TWO SPANISH DRAMATISTS--ECHEGARAY (1904), BENAVENTE (1922)
The prize of 1904 was awarded one half to:
Echegaray, José, member of the Spanish Academy, born 1833, died
September 14, 1916: “in appreciation of his comprehensive and
intellectual authorship which, in an independent and original way,
has brought to life again the great traditions of the Spanish
drama.”[147]
Until recent years, Spanish literature has been less accessible by
translation than that of many other European countries. Fiction by
Galdós, Valera, Valdes, and Ibañez have given to English and American
readers somewhat adequate impressions of the realistic power and poetic
undertones of some of these latter-day novelists. In drama, three of
Galdós’ plays, nine by Martínez-Sierra, a dozen more by Echegaray,
and several by Benavente have been rendered into excellent English
by such gifted translators as John Garrett Underhill, James Graham,
Charles Nirdlinger, Hannah Lynch, Ruth Lansing, and others.[148] In
the awards to Spanish dramatists of the Nobel prize in 1904 and 1922,
two generations with their differing standards and literary methods,
have been represented--Echegaray and Benavente. In German literature,
as exampled by Heyse and Hauptmann, and in Polish fiction, with its
representatives, Sienkiewicz and Reymont, one finds the same recurrent
recognition in successive generations.
José Echegaray, who shared the honor of 1904 with Frédéric Mistral,
was born in Madrid in 1833; that city was his home until his death in
1916, except for periods of travel or retirement because of political
friction. As Sully-Prudhomme found his first impulse towards science,
so Echegaray studied mathematics “ferociously, ravenously.” He made
researches, also, in geology and philosophy. Under the republican
government he held public offices, like Ministers of Agriculture,
Industry, and Commerce, President of the Council of Education, and
Senator for Life. After teaching at the National Technical School,
where he had been educated, he became identified with the University of
Madrid.
At first the writing of plays seems to have been a pastime for this
mathematician and politician. _The Wife of the Avenger_, _At the Hilt
of the Sword_, and _The Gladiator of Ravenna_, which appeared between
1874 and 1876, were popular in Spain but are little known by English
translation. In 1877 he wrote a drama that has been much discussed,
since it was translated as _Madman or Saint_ by Ruth Lansing (Poet
Lore, Boston, 1912); another translation by Hannah Lynch (Boston, 1895)
bore the title, _Folly or Saintliness_. Still another translation by
Mary Serrano is used in _Library of the World’s Best Literature_. It
is a strong play emotionally, with that touch of idealism and romance
which were traits of the author, blended with his keen analysis. Don
Lorenzo, a wealthy man of Madrid, finds that he has been deceived
regarding his parentage; he is not the son of a rich mother of noble
family, as he and the world supposed, but the child of his nurse,
Juana, who dies after she tells him the tale. No longer young, with his
daughter engaged to a son of the Duchess of Almonte, he is determined
to tell the truth and so defy his family. A specialist in mental
disease is called with the physician to examine him; at the same time
he sends for a notary to record his renunciation of his name and
estate. His final monologue is dramatic, beginning with the lines:
“What! is a man to be declared mad because he is resolved to do his
duty. It cannot be! Humanity is neither so blind nor so bad as that!”
These earlier plays by Echegaray, which called forth such ardent praise
from his countrymen, who would rank him with Calderon and Lope de
Vega of the past centuries, are trivial in literary value beside two
of later years, _The Great Galeoto_ and _The Son of Don Juan_. Eleven
years separated these two strong dramas (1881-1892) during which the
author continued to write plays, some with historical setting like
_Harold the Norman_ and _Lysander the Bandit_; others were of romantic
type, some tragedies and more comedies. In general, he sought to
revive romantic drama, to proclaim the sharp conflicts in life between
passion and duty. His motives were often more pronounced than his
characterization; his men and women were sometimes mere mechanisms,
fighting their battles for honor and truth. There was a chivalrous
note in his lines where domestic fidelity formed the keynote of the
emotional struggle. Soliloquy was much used by this dramatist.
When _The Son of Don Juan_ and _Mariana_ were translated, and linked in
the memory of English readers with _The Great Galeoto_, world-critics
gave study to this forceful Spanish dramatist who had grown in favor
during the decade from 1890 to 1900. Two characteristics of _The Great
Galeoto_ were noted: the fearless, vigorous portrayal of the evil of
gossip and resultant tragedy; the fact that the chief personage in
the play exercised occult influence and did not appear on the stage.
He is the “busybody,” who creates all the troublesome situations,
who directs the characters (or suggests their words) but he is not
present. Elizabeth Wallace, in an article of value in the _Atlantic
Monthly_, September, 1908, on “The Spanish Drama of Today,” says: “This
vanishing hero is the cruel, careless world, hastening eagerly to cast
the first stone, and, so soon tired of the sport, hurrying on to find
some new excitement, leaving death and destruction in its wake.”[149]
This culprit is the city of Madrid (or society anywhere). There are
individualized characters like Theodora and Don Julian; Don Severo, the
plotter, may well be compared to Iago.
Even more virile than this romantic tragedy is _The Son of Don Juan_;
it suggests Ibsen’s _Ghosts_, both in germ-idea and _dénouement_,
although it has distinctive merit. Echegaray borrowed the words of the
Norwegian dramatist for the lines of Lazarus, “Mother, give me the
sun!” In the Prologue the Spanish author expands these symbolic words
to “enfold a world of ideas, an ocean of sentiments, a hell of sorrows,
a cruel lesson, a supreme warning to society and to the family circle.”
Society is, again, at the bar of justice, as in _The Great Galeoto_;
the offense this time is lax morality of parent, and the lunacy which
falls, in retribution, on the child. The mother of Lazarus is a
convincing character. In _Mariana_ are found some of the strongest
delineations in Echegaray’s dramas, notably Clara, wife of Don Castulo,
the grotesque archeologist, and Mariana, the widow, with riches in
America, described by Clara (in a touch of jealousy, yet appreciation)
as “a widow who is hardly a widow and is almost a child.” The latter
woman is capricious, disdainful, yet passionate in her relations with
her lover, Daniel. Melodrama enters somewhat into the closing scenes of
intrigue and excitement. James Graham has translated both _Mariana_ and
_The Son of Don Juan_.
Echegaray continued to write plays, stimulated by the recognition
and the honors of 1904. When the award was made, there was a popular
demonstration in Madrid; the king presided and presented the prize,
while speeches were made by Galdós, Valera, and Mendenez Palayo, who
had once been his bitter critic. On this occasion Palayo said: “For
thirty years Echegaray has been the dictator, arbiter and idol of the
multitude, a position impossible to attain without the strength of
genius, which triumphs in literature as everywhere.”[150] He was much
honored in France and called “a second Victor Hugo.” It has not been
easy for American students to interpret the plays by Echegaray; they
fail to understand fully, especially on the stage, the situations
and sentiments of the Spanish dramatist. Many of the keen, brilliant
lines, both of analysis and wit, suffer in translation into English.
For Drama League readings, or group study and discussion, his plays
lend themselves to interpretation and study. This is true, not alone
the longer and familiar dramas already noted but such short plays as
_Always Ridiculous_, translated by T. W. Gilkyson,[151] and _The Street
Singer_, translated by John Garrett Underhill[152] and included in
Frank Shay’s _25 Short Plays_ of international selection (New York,
1925). Irony and wistfulness are mingled in this dramatic picture of
the little beggar-girl, Suspiros, of Augustias, the street singer, and
her lover, Pepe. Suspiros, sixteen and pretty but sickly, speaks to
Coleta, a professional beggar of fifty years:[153]
_Coleta._ You don’t know how to beg.
_Suspiros._ Yes, sir, I know how to beg; the trouble is, people don’t
know how to give. I say, “A penny for my poor mother who is sick.”
And you ought to see how sick she is! She died two years ago. Well,
I get nothing. Or else I say, “A penny for God’s sake, for my mother
who is in the hospital, in the name of the Blessed Virgin! I have two
baby brothers.” No one gives, either.
_Coleta._ They don’t, eh? And how many brothers are you going to have
to-night?
_Suspiros._ Ay, Signor Coleta! I had two and nobody gave me anything.
Last night I tried four and I got sixpence, so to-night I mean to
have five and see what they give me, or whether I just get the cuff
from my mother.
_Coleta._ Just in the family, how many brothers have you, really?
_Suspiros._ Really, I had two. But they died, like my mother. Ay!
they died because of the way my stepmother treated them--as she does
me--and I am dying! Listen! If I can make two or three dollars I am
going to run away to Jativa, and live with my aunt.
Echegaray was seventy-two years old when he gained the prize; he
was already called by some critics a “representative of the older
generation.” Interest in his plays, however, has gained rather than
waned, among critical scholars in every country, and his rank is
assured among the romantic dramatists of this century. His seriousness,
combined with keen wit and insight, has been compared with similar
traits of Tolstoy. Both writers have emphasized the “dignity of
suffering” for the sake of spiritual freedom. This is exampled in
Echegaray’s _Madman or Saint_, already cited. Conscientious and sincere
in his work, this Spanish dramatist has left a few plays of strong
characterization and potent message to society, a message that has an
element of idealism, flashing out amid the grim realities of life.
JACINTO BENAVENTE
The prize of 1922 has been awarded:
Benavente, Jacinto, dramatic writer, Madrid, born 1866: “for the
happy way in which he has pursued the honored traditions of the
Spanish drama.”[154]
Jacinto Benavente, to whom the Nobel prize was given in 1922, was
acclaimed as especially worthy by those who sought for a representative
of “the new generation” in Spanish drama--what was known as “the
generation of 1898” which decried past methods and urged modern themes
and viewpoints. Benavente was born in Madrid in 1866, a generation
younger than Echegaray. His father was a prominent physician and the
boy had stimulating home environment. He studied law for a brief time
but he inclined towards writing and the theatre. He had some actual
experiences “on the road” with theatrical troupes and with a circus,
thus gaining first-hand information about theatrical devices and the
needs of both actors and audiences. His first venture in print was as
a poet, in 1893, but the next year he published a play, _Thy Brother’s
House_. This and other immature plays received scanty notice until,
in 1896, appeared _In Society_. Two years later _The Banquet of Wild
Beasts_ focussed attention upon this daring, brilliant playwright. He
became a leader among young professional men in Madrid who, following
the Spanish-American War, were eager to renounce tradition and to
revolutionize society by exposing its vices and weaknesses. They would
punctuate “modernism” in thought and expression with ideals of poetry.
A summary of this is found in _A Study of the Modern Drama_ by Barrett
H. Clark (New York, 1925).
Benavente is less radical than some of his literary associates in
Spain, France, and Russia. He does not disdain “traditions,” if they
ring true to life and art. He is graceful and versatile, writing plays
of manner and characterization, satires on aristocracy and sympathetic
scenes of peasant life. He compels his readers or spectators to
_think_, if they will get stimulus from his plays like _The Truth_,
_Autumnal Roses_, _The Magic of an Hour_, and _Field of Ermine_.
In 1913, Benavente was elected to membership in the Spanish Academy.
He is widely quoted on educational and political, as well as literary
affairs. He has ideals for a greater freedom than now exists in Spain
and other European countries. He has traveled widely, seeing his plays
performed and making friends in Russia, England, South America, and
the United States. _The Passion Flower_ (_La Malquerida_), the tragedy
of peasant life with colorful setting and tense emotion, has been
popular in America, as a film, and as a play with Nance O’Neil as
actress. The Theatre Guild of New York and the Jewish Art Theatre gave
careful study to the interpretation of _The Bonds of Interest_. As in
many of his plays the serious lesson is not stressed to interfere with
the artistry. One of his best characterizations is Nevé, heroine of
_El Hombrecito_, often compared to Ibsen’s Nora of _A Doll’s House_.
Benavente believes that the inner meaning of a play must be revealed
by the mind or emotions of the spectator or reader. He is deeply
indebted--a debt which English and American readers share--for the
intuitive, careful translations and editing of several series of his
plays by John Garrett Underhill (Scribner’s, New York, 1917-1925).
Only in such interpretation can one fully appreciate the strength and
fineness of character-drawing, the satirical thesis, the fantasy and
poetry blended in such plays as _The Governor’s Wife_, _The Prince
Who Learned Everything out of Books_, _Saturday Night_, _The Other
Honor_, and _The Necklace of Stars_, with its fanciful charm and
sermonic lesson of love to one’s neighbor. In Ernest Boyd’s _Studies
from Ten Literatures_ there is a good summary of his life and work
which includes 144 plays. Mr. Boyd raises the question, “Has he been
overestimated?” Possibly it is an echo of French criticism. Valuable
material is found, also, in Storm Jameson’s _Modern Drama in Europe_
and _A Study of the Modern Drama_ by Barrett H. Clark (New York,
1925). A new intensive study is _Jacinto Benavente_ by Walter Starkie
(New York, 1925).
[Illustration:
_Copyright by Underwood & Underwood, N. Y._
JACINTO BENAVENTE]
_Expressionism_ classifies the work of dramatists like Benavente,
Molnar, and Capek. The methods used by the Spanish playwright to embody
this principle are to “generalize” both the action and his characters,
so that they become symbols of real life, appealing to the subjective
element in readers. He has declared that, henceforth, he intends to
write plays for publication and not for the theatre.... “The only way
in which a play may be appreciated thoroughly is by being read,” he
says. “I have written more than a thousand parts, yet of that number
I can recall perhaps five which I have recognized as being truly the
characters I had conceived, when they stepped upon the stage. I have
not even seen some of my plays.”[155] This stress upon the futility
of staging plays that should be interpreted by the reader’s own
imagination and mind, is not unlike that by Maeterlinck, already noted
in a previous chapter.
Benavente not infrequently uses puppets in place of real characters
to convey his inner meanings. Sometimes they are given real names but
they are not the _true_ characters he wishes the reader to discover
in them, as in the first scenes of _The Bonds of Interest_. In a
brief parable-play, _The Magic of an Hour_,[156] he has two symbolic
characters, “A Merveilleuse” and “An Incroyable,” two porcelain
figures upon columns that converse about life and love, books and
flowers, poetry and music. In this adroit, short comedy the author has
interwoven some thoughts that express that peculiar idealism which is
his, that contrast between weak humanity and the craving “for something
which is not ourselves, and yet which is the breath of living.” The
nearest approach to this ideal is love, which can transform, “by the
magic of an hour,” evil, men-beasts, cowards, “devils in crime,” into
“spirits of light, luminous with a divine wisdom through all instincts
of the beast.”[157] In sentences of such groping faith, such idealism
of the “inner eye,” scattered through the hundred and more plays by
Jacinto Benavente, one may establish, in a measure, his right to the
Nobel prize. With this is blended what Storm Jameson calls his “divine
sanity.” On the score of literary achievement, he is an artist,
versatile and sincere, delicate and yet vigorous in his workmanship.
His plays vary in value for the student of drama; some of the later
titles, like _A Pair of Shoes_ or _Doubtful Virtue_, indicate the
types of psychological plays among Continental playwrights. In his
finer, more characteristic plays, however, there are vital expressions
of idealism. Mr. John Garrett Underhill (in a letter to the author of
this book) says, “Benavente is an idealist of the highest type and
his philosophy is best and most explicitly stated in _The School of
Princesses_ and _Field of Ermine_--service and sacrifice.”
FOOTNOTES:
[147] Inscription with the Nobel Prize Award in Literature, 1904.
[148] See _A Study of Modern Drama_ by Barrett H. Clark, New York,
1925, and _Modern Drama in Europe_ by Storm Jameson, New York, 1920.
[149] By permission of the Atlantic Monthly Company.
[150] _Review of Reviews_, 31: 613.
[151] _Poet Lore_, Boston, 1908.
[152] _Drama_, 25, 62-76.
[153] By permission of John Garrett Underhill.
[154] Inscription with the Nobel Prize Award in Literature, 1922.
[155] _Plays_; fourth series, xix, edited by John Garrett Underhill. By
permission of Mr. Underhill and Charles Scribner’s Sons.
[156] _Ibid._
[157] _Ibid._, _Magic of an Hour_, p. 125.