Fictive History in Gironella

Fictive History in GironellaAuthor(s): Paul IlieSource: Journal of Spanish Studies: Twentieth Century, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Fall, 1974), pp. 77-94Published by: Society of Spanish & Spanish-American StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27740641 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 05:37

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 [email protected].

.

Society of Spanish & Spanish-American Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Journal of Spanish Studies: Twentieth Century.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.74 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 05:37:47 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sssas

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27740641?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


FICTIVE HISTORY IN GIRONELLA

Paul Ilie

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Several questions arise concerning the esthetics of the historical

novel when we examine Jos? Mar?a Gironella's Los cipreses creen en Dios and Un mill?n de muertos.l Whether theoreticians like Lukacs are followed or not, these novels pose two related prob lems: how accurate must the fictive reality be in its reflection of historical reality? and what degree of license may the writer enjoy as he fictionalizes history? Surely it can be said that if the novelist has no right to invent new "facts" in the way that he invents new

characters, he does have the right to select some facts and eliminate others in order to present his position before history. Selection means interpretation, and since the author is writing fiction and not engaging in historiography, his choices are as legitimate as the

historian's, who emphasizes or subordinates facts in the course of his own presentation. Nevertheless, the claim to selectivity en counters difficulty when the subject is as controversial as the

Spanish Civil War. Even by suggesting a point of view or judgment on the war, the novelist arouses feeling on the opposite side, whereas his efforts to be impartial may often incur blame from both sides.

The selective bias appears to be minimal in Gironella's case, for he paints such a wide panorama for the years 1931-39 that his material covers all possible political viewpoints, backgrounds in cluded. While objections might be made to the unfair treatment dealt to the Anarchists, an undeniably balanced account emerges of the politics practiced by the Socialists, Communists, Falangists, and military circles. This enormous equilibrium would be remark able if the purpose of the novels were to sketch the anatomy of

regional Republicanism in Gerona, or to follow the war from a social standpoint. However, the apparently low bias exists because

77



78 Journal of Spanish Studies

Gironella insists on the "human" content of his chronicle, a choice

enabling him to avoid the exposure of an open political stance. In

fact, the central character of both novels is the young and in

decisive Ignacio Alvear, whose inability to commit himself to any cause lends the appearance of impartiality to the entire narrative.

Therefore the question is not whether Gironella's frankness and

relative lack of prejudice are admirable, but whether those traits

are the result of historical consciousness or novelistic technique. If

a purely human motive like the depiction of character impels the

author, then his historical impartiality is accidental. Conversely, if

history motivates him, the fictive or imaginative quality of the

novels must remain subordinate. Inventiveness and the fictional

exploration of character cannot supersede historical judgment when

the aim of narrative is to produce a historical novel. In this

sense the concept of impartiality is an impossibility. Unless a mere

chronology results, the writing of a historical novel obliges the

author to make choices and selective judgments. This is particularly true of so heated an event as the Spanish Civil War. To posit

impartiality during that period is a post hoc judgment, not a

credible historical reality. Consequently we must as critics examine

the circumstances of Gironella's fictional world, and to inquire in

particular as to the nature of its historical awareness. Do the novels

reflect the historical world in fictional terms, or do they present fiction in the guise of history

? fictive history ? instead?

The questions are best answered by addressing ourselves to the attitudes toward history that lay hidden beneath the structural surface. We turn first, then, to the theoretical basis of Gironella's

trilogy. In an "aclaraci?n indispensable" he asserts the role of

imagination in the face of historical fact. The relationship between fiction and history bears only one truth: chronology and the "sig nificaci?n de aquellos sucesos de ?ndole nacional que repercutieron de una manera directa en la ciudad [Gerona] y la evoluci?n de las

costumbres y tradiciones."2 This means that such local events as

strikes or political decisions may well be fictitious, although the allusions to national events are accurate in their historicity. This

simple formula has one practical result: it separates the narrative

into two unequal parts. An outer framework of historical veracity gives form to local events by means of chronological references, while remaining useless in all other novelistic respects. Concur



Fictive History in Gironella 79

rently, an inner fictional content within that frame observes a

general verisimilitude without pretending to be historically ac

curate. The novels can thus be read on two levels without reference

to each other, as pure fiction or as pure historical outline, in a manner that reveals each level to be unaffected by the other or

unrelated to it.

Even if Gironella had succeeded in uniting fact and fiction, however, the historical element would have been undermined by a

second esthetic principle: simultaneity. Gironella uses simultaneous action in Republican and Nationalist zones, a device which in prin

ciple is a virtue since "cualquier juicio unilateral, desemboca en el acto en la caricatura, falsea la verdad" (M, 10). But the attempt to

portray opposing positions at the same time does not insure that

Gironella will be an indifferent observer. He acknowledges, as a

Nationalist sympathizer, the esthetic difficulties of reconciling sub

jective opinion with honest artistic representation. Consequently he must search for a solution to deal with the problem, but what he finds instead is an emotional evasion to be used as the outer

appearance of historicism. As he puts it: "?C?mo hacer compatible mi actitud previa, mi opini?n ... con la deseada e indispensable imparcialidad? Vali?ndome de la perspectiva en el tiempo y en el

espacio, de la morosa confrontaci?n de datos, y del amor" (M, 10). The success of Gironella's enterprise depends mainly on the last element. Realizing the need to overcome partisan feelings of antag onism, he claims to invoke the spirit of "love" in order to present all points of view with fairness and compassion. His effort is

embodied in Ignacio himself, who carries the two Spains within

him.

For compassion to work as a solution, however, it must cover

all possible spheres of influence. Yet in spite of multiple perspective and quantities of factual data, the narrative's impartiality affects

the human realm only. Although the code of love implies intellectual

generosity rather than sentimentalism, it fails to have any mean

ingful impact on the historical dimension. Instead, the human

drama remains separated from the level of pure history, enjoying the benefits of equitable artistic treatment. Thus, Socialists and

Falangists receive the same warm attention, but in their capacity as human beings, as fictitious characters who simulate the human

condition. On the other hand, the presentation of factual material,




about Socialists first and then about Falangists, becomes a match

ing game in which mechanical lists of information are balanced

against each other without interpretation. Since the disjunction of history and fiction is the main struc

tural weakness of the trilogy, especially in Un mill?n de muertos, it deserves further examination. In Gironella's scheme, factual documentation serves two purposes. It provides a chronicle of in

formation for Spanish readers, and it acts as a corrective against the allegedly misinformed works of Malraux, Hemingway, Barea,

Koestler, and Bernanos. In practical terms, however, facts help to

mold the historical framework without making a comparable im

pression on the reader. The real effect on readers is achieved in

the human realm, where fact recedes before the primacy of inven tion. In this way, the documentary value of the novel contracts at

the moment when the actual story is being told. Regardless of the

"balance" in presentation, its tacit impartiality is of no historical

consequence. What stands out is not factual fidelity but the author's humanitarian values, his sympathy for all participants in the war.

Thus two narrative rhythms alternate their appearance: first a

historical summary of events and then a fictional plot sequence,

alternating currents that isolate historical anecdote from fictive

plot. Separate lines of narrative exist, one where characters stand outside events and comment on the historical sphere, and the other

where these same characters lead their own lives with only artificial links to names and events in history. At times facts are colorful

enough to be narrated in a journalistic manner that renders their

factuality semi-novelistic. But the converse proves to be unsuc

cessful: purely fictional episodes rarely use facts that might make them appear veracious. The result is a surface resume of history that fails to penetrate the shell of historical occurrence with the

insight of character study. By the same token, characters' lives are

rarely determined by factual details, since they are people who react to history only in a vague chronological way.

The existence of a historical perspective cannot be denied, however, and it is maintained by certain techniques. The narrator

orchestrates an equilibrium in the discussion of controversial issues

such as the debate over Socialism and Falangism (C, 435-439; M,

66ff), and the critique of Catholicism and Church officials (C, 240

242; M, 561). Another device is narrative relativism, whereby the




same event receives two interpretations, each one in accordance with the opinions of a given side.3 This dual perspective implies that several interpretations are possible, a healthy assumption in

dicating a historiographical desire to rise above partisan views.

Thus we find a journalistic technique grafted upon narrative fiction as Gironella reports what has happened on one side, and then

presents its counterpart on the other. Little more can be expected of a novel which is neither profound nor searching, but which

successfully offers a panoramic reportage without falling into par tial historicism.

On the other hand, Gironella procures certain advantages for the Nationalist image by the very attempt at balance and by virtue

of choosing a Republican town for his setting. His first references are usually to the Republicans, a practice that sets up an uncon

scious point of comparison against which the Nationalists are later measured. When war erupts, Republican strengths are described

first, and only then are the rebels mentioned, clearly as underdogs because of their fugitive situation. Behind Republican lines, the

weaker position of the Nationalists draws sympathy, and the man ner in which they are repressed is narrated without similar per secutions against Republicans arising in the Nationalist zone. Thus

Gironella shapes his pro-Nationalist novels, a momentum of epi sodes which praise the insurgents' heroism while adding a Repub lican perspective that contributes nothing to the defenders' image.

The accidents and limitations of place are not the only factors which work more favorably for the Right. Alternation of descrip tions comprise a deceptive method which at first glance seems

beneficial to the Left. When the theme is suffering, both sides are

drawn honestly along the same scale, but in military and political matters a false equity is visible. One such example involves the

initial references to French volunteers and to Komintern support for the Republic. This assistance is established as a first fact, and

then we read that "mientras, la ayuda a los rebeldes segu?a un

ritmo parecido" (M, 72). This simple instance of narrative balancing allows the strict chronological order of history to be replaced by a subjective order of impressions, a false symmetry that becomes

the most persuasive factor in a decisive area requiring factual

truth. In this way, the apparently impartial coverage of two per

spectives conceals a serious omission.




The evenly matched list of praise and criticism, merits and

defects, is misleading in that the record is quantitative and not

qualitative. We know from historiography about the Civil War that

certain issues exist which, when touched upon, can reflect the

intentions of any writer who deals with them. Such are the battle

of Madrid, the bombing of Guernica, and the Belchite victory. These

episodes are treated by Gironella in a fashion that clearly indicates

his refusal to give credit to regular Republican forces. While pro

tecting the Nationalists from discredit, he minimizes the defense of

Madrid by depicting the International Brigades as a force with

inexhaustible reserves and expertise, face to face with an overex

tended Nationalist army.4 The Guernica atrocity is glossed over

in a few sentences that are surprisingly insensitive and deceptive,

lacking all reference to the significance of the incident.5 In Giro

nella's misguided search for objective balance, he includes the false

accusation that Basque miners were to blame for the bombing, an

incredible misjudgment which is not only cruel but misuses the

historical method of presenting different accounts of a controver

sial event. Finally, the battle of Belchite prompts the author to

indulge in an infrequent moment of prejudice reminiscent of the

cheap ultra-Nationalist novels dedicated to the denigration of

the Republican cause.6

One final technique of misleading impartiality works to the Re

publicans' detriment, and it involves the use of sympathy and

good-will. In many instances Republican characters are treated as

humanely as the Nationalists, but they are moments of individual

justice. When it comes to collective judgment, hostility is expressed in a way that is quickly counterbalanced yet also conspicuously ineffective. A good illustration is the following non sequitur: "era

preciso reconocer que el general, al definir a los milicianos como

meros 'asesinos de gente indefensa,' pec? de superficial... muchos

de ellos estaban dispuestos a dar la propia vida por la causa que defend?an" (M, 77). The statement appears to answer the charge "asesinos," but does nothing more than to call it "superficial"

without challenging its truth. Meanwhile, the reply itself attempts an explanation that has no basis in political or historical meaning.

Instead, the vagueness of the answer drifts toward the area of

human conduct, and reveals again the author's unwillingness to

make searching judgments about Civil War issues. He exchanges




historical values for human ones, basing his impartiality on the common pathos of all Spaniards. This is commendable, but it

means neglecting the historical significance of that pathos.

II

The techniques and esthetic premises responsible for the lack

of harmony between history and fiction constitute one aspect of

Gironella's historiographical evasion. The second aspect involves

the formulation of issues in ways that dissolve the rational basis

of historical inquiry. The derationalizing method includes asking questions that are humanly poignant but historically irrelevant,

interpreting events without regard to causality, and encouraging

ideological confusion. These offenses are serious, mitigated only by the sympathy accorded to characters regardless of their political views. Such compensation represents nevertheless an antihistorical

attitude. The question put to Socialists David and Olga, "?Qu? es

per?is encontrar al otro lado de esta org?a?" (M, 780), makes sense

in terms of human suffering, but it is unfair from the ideological standpoint. It assumes that Socialists are responsible for the

"orgy," and it accuses them unjustifiably for prolonging the war

instead of surrendering. Nor does such a question leave room for

determining who is to stop fighting first, or whose militancy is

responsible for the carnage, or finally, who began the war in the first place.

The rational process in historiography extends to the area of causes and effects, a recognition that historical reality is neither value-free nor uniform in the distribution of causes and responsi bilities. Gironella's same unfairness colors his characters' state

ments in this area, as when freemason Garcia remarks that "ningu no de nosotros es responsable de lo ocurrido ... La cosa se decid?a en las alturas, es decir, entre Rusia y las democracias por un lado,

y Hitler y Mussolini por el lado contrario. Y la jugada ha sido

clara: ni unos ni otros han puesto la carne en el asador... Con

la ventaja fascista de que sus potencias amigas estaban m?s cerca.

Por otra parte, ?qu? han hecho en las alturas los jefes de nuestro

bando? Dedicarse a la oratoria" (M, 777). Since this freemason has

been a shrewd analyst throughout the novel, it is uncharacteristic




if not odd that he should rely exclusively on the international fac tor in explaining the war's outcome. His remarks are inconsistent

with previous comments, which suggests that Gironella is not inter

ested in finding internal reasons for the conflict, much less blaming

Spaniards at all. If Garcia's statement means simply that the war

acquired a new, international identity after the first year ? a gen

erous assumption by the reader ? then Gironella need not be cen

sured. But other instances of evasiveness also occur.

What for example is the meaning of Ignacio's ideological emp tiness? As the novel's hero and principal Spaniard at war, he is a

historical nonentity. His total egoism, lack of ideals, and incom

prehension make him the epitome of Gironella's idea that people were fed up with the war from the start. While it is commendable that Ignacio sees senseless pain around him, being committed to

peace more than to any one policy, his very inability to transcend

personal sorrow in order to comprehend history makes him an

unconvincing agent for a historical novel. Nor can we argue that such inexpressiveness is precisely Gironella's judgment of history, namely, that citizens fail to grasp the meaning of events. Such an

argument would be mere casuistry. Rather, by concentrating on

Ignacio the author declines to write a historical novel that artic

ulates explanations and awareness. Despite the political identities

acquired by most characters in Los cipreses creen en Dios, the cen

tral figure is the best evidence that the novel's true substance is

nonhistorical or intrahistorical. It is therefore no surprise to find Gironella's real philosophy advanced in terms divorced from the

concepts of history: "Esta era la desgracia del ser humano, la in

compatibilidad, la exclusi?n. Amar esto implicaba aborrecer aque

llo, y ser comunista implicaba aniquilar el individuo. ?Si durante un minuto, uno tan s?lo, en toda la tierra no hubiera nada m?s que amor!

" (M, 230). The statement is more than wishful thinking, for it

reflects an emotional approach to history. Gironella is a sentimen

talist in the guise of a historian, a novelist with a psychological

perspective who in appearance is writing a historical narrative.

Emotion is not antithetical to history, of course, and there are

many kinds of truth. To adopt another perspective is not to for

feit verisimilitude either. What Gironella shows us, then, is the

absurdity of war, or rather, the absurd conclusions reached by reasonable ideological positions. His questions are not designed




to strengthen the intellectual links between history and human

behavior, but on the contrary to base his inquiry on nonabstract, human formulations. Thus he asks whether it is not madness to

transform a political conflict over ideas into a physical battle. Or, whether political values still have logical application when blood

shed means collective human tragedy. Clearly, such questions un

dermine the rational basis of historical inquiry, and they are posed at various points in the narrative:

?Qu? significaba el macabro juego? Unos se llamaban a s? mismos sacerdotes del bien com?n y escoltados por hoces

y martillos disparaban contra X; otros se cre?an contables del Esp?ritu Santo, y escoltados por cruces y cirios dispa raban contra Z. ?Ten?a el seminarista C?sar Alvear [asesi nado] algo que ver con esta clasificaci?n? ?El hermano de

Mat?as, en Burgos, era de verdad un asesino? Nadie lo sa

b?a, todo el mundo lo sab?a, nadie defend?a nada, todo el mundo lo defend?a todo. Pocos eran los que mataban por que s?, pocos los que sab?an por qu? mataban. (M, 171)

Discourse in this manner can never lead to historical understanding, and it suggests that Gironella believes that the voice of history is

drowned out by the larger flood of irrational humanity. If this is his meaning, then the passage reflects a historical judgment. The

human element, the man caught between opposing forces in his

tory, suffers unjustly when he is not committed to the rationale of either of those forces. His victimization becomes more impor tant to Gironella than the historical process itself. The novel not

only depicts the emotions involved in that suffering, but allows them to engulf the smaller nucleus of rationality that we call his

tory. Yet the same passage is an unfair statement of extremes, which no historian would advance as being representative of a

time-continuum. Even the Left and Right are falsified, at best par tial depictions wherein the whole is portrayed by one of its parts. Since the truth of one component is inadequate for the entire

phenomenon, it is misleading; and if these parts are meant to be

symbolic, then the deception is complete. It is a parody to portray the Republic and the Right by such metaphors, just as it is a his torical distortion to juxtapose extremities as if they were norms.

If we consider the novelistic experience, on the other hand, the

passage is perfectly justifiable when the principal aim is taken to

be dramatic effect instead of historical insight. But in that case




we must recognize that the author's allegiance to the dynamics of

fiction makes his historical data ancillary and unreliable.

A final aspect of irrationalism presents the war with a funda

mental disregard for political meaning. Here again historical reality is faithfully recreated on the psychological and moral levels. The

degree of suffering is equally severe in both camps, and if only each side understood the other, compassion for the enemy would

grow in the same measure that prejudice would disappear. The

human condition is thus admirably presented, as we can see in

the following comment: "Ignacio se dio cuenta en seguida de que

aquel hombre no ten?a la menor idea de lo que era la zona 'roja.' Y lo m?s probable es que les ocurriera lo mismo al resto de los

oficiales. Eran dos mundos separados por un tajo brutal, y en

los meses transcurridos cada bando se hab?a formado una c?moda

imagen del opuesto" (M, 586). The trouble is that this statement,

along with the subsequent "esta guerra la perderemos todos"

(M, 592), negates the political significance of war. Certainly it is true that the Spanish people as a whole were losers in the war, but it is just as true that one side did win and that victory did have its advantages. And so by raising the discussion to the human

plane, the author rejects the rational aspect of war as a conflict between ideologies. No one would deny the human truth of these

quotations. The issue is whether political explanations, however

limited, may be ignored legitimately. To do so can only lead to

historiographical irresponsibility: "Fanatismo, esp?as, h?roes vivos

y h?roes muertos. ?Cu?ndo uno de ellos, de cualquiera de los dos bandos conseguir?a poner fin a la lucha fratricida?" (M, 684). The matter is removed from the political realm altogether and con

verted into a tragedy that must be stopped. The narrator is justi

fiably anguished, but he neither asks who is to blame for the

suffering, nor does he ponder the political justice of victory and

defeat. Uppermost is the wish to end bloodshed, regardless of who

is right or wrong. Indeed, the concepts "right" and "wrong" are no more than abstractions when compared to the essential value

of human life. Consequently, since there are no absolute rights and

wrongs in history anyway, the only imperative is to save life. By the same reasoning, we might add, gratitude must be voiced to

Franco for having won the war and halted the massacre. And this

indeed is the logic of some historians on the Right.




III

So much for the process of historicism and its relationship to

the dramatic and technical aspects of fiction. We turn now to the

broader cultural issues that support the novel's foundations. Giro

nella compensates for his limited historical vision by his cultural

awareness, and he is more influenced by certain concepts of Spain than by short-lived historical events. His idea of the Spanish tem

per, his image of the pueblo, and the portrait he sketches of Spain as a national entity are all examples of contemporary self-analysis in the area of cultural anthropology. These concepts are partic

ularly valuable because they occur despite the author's attempt to

avoid specific theses and interpretations. But at the same time,

they offer further proof that his novels adopt alternatives to the

historical treatment of the Civil War.

Let us deal first with the pueblo and the theme of class conflict. There is never total sympathy or warmth toward the popular classes in either novel, but Los cipreses creen en Dios is clearly

more impartial. The upper-class hegemony is seen in decline as

rich men "viv?an completamente separados de la gente del pue blo" (C, 334), while "se van cayendo las grandes familias" (C, 256). The "sentimiento de solidaridad" (C, 335) experienced by Ignacio as he works with his own class extends to pity for the workers, whose revolution he hopes will be realized by the Republic (C, 86). His feelings are mixed nonetheless, for when he observes the im

poverished migrants from Andalusia and Murcia he both likes their "innata y racial alegr?a... a pesar de su miseria" and is repelled by their filth and animal-like habits (C, 38-39). A similar note of realism echoes in Cesar's missionary work in the slums, where his

pupils lapse into immorality after his departure (C, 711). Even

peasants, treated with special favor and shown to be honest and

generous in their communism, have their ugly aspect: "se les ve?a el fanatismo en los ojos" (C, 716). A hint of vice is never far

away, and when the Asturian revolt is described, an instinctual undercurrent appears in a reference to the "salvajismo de los mi

neros," although Ignacio rejects this phrase as propagandistic. However, Gironella's last word is that "s?lo Franco, con su




prestigio, impidi? que la acci?n de estas tropas igualara en fero

cidad la de los mineros" (C, 381-382).

Taken singly, none of these examples is serious, and since any evaluation of violence is subjective, they are comparatively well

balanced. In fact, it is difficult to ascertain Gironella's feelings at

the end of the novel when an ignorant mob demands food from

its cooperative. His narrative tone changes perceptibly however in

Un mill?n de muertos. Some antipopular sentiments are to be ex

pected, as in Ana Maria's remark betraying her class origin ("una aversi?n que a veces me da n?useas" [M, 227]). But Ignacio's first

impression of Barcelona in 1936 is equally strong: "

?cu?nta sucie

dad! ... Las mujeres iban muy escotadas y los hombres sin afei

tar. 'S?, hay algo soez y una complacencia en lo soez' "

(M, 222).

Ignacio's puritanical statement is out of character with his actions,

and it would seem that Gironella is deliberately manipulating

judgments. More important is the careless use of "complacencia," a gratuitous opinion interjected into a realistic report. The narrator

resorts to insinuation in his account of a city under communist

anarchism, thereby introducing a new hint of editorialization.

Reportorial improbability is established fully in the Socialists'

ostensible lack of confidence in the people. Olga's analysis of the

FAI's unpredictable activities reveals a weakening faith in the social

fibre of the masses, which seems unlikely at the beginning of the

war ("en el seno de la revoluci?n hab?a brotado un roedor m?s

sutil e incontrolable ... la masa neutra, indiferente, la gente que deambula de ac? para all? con curiosidad malsana y sin arriesgar nada, flaccida como la gelatina o como un cerebro en una mesa de

hospital" (M, 33). It is doubtful that revolutionary optimism would

be visibly in decline at this period, and the statement may well

reflect the author's own wish to structure the conflict with a min

imum of advantage to the Left. The unusual metaphor, further

more, points accusingly at Gironella, since he rarely goes to the

trouble of creating good images. When we reach the episode of

volunteer recruitment for the Arag?n front, which presents the

masses in a favorable light, a subtle carryover of the previous neg ativism persists: "[el reclutamiento] hab?a sacudido como un re

guero de p?lvora a la 'masa neutra' de que David y Olga habla

ban ... La ciudad entera comprendi? que 'aquello' confer?a a los

hechos un nuevo significado. Cada voluntario se respet? m?s a s?




mismo" (M, 76). Each word of praise reflects upon a previous defect: "voluntario" indicates that some citizens did not volun

teer; the concept of "masa neutra" is repeated; the self-respect implies an earlier unworthiness.

To examine the attributes of the Nationalist masses in the man ner just done for the Republicans is to understand that an entire

concept of "the people" is being questioned. Individual cases de

picting the populace sympathetically in both zones do not prevent the general picture from being less than admirable. The matter

supersedes the issues that distinguish the Right from the Left. For

example, the political ignorance of Nationalist soldiers does no

harm to the Right-wing cause as it emerges from the novel. But

their ignorance does help to demean the pueblo's image still further.7 The significance of these unflattering portraits is less a

matter of class politics than of a concept quite distant from his torical reality. If we study the psychology of the following passage, the bias becomes clear:

Cosme Vila le tem?a a la multitud tanto como a la socie dad, a la calle tanto como a su despacho. En la calle le intimidaba el continuo saludo de los milicianos ... En el

despacho del Partido le intimidaban los nuevos carnets que cada ma?ana ten?a que firmar. Cierto, el desfile de las

fotograf?as de carnets lo inquietaba sobremanera. Aquellas frentes estrechas, aquellos ojos y aquellas mand?bulas y orejas denotaban enfermedades de siglos, 'silbaban ham bre' ... y la momificaci?n de aquellas caras barr?a toda es peranza de elevar su nivel en una generaci?n. (M, 81)

Here at last is an unconscious confession of class fear and class

hostility. The sentiments are not Cosme's but the narrator's. We

have no reason to assume from the behavior of this Communist leader that he would entertain thoughts or experience any of the

feelings attributed to him. Still less could we expect him to single out and ponder negative hereditary traits in the masses. It is thus

extraordinary that Gironella, in creating this "insight" into his

character, should isolate la Espa?a negra from all the possible aspects of Spain that are visible, and that he should select this

segment of the deprived masses rather than some other. No writer

sympathetic to the Leftist cause could have attributed such feelings to Cosme. In view of the many historical alternatives from which to




choose, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Gironella decided to project an undesirable image of the pueblo by means of this

passage.

The biological description quoted above has still another im

plication. It is an attempt to state a truth about the hereditary characteristics of a national substratum in quasi-racial terms. From

the standpoint of the history of ideas, the collective portrait is a

thematic counterpart of the oft-repeated anatomy of the "raza cas

tellana," whose physical traits are frequently enumerated in the works of the Generation of 98. In the description cited, the theme occurs in reverse form, just like the grotesque types found in the

Espa?a negra of Baroja, Solana, and Cela. It is at this point that we leave the area of pure history, and enter the realm of cultural

analysis as expounded by the anthropological concepts of the Gen eration of 98. This tenuous area explains Spanish civilization by

categories such as national character, collective psychology, and

traditionalism, all somewhat subjective criteria. Even more impor tant, the accepted norms of the historical novel are exchanged for

concepts that are elusive as well as susceptible to imaginative inter

pretations. This is Gironella's error as he tries to interpret events

by a radical shift in perspective. The pattern of historical material

holding the novel together is broken at the very places where inter

pretation is needed. Meaning is replaced by cultural speculation. If Gironella's opinion about national character were limited to

political contexts, his method would not invite criticism. One might learn some things and eliminate the irrelevant matters. For example, one might accept that "en Asturias los socialistas hab?an sido absorbidos inmediatamente por cabecillas anarquistas o comunis

tas," and yet ignore the rest of the commentary: "lo cual estimaba

l?gico, pues opinaba que en un pa?s extremista como Espa?a el

socialismo, en el mejor de los casos, no pod?a servir sino de tram

pol?n" (C, 382). The entire remark may embody emotional deter

minism, but a single reference to the relationship between Spanish psychology and politics is not damaging. However, when the idea of extremism is linked to a more general Spanish temperament, then the implications are more serious. A moderate example is the belief that "la capacidad de odio que hay es terrible . .. Son miles

de espa?oles capaces de cualquier barbaridad" (C, 691), a belief whose cautious pessimism is both confirmed many times by violent




episodes and also denied by instances of restraint. The most ex

treme case of psychologism appears after war breaks out: "los

falangistas, los requ?tes, ?para no hablar de los moros ... !, esta

ban cometiendo los mismos horrores, a las mismas horas y con

id?ntica sa?a que sus adversarios ... Lo cual no era de extra?ar,

pues la raza era la misma" (M, 32, 34). This is total ethnic dam nation. The discussion abandons specific historical limitations in

exchange for generalized ethnic concepts. Analytical terms are vir

tually proscribed, a fact verifiable by comparing this statement with the earlier one linking psychology and politics. The two pas sages differ in the qualitative change from the pragmatic to the

categorical: from evaluating single events that can be corrob

orated, to making broad, absolute definitions without regard to numerous exceptions.

The real explanations for the Civil War, consequently, are ex

pressed in the pseudo-rationalistic terms of popular anthropology, and Gironella's characters slip into this manner of thinking quite naturally. One observer states that "puesto que nuestro pa?s es as?

y no de otro modo, puesto que aqu? nada puede llegar pac?fica mente ..." (M, 68), while a priest postulates that "lo que ocurre es que los mandamientos de la ley de Dios ... van contra los ins tintos y ello en un pa?s como el nuestro, sensual por naturaleza, resulta insoportable" (M, 134). These theories are even used as a basis for political decisions in the novel, since according to this view it is necessary to understand the alleged instinctualism of

Spain in order to hold real power. This conclusion is reached

by the Communist Vasiliev, whose cunning strategy outfoxes the

simple Spanish mind: "

'En Espa?a hay tanta impaciencia, que el

que consiga dominar sus nervios y hacer las cosas con serenidad acabar? adue??ndose del cotarro'

" (M, 79). Judging by the char

acters' own thoughts, the situation was hopeless from the begin ning. The Spaniards were trapped by their own hereditary traits, and events developed according to a preconceived logic of emotional instrumentalism. The principle seems to be that a people held cap tive by its ancestral passions can do nothing but be swept along by events. Only those who can escape their destructive psychic heritage can understand the situation and exploit it.

We may perhaps forgive ordinary characters for indulging in

this kind of cultural analysis, but what it difficult to explain is




that the same psychologism prevails when the narrator himself takes a step back in detachment. Such moments should be oppor tunities for the introduction of intellectually refined views, and yet the most superficial ideas enter the novel instead. In one case, familiar stereotypes are uttered in a lecture to newly-arrived Ger

mans,8 and in another Ilya Ehrenburg is quoted: "Espa?a ha

perdido siglos. Espa?a no es un pueblo alegre: es un pueblo triste, como el ruso y, sobre todo, hastiado. Los espa?oles desprecian el

factor tiempo ... Todo lo convierten en trascendental" (M, 772). It is easy to find irony in all this, but much more difficult to ex

plain Gironella's desire to be ironic. Therefore if we accept these evaluations as serious, and if they are true, we must conclude that

Spain's entire Republican enterprise was a hopeless venture. In

fact, this conclusion brings with it evidence for the belief that

resistence is imperative whenever essential values and national ideals are threatened. This idea is probably behind the narrator's

remark about the two Spains: "

'la otra mitad'... sinti? por pri mera vez ... que algo vital estaba en peligro ... la propia vida de la sociedad, las creencias, la historia y tradiciones por las que el

pa?s hab?a vivido siempre" (C, 692). That such a position is the most provocative way of establishing legitimacy is understood by Ignacio, who thinks of the Falange's "eternal" Spain as leading to excesses. Nevertheless, he also realizes that the Socialists' Euro

peanization of Spain leads to demoralization and a sense of infe

riority (C, 567). In every way that the Spanish tragedy is examined, the his

torical interpretation is outweighed by basic anthropological con

cepts which transcend specific events and seek to bring the entire

period 1931-39 into one characterological perspective. Masses of historical detail crumble away as the hard nuclei of psycho-moral theory emerge to make the real explanations. After finishing the

novels, the reader is faced with two kinds of cultural theses, neither of which is liberal. One is the conservative reply to the Socialist charge that Spanish civilization has contributed nothing significant in philosophy or science. It argues the importance of

"algo que tal vez tuviera m?s valor... m?s duradero: La fe y la unidad religiosas. Tal vez en la indiferencia de la raza por las ciencias y los pensamientos que perecen latiera este rasgo funda

mental. Espa?a tal vez no quisiera 'especializarse,' porque su sed




era de cosas eternas" (C, 566). The argument is idealistic in its disdain for pragmatic success, and speaks on behalf of a "raza" whose nature is assumed but not demonstrated. Moreover, it exalts a mythic tradition which by definition must stand in opposition to, and feel threatened by, every new step taken along the road of historical reality.

The second thesis is only slightly less reactionary. It contends that psycho-moral defects are responsible for Spain's failures. The idea is expressed as follows:

" 'la operaci?n importante por reali

zar en Espa?a era terminar de una vez con la pereza y con el atraso en los sistemas de producci?n ... ver si a base de Sindica tos Verticales y de l?tigo acabamos con la siesta nacional.' 'Esta

guerra es la consecuencia de tanto hablar.'... Primero, hablamos del sexo o de f?tbol. Luego nos llamamos unos a otros hijos de

puta y, de repente, tiros, la ensalada" (M, 285). The level of anal

ysis is seldom more sophisticated that this, but even if the judg ment were accepted, other cultural "insights" would contradict it.

Assuming the truth of the laziness thesis, how will constructive action overcome Spanish lethargy if "la impetuosidad de la raza hace a los espa?oles eficaces obedeciendo, pero peligros?simos man

dando" (M, 301)? How efficacious will a policy be "a base de Sin dicatos Verticales y de l?tigo" in this light?

It appears that the idealistic argument and the psychological argument complement each other. Spain's ethos and ethnos are

indifferent to material values, but even if they pursued these values the national character would spoil it all. Thus, transcendent values and personality combine to explain political failure. But there is more. The war itself can be explained in similar terms:

"Hay en Espa?a como una profunda necesidad de matar, tal vez

porque aqu? se cree que la muerte no es definitiva, sino un simple viaje a otra vida imaginada eterna" (M, 117). With this remark, the abdication of historical understanding is complete.

NOTES

1 A survey of the many books on contemporary Spanish fiction satisfies me that, in the absence of detailed treatment of this specialized topic, no useful purpose is served by citing individual critics who have writ ten surveys on Gironella. Nevertheless, for the sake of contrast I wish to




cite two articles: Jos? Botana, "Jos? Mar?a Gironella: Nuevos episodios na

cionales," Duquesne Hispanic Review, 6, iii (1967), 13-33; Edmund S. Urbanski,

"Revolutionary Novels of Gironella and Pasternak," Hispania, XLIII (1960), 191-197.

2 Los cipreses creen en Dios, 29.a ed. Barcelona: Planeta, 1961. Page references will follow in the text, preceded by the code letter C. The same

procedure holds for M, Un mill?n de muertos, 17.a ed. Barcelona: Planeta, 1967. The third volume of the trilogy, Ha estallado la paz, will not be con

sidered because of its inferior literary quality. 3 Cf. the decision not to cross the Segres in 1938 or march against

Barcelona. To the Nationalists, "el prop?sito del Alto Mando es cortar en

dos el territorio enemigo, separar a Catalu?a de Valencia y de Madrid. Hecho

esto, la ocupaci?n ser? un paseo militar" (M, 697). To the Republicans, "era

evidente que Franco no se atrev?a a tentar francamente la aventura de Ca

talu?a" (M, 701). In the same vein is the description of the first preparations for war: "Los que deseaban la victoria de los 'nacionalistas,' hac?an caso

omiso de los procedimientos usados y encontraban base segura para sus es

peranzas; los que confiaban en el aplastante triunfo del Gobierno de la Re

p?blica comprendieron por fin que... 'el enemigo era fuerte' "

(M, 239). 4 This is how he describes Mola's attack on the University: "reco

noc?a que los defensores formaban un ej?rcito experto, sin duda mandado

por jefes intr?pidos, que dispon?an de material de excelente calidad... Todo

ser?a in?til. Los atacantes estaban extenuados y no hab?a posibilidad de

relevo, en tanto que, desde Albacete, Andr? Marty segu?a enviando m?s y m?s batallones de 'Voluntarios'

" (M, 342). A Communist observer says of the

Nationalists: "el ataque fue tan mal planteado que haberle contenido no

presupon?a ninguna haza?a" (M, 344). 5 "... fue arrasada Guernica, la ciudad del ?rbol legendario, s?m

bolo del nacionalismo vasco, en la que estaban guardadas la espada de Zuma

lac?rregui, la guitarra del trovador regional Iparraguirre y los escapularios de I?igo de Loyola. La versi?n com?n atribu?a el hecho a la aviaci?n ale

mana, la Legi?n C?ndor; no obstante la emisora de Salamanca culp? de la

destrucci?n a los mineros vascos" (M, 471). 6 "

?M?s sangre, m?s y m?s sobre la tierra! ... Las tropas atacan tes eran heterog?neas. Se compon?an de milicianos fan?ticos, de otros for zados e incluso de soldados que al llegar a los cuarteles y a las trincheras blasfemaban por creer que ello era obligatorio" (M, 547).

7 "Casi todos aquellos atletas eran labriegos del propio valle de

Tena, que apenas si conoc?an otra cosa que los pueblos diseminados en ?ste

y la carretera que bajaba a Jaca... Ignacio hab?a supuesto que los soldados 'nacionales' emplear?an un lenguaje selecto y que tratar?an temas impor tantes" (M, 669). Later, Ignacio descends to the farmers' level of under

standing in one of the novel's most embarrassing scenes: "sus compa?eros sab?an vagamente por qu? estaban all?... '[Luchaban] contra las hordas

rojas.' ??Qu? crimen han cometido? ?Pues ... ?se, son hordas ... [Ignacio:] ?[Los comunistas] predicen la igualdad... El amo, el Estado; todo lo

dem?s, igual... Los mismos derechos un veterinario que un caballo" (M, 675-676).

8 "Dos cosas hay sagradas en Espa?a para los espa?oles: la pri mera, el sentimiento religioso; la segunda, el recato de las mujeres. Espa?a es pa?s cat?lico: deb?is respetar las ideas y las supersticiones de las gentes.

Espa?a es pa?s de tradici?n familiar: deb?is respetar a sus mujeres" (M, 363).



Date post:	11-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	paul-ilie
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Fictive History in Gironella

Documents