably be arrested as an accessory; he has stopped doing any teaching, and his cane is covered in dust. Meanwhile, elsewhere in the house, Don Urbano (reverting from overheated exhilaration to blackest pessimism) is fretting about his nephew, who is with the guards at El Pardo (one of the other royal palaces in Madrid), and who will surely meet his death. On 4 July Don Urbano himself falls seriously ill and is confined to his couch. At midnight of the 6/7 July Naranjo receives information that the police are coming to arrest them at daybreak. The fatalistic Don Urbano tends to be grimly unsympathetic to Naranjo's troubles. (During this discussion, it emerges that the mysterious woman brought news from Bayonne and the exiled Eguía.) As Naranjo gets ready to flee, he unconsciously takes his revenge on Don Urbano by suddenly turning on the Guards for having stupidly missed the critical moment and for dispersing e.g. to El Pardo. Then Naranjo in a further spasm of self-pity announces that he has no money. Don Urbano nods to Soledad to give him their own money, and Naranjo suddenly cheers up and tactlessly starts preaching to Don Urbano about the necessity of keeping your hopes up.

17. 

Left alone, Don Urbano and his daughter talk. He feels his lack of faith in providence is confirmed. Soledad suggests they seek a friend to protect them. When her father derisively asks her to name a friend (he has no friends), Soledad dares to mention Monsalud, but Don Urbano reacts with horror. He is struck to the heart, his health is failing and he can now no longer see clearly. He falls into a stupor and, Naranjo's old maidservant (Doña Rosa) having arrived, Soledad decides to go out. As she is going, she hears her father mutter four words: He seduced my wife. She goes out anyway. 

18. 

2 a.m., 7 July. Soledad goes looking for the batallón sagrado (a unit of the national militia) -- evidently Monsalud is a volunteer in this batallion. But she cannot make any headway with her enquiries: the city is in tumult, there is firing, all the militia are in full operation, and she is almost the only woman on the streets. Eventually she decides to go home, momentarily cheered by the thought that in all this chaos the police probably won't come to arrest them at daybreak. But she can no longer find a way back to the Calle de las Veneras, because other streets are now full of fighting.

7 July: The Guardia Real advance through the streets (Chapter 19); note the granaderos at the front.

19.

Account of the decisive fighting to prevent the Guards from entering the Plaza Mayor. The Guards have advanced along the Calle Mayor (just to the north), and the key fighting is in three streets or passages that connect the one with the other: Calle de la Amargura, Callejón del Infierno, Calle de los Boteros. [With remodelling of the Plaza Mayor these are now the arcades "Calle del 7 de Julio", "Arco del Triunfo" and "Calle Felipe III", as expained here.] The trained soldiers advance against those they mock as "paper soldiers" but they are driven back by the courage and unity of the militia. The most dangerous moment is in the Calle de los Boteros, where the hero of the hour, renewing the courage of his companions when it falters, is Don Benigno Cordero (who is wounded but survives). 

7 July: The fighting in Calle de los Boteros (Chapter 19)

20.

A contrast between the enthusiast Don Benigno, a true hero, and the fanatic Don Patricio. The latter goes berserk during the fierce fighting in the Callejón del Infierno, blaspheming furiously, wounding one of his fellow militiamen with his bayonet and even stabbing the wall itself. The battle has been a disaster for the Guards, who are now a fleeing rabble. A moment of sweet victory for the people, celebrated not by laurels and triumphal arches but by wine and cake. And now the Militia advance upon the Palacio Real. Somewhere in the chaos we hear an anguished woman's voice, asking about the batallón sagrado ...

21.

The batallón sagrado make advances on the palace despite considerable resistance. However, glorious action now gets bogged down in negotiation, in which the agents of the palace are far more skilled than the indecisive council who represent the victorious side. The upshot is that while the four batallions of Guards that invaded the capital will be requested to surrender, the other two batallions of guards will be allowed to remain in service. Soledad, having got home and come back out again, finally meets Monsalud who says that everything will be fine, but he cannot come at once as his troop is overseeing the surrender of the Guards. And then there is more shooting and everything descends briefly into chaos once more. The king is heard to be still urging on the Guards. 

22.

Soledad goes out a third time, meets Monsalud and returns with him to Naranjo's house. Doña Rosa tells them that the beautiful woman turned up there, and was very angry to discover Naranjo's flight; she left half an hour ago. (Monsalud is so agitated by this that he momentarily stands up to leave, forgetting why he has come.) Don Urbano, hearing a male voice and not seeing clearly, assumes Anatolio has returned. He asks Soledad and "Anatolio" to embrace each other, which they do. Don Urbano, in his death agony, is soothed by this, but when he later overhears Monsalud say something he instantly recognizes the voice and cries out to "Anatolio" to kill his mortal enemy. Soledad asks her father to pardon Monsalud, but he refuses. Soon afterwards, he dies. 

23.

10 p.m, 7 July. A knocking at the door. Monsalud opens it to a party of soldiers headed by a puffed-up Don Patricio, seeking Anatolio and looking to arrest the other residents. He tells them that Naranjo has fled and Don Urbano is dead. After they have searched and found no-one to apprehend, Monsalud terminates Don Patricio's insensitive bluster by pushing him out of the door. 

24. 

9 July. Monsalud brings Soledad to stay with his mother and himself (at a peaceful house with a beautiful garden in el Prado Viejo: it belongs to the Duque del Parque). He sets about tracking down Anatolio; he is confident, he tells Soledad, that her cousin is alive and will still be her husband. In the mean time she can stay at this house for as long as it takes. Monsalud's investigations draw him into rambling conversations with the Corderos, nephew and uncle, both claiming to be able to help him but really preoccupied with their own affairs; Don Primitivo planning a lunch of thanksgiving with thousands of guests; Don Benigno continuing to speak up for a moderate approach and stating his belief that the king is not personally responsible for the violence carried out in his name, but has been "seduced" by hombres pérfidos. Both are evidently bothered by the recent promotion of exaltados to ministerial posts formerly held by moderates. Monsalud eventually manages to get away. Neither the Corderos nor anyone else has any real information about Anatolio's whereabouts.

25.

Monsalud finds himself talking more freely to Soledad. He mysteriously voices the wish that she and his mother (Doña Fermina) should conspire to hold him back from some undisclosed act that he is being tempted into. In the course of the conversation Soledad lets slip that she now knows the reason for her father's hatred of Monsalud, which knocks him off balance. He says that he gets the impression that Anatolio does not want to be found, and he will search no more for him. 

26.

Monsalud has gone out. Soledad in the garden is shocked to see Anatolio appear, dressed in black and with his arm in a sling. He tells her that he hid in a house when wounded on 7 July, and later went to Naranjo's house to find her gone. Now he has tracked her down, but, whose house is this? Soledad doesn't know what to say. Anatolio apologises for his brusqueness, but says he has heard things and he now doesn't intend to marry her. It turns out he has heard about her relations with Monsalud from Lucas Sarmiento (with whom he has reconciled himself, after their brawl). Soledad is serenely accepting of his decision, though asserting her innocence. Anatolio demands proof but she will not supply it, saying she doesn't wish to marry him anyway. Anatolio leaves, feeling he has suffered a blow. 

27. 

Monsalud returns at nightfall, but he is not the frank companion of the morning; he looks severe and avoids conversation. Soledad remarks on his change of manner, but Monsalud says he can't talk about it tonight, he's in the power of the devil. Later she overhears mother and son talking, the mother apparently pleading. When she awakes the next day he has gone out. His mother tells her that Monsalud is leaving them -- they pack his chest. Monsalud, returning, mentions to Soledad that he has heard about Anatolio's visit. Soledad reports what happened, and Monsalud says he will convince her cousin he is in the wrong, but Soledad is not in favour. Monsalud asks for his chest to be ready by ten. As the evening draws on he behaves wildly, at each moment wavering between asserting that he's leaving and deciding that he won't leave. He asks to be chained up, for the doors to be locked. 

28.

His mother having retired, the "brother" and "sister" continue to talk, Monsalud wishing that he could draw inspiration from her serenity and peaceful spirit. Soledad retires in turn, but she doesn't sleep, being far from reassured by this conversation. Suddenly she hears a coach draw up outside. She slips outside, sees Monsalud at the gate and the chest being loaded onto the coach. She hears a woman's voice saying: What is this? Do you repent? Monsalud replies: No, let's go. Away! In despair, Soledad calls out his name (though only internally) and drops senseless to the ground.

*


Spotting this in a shop window, I thought: "Why, that's Salvador Monsalud!" Well it isn't of course. The portrait that Alianza chose for the cover of 7 de julio is Jean Terford David, a French-born American officer painted by Thomas Sully of Philadelphia in 1813. But I think it works pretty well for Galdós' handsome and ambiguous hero. 

*

About Trafalgar (1873), the first volume of the first series of the Episodios Nacionaleshttps://michaelpeverett.blogspot.com/2016/01/benito-perez-galdos-trafalgar-1873.html .



















Labels: ,

Thursday, June 24, 2021

Benito Pérez Galdós: Fortunata and Jacinta (1886-1887)



Benito Pérez Galdós: Fortunata y Jacinta (Fortunata and Jacinta) (1886-87)  

So, some three and half years since I began it, I've finally finished reading Fortunata and Jacinta (in the brilliant translation by Agnes Moncy Gullón). 

Well yes, it's a long book. On some rough calculations that I've just done, it comes out as 15% longer than David Copperfield. Someone else wrote that it's as long as War and Peace shorn of its epilogues. 

None of Galdós' eighty-ish other novels is anything like so long. I read somewhere that Galdós was persuaded to write a long novel because of the success of Clarín's La Regenta, published a couple of years earlier. 

But this doesn't explain why it took me so long to read. There were some long gaps, maybe a couple that lasted a year or more. When I picked it up again, it was with a sense of excitement but also a sense of struggle and reluctance. It didn't take much to draw me away from it again. (I haven't quite worked out what the feeling of reluctance was about, but I know that I was troubled about disturbing my peace of mind, e.g. whenever Juanito reappeared, or approaching the inevitable end. You might not unreasonably describe Fortunata and Jacinta as a comic novel. But I was frightened of it.)

Galdós evidently didn't have the problem that would occur to the rest of us, how to fill all those pages. He just, as it were, opened the windows and let in Madrid. At the most entertaining level Fortunata and Jacinta is just an overwhelming flow of life and anecdote and detail. Everyone knows that Galdós' favourite novelists were Dickens and Balzac. But often, immersed in the grainy, lived detail of this Madrid, what I was most reminded of was Joyce's Dublin. 

I suppose the other book that comes into view is Zola's L'Assommoir (1877). That was a complete and unexampled immersion in working-class life. Fortunata y Jacinta is more centred on middle-class life, but with special reference to the lower-class heroine Fortunata. One of the book's serious themes is the contrast between middle-class values and assumptions, the often hypocritical "ways to behave" recognized by the educated, and the radically uneducated "streetwise" conceptions held by Fortunata, her patent lack of commitment to "sensible" notions, her passionate need to live, her regular bouts of cleansing self-destruction. "I am pueblo," she says at one point. No question of preferring one of these novels to the other, both masterpieces, but psychologically Galdós poses the more pertinent question for an era when our new middle-class codes and exclusions are so hotly proclaimed and assailed. 

At any rate both these novels feel more urgent to me than War and Peace (no working class) and Ulysses (no story) -- Well, I'm being contentious I know. 

*


Juanito spotted number 11 on the door of a poultry shop. It was undoubtedly the way in, he thought, stepping over feathers and crushed eggshells. He asked two women who were plucking hens and chickens, and they answered by pointing to a screen door, the entrance to the staircase to number 11. The main entrance and the shop were one and the same in that characteristic building of old Madrid. And then it dawned on Juanito why Estupiñá often turned up with feathers from different birds stuck to his boots [. . .] To the right of that lugubrious square space, in another area, a paid assassin besmirched with blood was executing the hens. He wrung their necks with the speed and cleverness that come from experience, and when he had scarcely let go one victim and turned the agonizing creature over to the pluckers, he would grab another to caress her in the same way [. . .]

Having absorbed this gruesome spectacle (the smell of the corral and the noise of fluttering wings, the pecking and clucking of so many victims), Juanito turned to the sooty, worn, famous granite staircase. [ . . .] On the next level, as Juanito went past the door to one of the rooms, he saw it was open and naturally looked in , because everything about the place greatly stirred his curiosity. He didn't expect to see anything, and he suddenly saw something that impressed him: a pretty woman, young and tall  . . .  She seemed to be spying too, moved by a curiosity similar to his, waiting to see who the devil was coming up the blasted staircase at that time of day. The girl wore a light blue scarf on her head and a large, heavy shawl over her shoulders, and the minute she saw the Dauphin [Juanito] she swelled up at him, I mean, she put her hands on her hips and raised her shoulders with that characteristic gesture that low-class women of Madrid have, filling out their shawls with a movement that reminds you of a hen ruffling her feathers and swelling out before coming down to normal size again.

Juanito didn't suffer from shyness , and when he saw the girl and observed how pretty she was and how fine her boots were, he had an urge to get closer. 

"Does Sr. Estupiñá live here?" he asked her. 

"Don Plácido? Yes, way up, on top of the top floor," the young woman answered, taking a few steps towards the door. 

And Juanito thought, "You're coming out so I can see your pretty feet. Nice boots." As he was thinking this, he noticed that the girl was taking a red mittened hand from her shawl and raising it to her mouth. Young Santa Cruz craved to treat her in a familiar way, and couldn't resist asking:

"What are you eating, sweetheart?"

"Can't you see?" she replied, showing it to him. "An egg."

"A raw egg!"

Very gracefully, the girl lifted the broken egg to her mouth for the second time and sucked it again. 

"I don't know how you can eat that raw drool," said Santa Cruz, not finding a better way to make conversation. 

"They're better raw. Want some?" she replied, offering the Dauphin what was left in the shell. 

 

(from Fortunata and Jacinta I.3.4, translated by Agnes Moncy Gullón.)

*

At No 11 Calle Cava de San Miguel lives Estupiñá, an elderly henchman of the merchant families. But they never visit him here, because he's always out and about. Only now, with him being laid up with a rheumatism, the young Juanito is despatched to pay him a visit. The building, owned by Moreno-Isla, is seven floors from its main entrance down on Calle Cava de San Miguel. Estupiñá, as a more respectable citizen, lives at the top of the building. The staircase is "famous" because Estupiñá always talks about it (as perhaps his home's only notable feature). But he himself only has to climb four floors because he has an arrangement with the shoe-shop looking out on the Plaza Mayor, which is at a much higher elevation than the street on the other side.   

Juanito, not knowing about this, enters from the Cava side -- and down there, in the excitement of that heady charged violent atmosphere, he glimpses the woman eating a raw egg who, we'll learn, is Fortunata. 

It's a crucial scene but an anomalous one. We are seeing through Juanito's eyes here, but that'll prove to be a very rare thing. We won't meet Fortunata directly again for a long time. The novel's first 100 pages are focussed on the lives of the wealthy middle-class Santa Cruz family and their circle, a devastating group portrait. 

When the outcome of this meeting is recounted it's in an excruciating way, via Jacinta's self-tormenting curiosity and the hidden resentment in Juanito's alternately guarded and boastful revelations; then his drunken guilt; then his scrambling recalibration the following day.  (Remembering those honeymoon conversations brings back to mind some of the reluctance that I felt while reading, my over-sensitivity to the novel's pain.)

Thereafter, for much of the novel we'll be seeing things -- including Juanito -- through the eyes of others, including Jacinta and especially Fortunata.

*


I've mentioned the translation, by Agnes Moncy Gullón. It could be the topic for several posts on its own. It's certainly one of those rare translations that feels like something more than a serviceable rendering. It feels like a new classic novel in the English language, like Smollett's Gil Blas or Scott Moncrieff's Remembrance of Things Past.

And like the latter, it is both relishable and deeply strange. It feels like it was flung out with the same unhesitating rapidity with which Galdós wrote the original. There's a fearlessness about it that constantly strikes sparks. Or you might say it has a certain necessary roughness, even wrongness. Like in the extract above, when the executed hen is "agonizing" rather than "agonized", or 

...the collectors going by ladened with money...  (pp. 85-86) 

...two pounds of Corynthian raisins for a plum cake... (p. 94). (Don't we have the word "currants"?)  

The translation is into American English, and it makes essential and often brilliant use of colloquial American resources. 

There were various types of boys. There was the type who always goes to school with his book bag, and there was the barefoot prankster who does nothing but waste time. They differed very little in their dress, and even less in their language, which was rough and had slovenly inflections.

"Hey, kid . . . looka this. I'll push ya' face in. Get what I mean . . . ?" (p. 134)

And yet to me it doesn't sound consistently American, it sounds piebald. I don't know if that's also how Galdós sounds in Spanish, but I doubt it. I suppose this is a criticism, in principle . . . but there's a cornucopia of great effects that come out of the clashing registers. 

"Doña Barbarita" was so well-known in the district that the market women fought for her business and got into brawls over who would have dibs on the illustrious customer. (p. 92))

Then caps, scads of caps placed high on racks and aligned with a stick; sheepskin jackets and .... (p. 133)



Jackets of the 1887 edition (second and fourth parts)

[Image source: Wikipedia.] 

Is there a significance to the larger font for Fortunata? As is often observed, in the novel the two women are by no means equally prominent. Jacinta is a smaller person -- I don't mean just physically. Is that fair? -- I honestly don't know. But Jacinta has her moments, especially in the early pages. 

"[...] And besides, what difference does it make to you?" "None. I'm sorry. But what a temper!" "You're the one who's mad, not me." "Well, you are spoiled!"

Nonsense like this was inconsequential; ten minutes later they had usually made up. But when she left that night, she felt like crying. Her desire to have children had never shown itself so imperiously before. Her sister had humiliated her, been angry that she loved her little nephew so much. After all, if it wasn't jealousy, what was it? If and when she had a little boy, she wouldn't let anyone so much as look at him. She went from Hileras Street to Pontejos Street in an extremely agitated state, oblivious of everyone. It was sprinkling, but she didn't remember to open her umbrella. The gas lamps in shop windows were already lit, but Jacinta, who usually stopped in on her way home to see what was new, didn't stop once. When she got to the corner of Pontejos Square and was about to cross the street and enter her house, she heard something that made her hesitate. A chill ran through her body like a knife. She came to a halt, ears perked for the murmuring sound that seemed to come from the ground, from in between the cobblestones. It was a wail, an animal's cry begging for help and protection against desertion and death. And the cry was so piercingly sharp, so cutting, that it sounded less like the voice of a living creature than the treble sound of a violin faintly played on its highest note: meeeeee . . . [...] She looked all about her and saw at last, next to the sidewalk by the square, a grate in the curb where rainwater drains into the sewer. So that was where the sounds were coming from . . . And those laments were upsetting, producing a painful flood of pity in her. All the maternal emotions of which she was capable and all the tenderness she had experienced until then in her dreams of being a mother were activated by that cry [...]

"Deogracias, that . . . that noise over there . . . go and see what it is," she said, trembling and pale. 

The doorman listened carefully, then got down on all fours, looking at his mistress with a rather wheedling, jovial expression. 

"It must be . . . Aha! It's some kittens that got thrown into the sewer."

"Kittens? Are you sure? Are you positive that they're kittens?"

 [...]

"Get them out of there!" the lady commanded, unusually authoritative. 

Deogracias got down on all fours again, rolled up one sleeve, and put his arm into the hole. Jacinta didn't detect the incredulous, almost mocking expression on his face. It was raining harder and water started running into the opening, gushing and bubbling as if it were in a frying pan, so loudly you could hardly hear the thin meeeeee-ing any more. Nevertheless, the Dauphin's wife heard it distinctly. The doorman looked up with his dullard's face as if to invoke the heavens and, smiling, said:

"I can't, Miss. They're deep down . . . really deep down."

"Can't you take up this paving stone?" she said, stamping on it. 

"Paving stone?" Deogracias repeated, standing up and looking at his mistress as one looks at someone whose sanity is in doubt. "As for taking it up, yes, it could be done. You could notify city hall. The lieutenant mayor, Sr. Aparisi, is a neighbor. But --"

They both perked up their ears. 

"Can't hear anything any more," Deogracias commented stubbornly. "They're drowned."

The brute never suspected that he was driving a dagger into his mistress' back with those words. Jacinta, however, thought she could hear the wailing deep down. But this couldn't go on. She began to realize what a lack of proportion there was between the vastness of her pity and the smallness of its object. The rain came driving down, and by now the opening was swallowing a thick wave that made a gargling noise as it hit the walls of that gullet. Jacinta broke into a run towards the house and dashed up the stairs. [...] And all night long she suffered the ineffable annoyance of constantly hearing that meeeeee from the sewer opening. She knew it was nonsense, perhaps a nervous disorder, but she couldn't help it. [...]


(from Fortunata y Jacinta, I.6.4 (pp. 89-91 in Gullón's translation))


*

Reader: I am a novelist myself, and an avid fan of novels; this particular one taught me the glorious scope and the exhilarating freedom that a novel can provide, both as an art form to practice and as a reading experience to enjoy. You live in it. You move into it. You inhabit it. You get accustomed to it. It becomes part of the daily setting of your life, like your coffee mug or your computer or your dog. You scrape some extra minute to get back to it. You stay awake longer than you should to reach the end of a chapter. You walk the same streets the characters walk, overhear their conversations, visit the same cafés and street markets and bourgeois mansions and working-class slums and taverns. 

(Antonio Muñoz Molina, in his note "To be placed inside a copy of Fortunata and Jacinta. . .")

*

Linda Willem, "Moreno-Isla's Unpublished Scene from the 'Fortunata y Jacinta' Galleys", Anales Galdosianos 27-28 (1992-93), pp. 179-83:

https://www.academia.edu/48345034/Moreno_Islas_Unpublished_Scene_from_the_Fortunata_y_Jacinta_Galleys

A short scene that Galdós changed his mind about, replacing it with a single sentence (IV.2.5, p. 683 in this translation), tightening up the irony in Moreno's final hours. 

Staircases are important in Fortunata and Jacinta. In hindsight there's something of an irony in the seven-floor one at the Cava being owned by Moreno-Isla, whose heart trouble makes every stair-climb a crisis. 

*

Robert Kirsner, "Galdós's Attitude towards Spain as Seen in the Characters of Fortunata y Jacinta", PMLA vol 66 no 2 (March 1951), pp. 124-137. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/459594

Kirsner argues that in Fortunata y Jacinta Galdós here manifests an acceptance of Spain as it is, with an accent on compassion, in contrast to the more radical gestures of earlier books. "... Spain appears as a living image which, like the characters of this novel, inspires a sympathetic appreciation".

There's a lot that's worth pondering here, but it's a reading that surely underemphasizes the novel's devastating challenge to Spain's new "mesocracy" (government by the middle class). (Has Kirsner forgotten, for instance, the arranged marriage. . . Surely he isn't confused by the protean narrator's assurances that all is joy and happiness?)

That protean narrator needs to be carefully negotiated. For example, in the long passage I quoted earlier, is Deogracias really a "brute", or is the epithet to be understood as a rendering of Jacinta's emotion, or a rendering of how some sympathetic member of her own class would tell the story? 

This narrator, on a larger scale, gives us small essays that we may simply swallow if we're not careful. Here's one: 

Being a rich and terribly respectable family, the Santa Cruzes were very well connected and had friends in all spheres, from the highest to the lowest. It's strange to see how our times, which are unfortunate in other ways, present us with a happy confusion of social classes or, rather, their harmony and reconciliation. In this respect our country is ahead of others, where serious historical suits for equality are awaiting a verdict. The problem has been solved here simply and peacefully, thanks to the democratic spirit of Spaniards and our less vehement concern about aristocratic status. A huge national defect, "employomania", has also had its part in this great conquest. Offices have become the trunk onto which historical branches have been grafted, and from these branches friendships have sprung up between the fallen nobleman and the plebian swollen with a university degree, and such friendships have led to blood relations. This confusion is good. Thanks to its existence, we aren't terrified of being affected by class wars; we already have a mild, inoffensive sort of socialism in our blood. Imperceptibly, and aided by bureaucracy, poverty, and education, all classes have gradually mixed; the members of one migrate to another, making a strong network that holds together and toughens the national fabric. Birth means nothing to us, and comments on ancestral lineage are only conversation. There are no differences other than the essential ones based on good versus bad breeding, on stupidity versus discretion, on the spiritual inequalities that are as old as the soul itself. The other positive class distinction, money, is based on economic principles as immutable as the laws of physics, and trying to alter them would be like trying to swallow the sea.

(from Fortunata and Jacinta I.6.1, pp. 81-82 in Gullón's translation)

I am sure this is not mere sarcasm, it isn't merely counterfactual. But I have a very strong sense of the narrator temporarily assuming the mental outlook of, say, Don Baldomero (Juanito's father). It sounds like a blandly optimistic view of society that emerges from within the middle class outlook; but what the novel is really probing is the middle class outlook itself. 

And by the end of the passage, it's started to undercut much of its original proposition by a series of shrugged-off yet increasingly significant qualifications. 

As in most novels, as in life generally, we need to keep an eye on what people actually do. Listen to Jacinta's dismissive ideas about the lower class -- eagerly fortified by Juanito, who is striving to put a lid on the past. Or the uncomprehending disparity between the outlooks of Jacinta and the doorman Deogracias in the kitten scene. 

Yes, Fortunata and Jacinta portrays class distinction with all its old inveteracy, though perhaps with new hypocrisy. To see the chasms in the above divagation there's no need to reflect on what would happen in Spain half a century later. 



The jacket illustration is a detail of an 1892 painting by the Catalan artist Ramón Casas i Carbó. According to the rear note it's called Chica in a Bar but the translator calls it La Madeleine and Casas' original title is Madeleine o Au Moulin De La Galette. So the subject who so strikingly stands in for Fortunata is in fact a Parisian. (According to the blog of the Museu Nacional the source of her emotion can be glimpsed in the mirror behind her, a couple dancing cheek to cheek. I can't really make this out. I can see what might be a couple, though they don't appear to me to be cheek to cheek.) 

I think the jacket works brilliantly, but in fact it makes me reflect that in the novel Fortunata doesn't really go to places like cafés.  Hers is a world of stairs and balconies and streets and markets and shops. The novel's many Madrid bar-café tertulias are generally peopled only by men. 

*

Two earlier posts about Fortunata and Jacinta:

Inside the Micaelas with Fortunata:
Wamba, King of the Visigoths:









Labels: ,

Thursday, March 07, 2019

Spanish reveries

Reichardia tingitana

I'm in Spain for a couple of days… and it's a delight to be here in March, when it's perfect walking weather, the acacias are glowing and people are friendly and fresh with spring hopes.

As ever, I'm trying to improve my Spanish by reading a book by Benito Pérez Galdós. I suddenly began to wonder why the author's name on the spine is Pérez Galdós, but in the editor's introduction he is just referred to as Galdós. And I thought, it really is time I got to grips with Spanish names and how they work.

A very fascinating topic, comprehensively explained by Wikipedia.


An author or other famous person is normally referred to by the first of their two surnames, which was once invariably, and still usually is, the one inherited from their father. (Thus if I ever apply for Spanish citizenship, my name will be registered as Michael Peverett Gulliksson.) Thus Cervantes, Unamuno, Goya, Calderón, Albéniz, Franco …. But some Spanish surnames are extremely common: Pérez is is one of them. If the first surname is one of these, the second (or mother's) may be preferred: thus Galdós, also Lorca, Picasso…  But when this is the case, the author is still indexed under the first surname: García Lorca under G, Pérez Galdós under P. And since libraries like to arrange their books in alphabetical order, that's the form used on the spines.

I learnt something else too that's relevant to the heroine Soledad (the book in question is Siete de julio, one of the 46 Episodios nacionales). Many Spanish girls are given forenames of different devotional images of the Virgin Mary:  Maria de Los Dolores, Maria de la Luz, Maria de la Soledad etc . In everyday use these names are shortened to the suffix: Dolores, Luz, Soledad… Family and close friends also make use of a wealth of traditional nicknames: in this case Solita, Solilla, Sola, which all appear in the opening pages of the novel.

Reichardia tingitana

In the apartment I found Peter Hughes’ Allotment Architecture (2013). Evidently I left it here a few years ago, thus happily escaping the vicious purges of my books in England (i.e. whenever I feel suffocated by possessions).

As is perhaps understandable, I'm viewing it through a Brexit lens. Peter is a poet from a non-elite background, a native of “peripheral Britain” (basically E Anglia, well away from the metropolitan centres), and his poetry is deeply in touch with local life -- not the romanticized version, but as it actually exists for most peripherals today. But at the same time his poetry keeps engaging with European material. In obvious ways: e.g. the last of the five sequences here is simply called, and is about, Berlioz. And his subsequent book was a transformation of Petrarch. You can't get much more European than Berlioz and Petrarch. I seem to remember that Peter Riley complained that Hughes traduces Petrarch, reduces him to a demotic (and very British) laddishness. I'm probably misrepresenting PR. Anyway, while this is too reductive as a reading of Peter's poetry, I do think it's a very good starting point for a reading. For isn't this precisely the point? Couldn't we see this as one of his central concerns: What has Europe to do with us, and we with Europe? Why the glaring and comic disparities, what does that mean, and how can we negotiate it? Concerns that, to say the least, seem timely.


      miserable simplicities
recline under the fingers
   whispering September
      plane leaves along the banks
           of the Seine cannot be heard
               from here unlike the fight
                                  across the street
                              & the piano lesson
                      that neither teacher
nor student attend

(Behoven 19)

The title conceals "Beethoven", regularly evoked in the poems of this sequence. But when poem 12 ends with the line

O Vienna!

it's not of the composer we're thinking, but of Midge Ure's moustache.

Well, pretty much every book I read seems to be about Brexit these days. The aforementioned Siete de julio, for example, portraying a complete meltdown of  government and institutions, an era of febrile conspiracy theories and furious opinions...

Peter's zone of operation, you might object, is better expressed not as Europe vs King's Lynn, but as high culture vs low. (Where "vs" is a flippant way of referring to a problematic relationship, rather than to outright opposition.) But I'd contend that the two pairs of contrasts aren't finally distinguishable. The sphere of high culture and the sphere of the international are intimately linked (by education, not least). In contrast to both is the local experience of our peripheral lives, with its desolating yet often salutary deflations, its loathing of pretension and outsiders and deviance, its willed ignorance, its nurturing horizon, its  instincts and intuitions, its corrective if inadequate appeal to the mere evidence of our senses.

As one of the caravan sites boasts:

      traditionalists from all walks of life
              will relish the narrow range of
             cultural references visible here

(Site Guide, site 15)

We're both mocking, but not altogether mocking either. There's something out here
(for our locality is just as much an "out here" as  it is a prison)... There's something out here that matters, something neglected and essential...


the rogue gnocchi of Abergavenny
pursued us through cold nights of restless sleep
& later formed a cash-in-hand band for
weddings or birthdays & passing your SATs
the only real security was speed
but with the second-hand Fiesta hitched
to a home-made marine-ply caravan
we couldn't underestimate the risks
the alcoholic SAS man swore
if we kept on the move around Norfolk
we would confuse everyone including
ourselves & that is certainly working
imagining the place where we started
we still don't know penguins have solid bones

(Lynn Deeps, 6)

[Yes. They do.]





Since I was last in Spain I've significantly reduced my meat intake -- basically because I'm fairly horrified by industrial meat production, and also because it seems a pretty pain-free way to reduce my carbon footprint. I suppose I've gone from being about 70% meat-free to about 95%. (I still eat fish.) Anyhow, this has made me more aware of the Spanish word "vegetal"... It means something with lots of vegetables in it... e.g. a lot of salad in a sandwich. It doesn't mean "suitable for vegetarians" and a sandwich vegetal probably contains eggs and tuna and may well contain chicken or ham. I quite like the Spanish assumption that a meat eater might want to eat something with a lot of vegetables.



Reichardia tingitana

Reichardia tingitana

Reichardia tingitana

Reichardia tingitana


Another book I found at the apartment: Torbjörn Säfve's molza, älskaren, a 1988 historical novel (set in the Renaissance papal society of Raphael and Michelangelo). I was delighted to find that all that reading of the Swedish news service SVT nyheter is paying off; I can almost read this. Säfve is a Norrbotten novelist, recipient of e.g. a Rubus arcticus award in 1997. He sounds a fascinatingly individual author of whom I'd like to learn much more. Many of his books are about boxing. He's an Islamic convert (Sufism), and there can't be too many of those in Norrbotten. (I believe special rules apply to the observance of summer Ramadans in places where the sun never goes down.) One of his other books is about the Sufi master Ibn 'Arabi.


Some sort of exotic succulent, Cala lo Ferris
When I'm not thinking about Brexit I'm thinking about climate change. (The topics are not altogether unconnected, but I won't get into that now.)

More specifically, I've been thinking about how I as an individual should best direct my efforts to reduce my personal carbon footprint.

[Carbon footprint: I'm using this familiar expression to mean our total personal contribution to global warming. I'm aware that not all greenhouse gases contain carbon. There are probably other objections of which I'm not so aware. But this isn't a technical discussion, and for present purposes “carbon footprint” will do.]

Of course I'm not just talking about myself. I'm talking about people like me, environmentally concerned westerners with a pretty average lifestyle, involving most of these: loved ones, family, friends, a heated home, clothes, a vehicle, a job, a vice or two, going to cafes, a meal out once or twice a week, visits and events, the odd trip abroad, and so on.

Most of these aspects of our daily lives contribute to our carbon footprint. As I've touched on in a couple of recent posts, to live is to pollute. As human beings we have an inbuilt drive to dominate and exploit our environment, not just to survive but to make our mark, to realize our potential: to build prosperity and security for our families, to have many children, to invest our capital, to use our muscles and powers of invention to better ourselves. For our remote ancestors that meant hunting wild beasts or cultivating a bit of ground or shaping wood into outbuildings. These days our individual impact on nature is less directly visible, but our drives haven't really changed. When we shop.for clothes, or bomb down the motorway in our car, or buy a meal, or put in a new kitchen, or head for a new holiday destination, or discover there's going to be a baby, we usually experience a level of exhilaration. We are really living! We feel fulfilled.

So reducing our personal carbon footprint usually involves sacrifice.

That's not such a big deal. Humans are good at sacrifice when it's for something they care about. A mother will throw herself in front of a car to save her child, without even thinking. But that's a rather dramatic example. What about courtesy? We stand aside to let someone through, we apologise for delaying them, we say thank-you when someone tells us the way to reception. We do these things because we think courtesy is important, it makes the world go round. And as a matter of fact it's only when we were children that we thought of them as sacrifices, though they are. Humans readily internalize sacrifice, and those who live almost entirely for others are often unaware of it.

Sacrifice needn't be a problem. But, coming back to reducing our carbon footprint, there are some important corollaries. The mother who shields her child and the courteous person who stands aside with a smile both know exactly what to do. This carbon footprint thing is trickier. We know about lots of things that it would be good to do, but what should be our priorities? A sacrifice ought to be an informed one. How sad it would be to learn too late that we had toiled and scrimped and denied ourselves over many years to achieve some reduction, and it had  made hardly any difference, and all the time we'd been neglecting another course of action that would have been far more effective?

Given that this question of priority is of such urgent concern to so many of us, you would suppose that the information we need is widely publicized. But that hasn't really been my experience. The media is interested in publicizing new ideas for reducing our carbon footprint, especially contentious ones, but is far less interested in context and in describing the overall picture; the sort of information that changes more slowly and is therefore less newsworthy. And public agencies tend to promote messages that are relevant to their own sector and their objectives; it's not their business to look at our lifestyles as a whole.

The upshot is, it's easy to find advice, but not so easy to find guidance.

Take a hypothetical example. A rather ridiculous one, maybe, but it'll do.

We've all seen the advice, by government and advisory bodies and green groups and even energy suppliers, to turn off unnecessary lights in our homes. Suppose my friend Carter took this on board in a big way, is scrupulous to a fault about turning off every light in the house except for in the rooms where  someone is actually sitting. (Or perhaps, like the old tip in Viz, Carter turns off all the lights and walks around the house wearing a miner's helmet?) Anyway, Carter is habituated to this devoted attention to detail. It's an important expression of Carter's values. Lights today use much less energy than twenty years ago when Carter began darkening the landing -- How much less? Carter doesn't know. It so happens that Carter's supplier now uses electricity from 80% renewable sources, but Carter doesn't know that either.  And now suppose that all this time Carter’s been running the gas central heating on max, likes to feel cosy but is often rather warm and sluggish and dehydrated and has trouble sleeping? Well, what Carter did deserves the respect that any sacrifice deserves, it was certainly better than doing nothing -- but not very much better. Carter saved some light bulbs from being consumed, and it was good for Carter's soul. But with fuller information and guidance, Carter might have sacrificed less and achieved a whole lot more.

So, how can we avoid doing a Carter? What kind of information do we need?

It would be helpful, I think, to see an analysis of the annual carbon footprint of the average household, with the percentage contribution of e.g. car use, flight journeys, electricity, heating, food consumption, internet usage, and new purchases such as a smartphone, a new car, a second-hand car, a kitchen refit... That kind of thing. No-one can make our decisions for us, but this sort of breakdown might suggest where we should focus.

Without that ability to assess different behaviours in terms of their carbon footprint, crusades such as Carter's are just articles of faith. Most of us, I suppose, adopt a more multi-pronged strategy. We try to be environmentally responsible in every way we can, so long as it isn't too inconvenient. Perhaps we adopt the Peverett rule, referred to earlier in regard to eating meat (Don't sweat the last 5%). We who have worked in offices are familiar with many another cliché expressing the same anti-perfectionist idea: low-hanging fruit, easy wins, the 80:20 rule...

I'm not one of those who despair of the planet and say it's too late to do anything -- how could I think that, walking among these Spanish flowers? This despair is an instance of the emotional fallacy of taint: to see something that's been damaged as something that's been ruined. But still, the sea ice is melting, it's a perilous situation. It merits a more concerted response than articles of faith and rules of thumb.

Here's another scenario, a real-world one this time. Tomorrow I'm driving down to stay with my mum and dad, about 150 miles away. The advice is clear: I ought to take public transport. That would take much longer, it would be less convenient, and it would cost more, so I won't. But if I had the information to quantify how much it would reduce my carbon footprint, I might reconsider my approach: not just for this one journey, but for similar ones in the future.

And such questions arise frequently, on small things as well as big. At a cafe, should I use the electronic hand-dryer or the paper towel... or wipe my hands on my jeans?

We recently posted about compostable cardboard cups. Is it better -- strictly as regards global warming -- to compost the cups, or to recycle the cardboard, or to bury them in landfill?

So how can such alternatives be quantified? Evidently, we need a common unit. It's time to stop asking questions and do some reading up.

Starting, not with human actions, but at the other end, when gases enter the atmosphere, there is a unit called GWP (global warming potential). But this doesn't relate to any specific quantity of CO2; it's a way of comparing identical quantities of different kinds of greenhouse gas. CO2 has, by definition, a GWP of 1. Methane's GWP is much higher (though to make it more complicated, just how much higher depends on the chosen time period). The GWP is used to express all GHG emissions using the same unit:

Metric tons of CO2 equivalent. (aka MtCO2e)


In the UK, this was 8.45 per capita in 2013. Australia 25.06, USA was 19.9, Finland 11.69, China 8.49, Sweden 5.29, India 2.28. World average 6.27.
[Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions_per_capita .]

UK GHG emissions, breakdown by sector (2017):


Transport 27%
Energy supply 24%
Business 17%
Residential 15%
Agriculture 10%
Waste Management 4%
Other 2%

[Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/final-uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-national-statistics-1990-2017 .]

The US EPA (2018) says:

"A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. This number can vary based on a vehicle’s fuel, fuel economy, and the number of miles driven per year."

That's based on 22mpg (4.839mpl) and driving 11,500 miles per year. [Most UK vehicles will be more fuel-efficient.  My own vehicle is far from efficient but it's still 7.7mpl.]

[Source: https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/greenhouse-gas-emissions-typical-passenger-vehicle .]




[Continuing...]

*

A couple of asides. Some people don't like the implication that a very high proportion of emissions are the result of ordinary people doing things. Here's Seema Syeda in the Guardian;

"Less widely known, however, is that responsibility for the crisis is unequal too. In recent years we have been sold a lie: that ordinary people are to blame for the climate crisis. It’s our spending and our consumption habits that have created the mess we’re in, we are told, not the bankers, oil companies and a rich elite. ... At the pinnacle of this system stands the fossil fuel industry. A report last year showed that just 100 companies have been responsible for over 70% of the world’s carbon emissions since 1988. The fossil fuel industry has wrecked the planet...."

No doubt the FFI is deeply responsible for promoting consumption of its products and for lobbying governments to maintain FF consumption as central. It has worked hard to discredit or neutralize information harmful to its profits. Those are bad things. But Syeda's use of the word "responsible" tends to convey the entirely false impression that the producers themselves are the emitters (if they were, they'd have nothing left to sell us). The vast bulk of emissions arise from the lifestyle decisions of citizens. There are people out there trying to influence us, but no-one can take away our responsibility for our decisions. We stop buying oil, BP ceases to exist. We have the power.

Individual decisions are not insignificant. For example, Sweden's meat consumption after rising for many years has now dropped for two years in a row and this is expected to continue. It is attributed to citizens choosing to eat less meat. Not to other factors that might produce the same results, such as supply issues, high prices, an economic squeeze, or new legislation. Just individual decisions. And that's a lot less emissions.


*

That's not to say that politics isn't important. In 2018 US emissions increased by 3.4%, after declining for 20 years. The Trump effect, of course. As nations feel the pinch, there's  a wave of ugly kickbacks. Global imperatives come to be seen as the enemy.

Which brings me to my second aside.  Some people say that it's more important to focus on consciousness-raising and activism than on rubbing away at our individual carbon footprint. That's true, in theory. If you can persuade ten or a hundred people to reduce their emissions by 30%, that's better for the planet than only reducing your own emissions by 30%, or even 95%.  But few of us can measure our personal effectiveness in that way. When people change what they do, how often is it the result of one outside voice and that voice alone?

Besides, it's better to be congruent. You are a better persuader if you are taking action yourself, in your own life.




Pallenis maritima (syn. Asteriscus maritimus)


Pallenis maritima (syn. Asteriscus maritimus)

Plantago lagopus, Gynandriris sisyrinchium, and unopened flower of Asteriscus maritimus



Some sort of Acacia... retinoides maybe
Fagonia cretica





Lotus creticus


I was defeated by this one. On sand. Flowers generally like e.g. a Bird's-foot Trefoil (Lotus), but the 5-part leaves don't resemble anything in my book (Blamey/Grey-Wilson).

Later... It's Lotus creticus. Admittedly it would have helped if I'd noticed the headnote to Lotus, which describes the 5-part leaves. What was less clear from the book is that the dark-tipped keel (diagnostic for L. creticus) only becomes visible in the later stages of flowering. Also, the leaflets on these plants were quite sharply pointed, not at all like the obcordate leaflets in Blamey's illustration.


Lotus creticus



Lotus creticus

Zoom in on the picture above to see the pods, the fresh flowers (with keel not yet protruding), and one or two fading flowers where the dark-tipped keel is visible.

Medicago littoralis


I had to get out the Blackeye clip-on macro lens for this one (it's another yellow coastal prostrate legume, like the previous species, but it's tiny in comparison. I'll go for Medicago littoralis, on the basis of the sharply toothed stipules.

The macro lens has such a narrow depth of field that it's not much good with swollen shapes (such as pea flowers). It's better with flat things, like leaves.

Medicago littoralis

Labels: , ,

Powered by Blogger