ABSTRACT
THE TRAGIC THEATRE OF ALFONSO SASTRE

BY

Harold Rick Hite

This work purports to demonstrate the fundamentally
tragic nature of Alfonso Sastre's theatre and to show the
relationship between his theatre and his theoretical
writings.

A continually deve10ping theory of tragedy is
extracted from various works, particularly Drama and
Society (1956) and Anatomy of Realism (1965). This
theoretical concept is shown to originate with Aristotle
and to grow eventually into a form of dialectic between
Aristotelian and Brechtian elements. The subject of this
theory of tragic theatre is man in his dialectical
(existential v. social) being. Katharsis is shown to be
the central effective eXperience of this theatre and an
experience which goes beyond its Aristotelian conception.

The plays are interpreted as tragedies and the thesis
arQued that only as tragedies can they be seen to function
(mimesis-katharsis) as effective works of theatre in the
context of modern society. They exist as eXperimental
pieces through which Sastre eXplores the tragic nature of
Han and the forms of eXpressing that nature. As
experiments they provide the basis for later theoretical

expressions.

Harold Rick Hite

The plays are studied in two major groups:

existential tragedies and dialectical tragedies.

THE TRAGIC THEATRE OF ALFONSO SASTRE
By

Harold Rick Hite

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Theatre

1973

COpyright by
HAROLD RICK HITE
1973

TO
BOBBIE

For the long wait

11

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am deeply indebted to all those who brought me to
love Spanish literature and the theatre. For their
inspiration, guidance, and assistance at Stages along the
way I thank eSpecially Robert H. Russell, Margaret and

Fletcher Collins, Allan Lacy, and Frank C. Rutledge.

iii

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I

CHAPTER II

CHAPTER III

CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

THEORY:

THEORY:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THEATRE:

THEATRE:

Part

Part

DRAMA AND SOCIETY . .

 

ANATOMY OF REALISM.

 

EXISTENTIAL TRAGEDY.

DIALECTICAL TRAGEDY.

iv

11
36
57
123
124
175
281

294

INTRODUCTION

The prestige of tragedy as an intellectual and
critical conception stands today in almost inverse
ratio to its prestige on the stage. The commentaries
published on the subject during the past fifty years
have easily outnumbered not merely new plays overtly
entitled tragedies (if there have been any) but all
new plays, however described, in which the tragic
elements as defined by any theory could be said to
predominate. The twentieth century respects tragedy
but does not produce it.1
If one accepts this statement of Geoffrey Brereton as
a valid description of the times, one must regard the
Spanish playwright Alfonso Sastre as something of a rara
avis in the modern theatre for he is engaged precisely in
an effort to create plays in which the tragic elements as
defined by a theory can be said to predominate. The
present study shall concern itself with this predominance
of tragic elements and the theory defining them in an

attempt to prOperly interpret Sastre's work from 1946 to

1965.3

 

lGeoffrey Brereton, Principles of Tragedy (Coral
Gables: .Univ. of Miami Press, 1968), p. 3. George
Steiner is even more conclusive in his pronouncement of
the death of tragedy. "From antiquity until the age of
ShakeSpeare and Racine, such accomplishments seemed within
the reach of talent. Since then the tragic voice in drama
is blurred or still." The Death of Tragedy (1961; rpt.
New York: Hill and Wang, 1966), p. 10.

2None of the works to date have dealt with Sastre's
plays as tragedies. The existential and social themes
have been pointed out by a number of critics with the
latter receiving the greatest attention. Many of the
single articles dealing with the plays are little more
' l

 

A look at the first of Sastre's plays, Uranium 23S,

 

produced in 1946, makes apparent his-interest from the
beginning in that which his fellow countryman, Miguel de

"3 The work

Unamuno, had called "the tragic sense of life.
is dominated by a concern for man, as an individual and as
a society, faced with uncertainty and (the uncertainty of)
death. The plays that follow, however they differ
formally, and whatever the social position they take,
never neglect that condition of man which their author
refers to as "the great metaphysical tragedy of human
existence."4 They are all part of a continuing eXperiment
which in a practical way attempts to exPlore the nature

and effectiveness of tragedy.

Cargo of Dreams immediately followed Uranium 235 and,

 

 

like it, was one of Sastre's contributions to the Arte

Nuevo (New Art) group of young writers attempting to

 

than daily theatre reviews and fail to link the particular
work with the entire corpus. Farris Anderson's Alfonso
Sastre (New York: Twayne, 1971) is the best work on the
writer to date. Anderson approaches Sastre's work from
what he calls the "overall dialectical unity of Cit].",

p. 5, and does not treat the works as tragedies.

3Delsentimiento tragico de la Vida by Miguel de
Unamuno appeared in 1913 and is probably the most
influential philOSOphiC work by a Spaniard in the
twentieth century. Translated in 1921 by J. E. Crawford
Flitch with the assistance of the author, it is readily
available today in a Dover paperback edition, Tragic Sense
of Life.

4Alfonso Sastre, Drama 2 sociedad (Drama and Society
ED. SJ) (Madrid: Taurus, 1956), p. 138. Translations
throughout are my own. -

 

 

revitalize the Spanish theatre of the day.5 Both works
are eclectic in their efforts to bring outside influences
to a stage still dominated by the style of Jacinto
Benavente.6 And both represent for Sastre something of a
false start in their deliberately nonrealistic form
although not in their tragic content.

By 1950 the major direction of his theatre was

established with the writing of Pathetic Prologue, a work

 

which is realistic in style and which concerns itself with
man both existentially (philOSOphically) and socially,
discovering the dramatic power in the dialectic between
these asPects of his being.7 In the same year, with José
Maria de Quinto, Sastre helped to found a new theatre
group, Teatro de Agitacién (Theatre of Social Agitation

ET. A. $3 )8 which would function to bring theatre of

 

5Arte Nuevo was an eXperimental theatre group of

university students. The charter members were José
Gordon, Alfonso Paso, Medardo Fraile, Carlos José Costas,
José Franco, Jose Maria Palacio, and Alfonso Sastre.
Sastre states that what united the group was "the nausea
brought on by the middle class theatre of the time."
"Entrevista con Alfonso Sastre" by Ricardo Doménech in
Alfonso Sastre (A. S.) (Madrid: Taurus, 1964), p. 56.

6Jacinto Benavente (1866-1954). A middle class
playwright of unequaled pOpularity in twentieth century
Spain, won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1922.

7Sastre said of this work, "I must say that with
Pathetic Prologue I finally considered myself baptized as
a dramatic author." Obras Completas (Complete Works [9.
CJ) (Madrid: Aguilar, 1967): P. 59.

8The T. A. S. is described in some detail by Sastre
and José Maria de Quinto in A. S. The Manifesto of the
group is also printed in this book.

 

 

 

u‘

 

h'v

(In

in

 

9.

‘h

(I,

 

 

I

social awareness to the Spanish stage. Although it never
moved beyond theoretical pronouncements, the T. A. S. was
an early indication of Sastre“s determination to create a
serious theatre to deal with the real problems of man,
both social and existential. The manifesto rejected any
simplistic "thesis theatre" concept of social theatre.

In Spite of the failure of the T. A. S. Sastre's own
dramatic output continued in uninterrupted fashion for the
next six years with works eXploring man's tragic

situation. The Garbage Can (1951), the weakest of his

 

plays, was followed within six months by The Condemned
Sggag, one of the strongest. A clear, dramatic relation-
ship between the individual and his society which tended
to elude him in the first of these works was discovered in
the other. It established a microcosm of society in a
small group of interrelated individuals caught in a tragic
situation and left to discover and suffer, in a Sartrean
manner, their condemnation to freedom.

Following The Condemned Squad, which received three

 

performances by a university group in Madrid before being

closed by the government, Sastre wrote Community Bread

 

(1953), The Gag (1954) and Red Earth (1954). The first
two have received production, the former being considered
an attack on communist forms of government and the latter
being seen as a rural drama. Both works are in fact
tragedies which attempt to deal with the dialectic between

individual, human needs and communal, social

re3ponsibilities under conditions of stress. Red
Earth, which is more tOpical in its treatment of the
social aSpect, has not been produced.

With Anna Kleiber and The Blood of God in 1955 Sastre

 

 

momentarily reduced his focus to the existential
predicament of the individual touching only incidentally

on man”s social condition. These works, with The Raven

 

(1956), while separated from the larger number of plays
involving man”s social being, relate to the total corpus
of Sastre's theatre as tragedies. They are in fact a part
of a highly productive period of varied eXperiment with
the tragic theatre which includes two other plays, Sad Are

the Eyes of William Tell (1955) and A Death in the

 

 

Neighborhood (1955) and Sastre's first book of theory,

 

Drama and Society (1956).

In A Death in the Neighborhood he brought together

 

the impulse of contemporary social revolt and the
primitive ritual movement of the group in a brutal climax
that would have pleased Artaud. The implications of this
work which ends with a tacit approval of social
purification through mob violence and execution were
sufficient to prevent its being approved for production by
the authorities.

Sastre's "William Tell" is a s0phisticated and
complex eXperiment in relating the theatrical and the
real, the mythical and the ordinary, the tragic and the

comic. It represents something of an intuitive move

 

 

.Ay.

'5‘

.m-
A~
0..

. ‘A’V

 

q
I
‘

(II

(In

. .
i

.’
t

p
0..

'QA

b;

-.E

\
Id.
‘Iu

‘3‘
VV‘

9-.

o 1 l -__.-1
0 an I; -
I t n I

I

a.
or.

to.
II-
I

/

towards epic theatre for the playwright who at the time
was largely unaware of Brecht's accomplishments. The
work, described by one critic as "one of the most
beautiful dramas written in Spain in recent times,"9 was
also refused production rights.

During 1957-58 Sastre wrote four.film scripts,lo
translated Euripides' Mgggg and completed a short novel,

E1 paralelo 38 (The 38th Parallel).ll By the end of 1958

 

he had begun a new work, Nocturnal Assault which he

 

finished early the following year.
1959 was a period of great production with the epic

eXperiment of Nocturnal Assault being followed by a

 

tightly knit Aristotelian tragedy, In the Net and an
additional eXperiment, Death Thrust, incorporating both
concepts. In the two later works Sastre achieved new
levels in develOping situations and characters from which

the dialectical tensions between man's existential nature

 

9Domingo Pérez Minik, "Se trata de Alfonso Sastre,
dramaturgo melancolico de la revolucion," in A. S., p. 26.

10Sastre has written seven filmscripts altogether.
”Amanecer en puerta oscura" ("Dawn Through a Dark Door"),
1956, ”Tres hombres" ("Three Men"), 1957, "Carmen," 1958,
”La noche y el alba" ("The Night and the Dawn"), 1957, "Un
hecho violento" ("A Violent Affair"), 1957, "A 1as cinco
de la tarde" ("At Five in the Afternoon"), 1960, and
"Nunca pasa nada" ("Nothing Ever Happens"), 1961.

11In addition to El paralelo 38 Sastre has written a
book of short stories, Las noches lfigubres (ngubrious
Nights), written between 1961 and 1963, and Flores ro‘as
para Miguel Servet, a short biography, written in 1964, of
the protagonist of an unpublished play of his entitled £3
sangre y la ceniza (Blood and Ashes).

 

 

 

and his social condition could organically and
dramatically break forth,

This period was followed by another two years in
which translations (Ibsen”s The Lady from the Sea and

Strindberg“s Creditors), film scripts, poetry and critical

 

writing dominated his schedule. In 1960 he also joined
José Maria de Quinto again in another attempt to found a

new theatre group, this one called the Grupo de Teatro

 

Realista (Realistic Theatre Group [C. T. R;]). Their
purpose was to investigate realism both theoretically and

practically, and they achieved one season of success

12

staging three works and publishing a number of

significant documents.13

The Tenebrae was begun in 1960, abandoned for a year

 

and a half, and completed in 1962. It is Sastre“s most
pessimistic statement regarding contemporary middle class
society. In its concentrated depiction of the trapped
remnants of a depraved society and of the agonizing
tensions and violent actions among its members, it merits

comparison with Albee's Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf,

 

written about the same time.
In 1963 there was again a return to concentrated

efforts in theoretical writing with the greater part of

 

lzTo Clothe the Naked by Luigi Pirandello, E1 tintero
(The Inkwell) by Carlos Mufiiz, and In the Net by Sastre.

 

 

 

 

13Documents of the G. T. R. are to be found in A. S.,

Anatomy of Realism being written. This work was completed
and published in 1965 and serves to conclude and define
the period of eXperimentation with tragedy leading to
it.14

With Anatomy of Realism and the earlier Drama and

 

 

Society Sastre attempted to put into theoretical and
critical language the same concepts of tragedy which his
plays were eXpressions of in a practical way. The first
of these works is basically an effort to rough out a
modern "poetics" capable of functioning for a Specific
philOSOphical and social conception of man. In it he
describes man as a creature who is by nature tragic in
that he exists in a situation characterized by the
perpetual absence of happiness and the eventual presence
of death. This existential condition is translated by
dramatic mimesis into the metaphysical substance of
tragedy. For Sastre this is an inseparable part of all

3

tragedy whatever other focus or purpose may exist, and it

 

14Since 1965 Sastre has written four works for theatre
which remain unpublished in Spain. They are La sangre y
la ceniza (Blood and Ashes), La taberna fantastica (The
Fantastic Tavern), El banqgete (The Banquet), and Crénicas
Romanas (Roman Chronicles). Because they remain
unpublished and generally inaccessible and because they
represent an entirely new phase in Sastre's development,
they fall outside the sc0pe of this study which finds its
most apprOpriate limitation with the publishing of Anatomy
of Realism in 1965. In 1970 Sastre also published a new
theoretical work which attempts to deal with his develop-
ment following Anatomy of Realism. This work, entitled L3
revolucién y la critica de la cultura (Revolution and
Cultural Criticism) with the unpublished plays are
material for a study in themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o...»

 

51.,

'1.

is that part which in the final analysis relates the
earliest and the latest eXpressions in the history of the
tragic theatre.

Less enduring than the metaphy51cal substance, but
usually more urgent, as Sastre sees it, is the social
function of tragedy. In mimetic terms tragic theatre is
seen as an apprOpriate genre to document and investigate
the social condition of man, which is, at present, tragic.
This condition, however, is seen to differ from the
existential condition in the fact that it can be
ameliorated finally (the existential cannot be). It is in
fact to the purpose of such an amelioration, without
neglect for man's existential problem, that tragedy is
shown to be a genre uniquely endowed. The major process
that provides tragedy with this potential effectiveness is
katharsis.

The eXperience of katharsis, as Sastre reinterprets
it, goes beyond Aristotle's conception to become a real
social purification. But this idea of an eXpanded
katharsis still rests on a structure of tragedy which is
fundamentally Aristotelian. The significant point is that
Sastre's theatre, by his own definition, can function as
effective social theatre and as meaningful existential
theatre only because it is tragic theatre.

The Aristotelian nature of his theatre is obvious in

the plays and it is eXplicitly stated in Drama and

 

Society. There is particular support for the predominance

10

of plot, this being the apprOpriate manner of treating
what is seen as a basically situational reality. In the
plays the acts of reversal, recoqnition and suffering are
effectively used in realizing this concept.

By the time of Anatomy of Realism Sastre's

 

Aristotelian tragic theatre has run head on into Brecht‘s
epic theatre. After a period of dialectical eXperimenta-
tion with the formal principles of these two "theatres"
using plays, a further development in theoretical thinking
is outlined in this second book. A concept of dialectic
dominates the work: man's being is seen as a dialectical
process between existential and social aSpects of that
being and a theatre of dialectic is called for to reflect
and effect man‘s being. On a formal level this dialectic
occurs between Aristotelian and Brechtian principles. In
its view of man it can be seen to grow out of the conflict
between avant-garde nihilism and epic social Optimism.
Sastre places himself betweeaneckett and Brecht calling
for a "critical theatre" relevant to the pre-revolutionary
middle class society of the present, a theatre which in

its most exPressive and effective form is and must be a

tragic theatre.

CHAPTER I

THEORY: DRAMA AND SOCIETY

 

In 1953 Alfonso Sastre set down a definition of
tragedy, which, compared to his later considerations of
the subject, exhibits remarkable conciseness.

For me . . . tragedy is simply the dramatic
(theatrical) result of the documentary transference
of human existence to plots . . . that include painful
events which provoke in those who suffer--or at
least in the Spectator--basic questions about the
meaning of those events} Ultimately the questions
concern human existence and the possibility of
reducing, by means of human efforts, the effects of
the painful events. The Spectator participates in
the anguish of the action, and through his grievous
emotion--which consists of horror (phobos) and pity
(eleos)--he may be moved to revise his view of the
world and the assumptions of his life. He may be
moved to make meaningful social decisions, ranging
from individual assistance to revolution. When this
happens, the tragedy has achieved its supreme end:
purification (katharsis). Understood thus,
purification consists of two stages: immediate or
personal purification, and social purification.l

Farris Anderson has correctly pointed out the
elements in this definition which remain part of Sastre‘s
later developing theory of tragedy, these being his
existential conception, the social function of tragedy,
and the incorporation of certain Aristotelian concepts

and terminology. In Drama and Society these are dealt

 

 

1Alfonso Sastre, "Tragedia," Correo literario, 70
(April 15, 1953), 10, translated by Farris Anderson,
Alfonso Sastre, p. 33.

 

 

ll

12

with as metaphysical substance, artistic form, and
social function. Viewed historically these aspects of
tragedy exist in varying degrees of significance and
potential for meaning: social function Operating with
maximum significance in the period of and the society of
a play's creation, and steadily losing significance
thereafter to the possible point of meaninglessness;
metaphysical substance maintaining itself as permanently
significant and meaningful for men of all periods;
artistic form having a quality of plasticity within
certain permanent parameters.
There is something permanent and something
corruptible in a tragedy. That permanent aSpect is
that which causes us to understand an ancient
tragedy and to use, over a period of time, the term
“tragedy'_to designate distinct and distant dramatic
works. That corruptible aSpect is that which, after

a period of time, makes Oedipus Rex seem so distant
from us.

 

 

Sastre sees in Oedipus Rex, Othello, and The Hairy
‘Apg a similarity which he calls their metaphysical
substance. ("The metaphysical substance of tragedy is
human existence in its authentic modality (Heidegger). . .
human existence confronted with Unamuno's tragic sense of
life."3 For Sastre, in Drama and Society, the first and
last requirement for drama to be tragedy is that it deal
in some way with the question of human existence. It is

that aSpect which, in fact, makes ultimately possible the

 

2Sastre, D. S., p. 20.

3Sastre, D. S., p. 20.

13

existence of tragedy in this or any period of history.
"Human existence, even if the social tragedies become
eliminated, is a great metaphysical tragedy.”4 The fact
that human existence is ultimately a tragic situation is
made clear by Sastre in his detailed description of it
as he sees it in "those rare moments when the farce of
daily life melts away."

a) a closed situation

b) in which are found existing

c) beings condemned to die

d) who desire--in reality this is an a priori
exigency, not deliberated upon, biological,
constitutive, previous to all desire-~a (kind of)
happiness

e) which, at least as a state of plenitude, is
denied them,

f) and, at times they question themselves concerning
their destiny (worldly or otherworldly)

g) and concerning the unknown sin or guilt for which
they are punished.

h) It is a struggle

i) in which human life is always defeated

j) in moments which provoke horror (before the
magnitude of the catastrOphe) and pity (before the
nihilism of being human) in the Spectator of this
defeat, in which he sees, anticipated, his own
defeat in life, to which he is brought by the mere
fact of existing.5

 

For Sastre the fact that this tragic situation is
common to all men makes the tragic theatre, which
imitates this situation, a viable and relevant form of
drama; in the final analysis, the most relevant form.
But the closed, nihilistic.nature-of this situation will

makedit'aloneyvfor18astre; unacceptable as the whole

 

4Sastre, D. S., p. 138.

SSastre, D. s., p. 24.

(Iv
it

4
In

Cal

-.

5'»

~ .

1"

I111

9,5»!

14

subject of tragedy, and while the influence of Unamuno‘s
’tragic sense of life' will always remain strong in
Sastre's theatre, it will not become its single_subject
or his obsession.‘

The closed situation of "beings denied happiness"
reflects Sartre's concept of human reality as "by nature
an unhappy consciousness with no possibility of"

"6 although Sastre does not

surpassing its unhappy state
mention the French existentialist. And while possibly a
minor point, it should be noted that Sastre only
indirectly deals with the degree of consciousness of the
tragic individual, suggesting an almost fleeting
awareness of his state ("in those rare moments when the
farce of daily life melts away") and indicating only
.possible eschatological concern ("at times they question
.themselves concerning their destiny")., In this'degree'
they are less~than Unamuno's or Sartre's existential men
and perhaps more of Arthur Miller's common man. In this
‘case the tragic flaw in Sastre's man ("the unknown sin")
would bethe very constitutive desire for happiness which

drives him.) But Miller sees a "possibility of victory"7

and Sastre sees inevitable defeat in this closed

 

6Lucien Goldman, "The Theatre of Sartre," TDR, T49
(Fall, 1970), 103. This is qudted fromLSartre'g ‘
Being and Nothingness.

7Arthur Miller, "Tragedy and the Common Man," in
TragedyVision and Form, ed. Robert Corrigan (Scranton:

15

situation. The question of comparison, however, while
valuable, cannot be fully dealt with on the limited basis
of Sastre's description of only a single aSpect of his
concept of tragedy. And certainly some features of
Miller's description, particularly the more positive and
Optimistic, can only be seen to have their counterparts
in Sastre's views of the social function of tragedy. And
in the later deveIOpment of his theories Sastre goes
beyond Miller's sketchy ideas.

In a closer analysis of this description of human
existence a number of points become evident and are
(important as factors around which a correct interpreta—
tion of the tragic sense of Sastre's plays can be
developed.. It is necessary to accept the force of the
nihilistic truth of this description dealing with the
metaphysical substance of tragedy. Human existence is a
"closed situation"; closed physically by death and:
psychically (spiritually) by the denial of ultimate
happiness in life. With this view of human existence it
is not surprising that Sastre reacted with such under-

standing to Beckett's Waiting for Godot and in his review

 

of that play anticipated End Game with almoSt prOphetic
3 .
precision. ..And his description here can be seen as an

abstract of the later work. But while Sastre sees this

 

8Sastre, Anatomia del realismo (Anatomy of Realism
EA. R;]) (Barcelona: Editorial Seix Barral, 1965),
pp. 32-40.

16

nihilistic metaphysical truth as being an inevitable fact
of life, and.thus inevitable factor in tragedy, (which
makes tragedy an always meaningful theatrical form), he
insists that the force of its truth be utilized, not alone,
towards a devastating pessimiSm, but in relationship with
an equal and Optimistic social truth of man as a creature
capable of prevailing.9 This concept of the metaphysical
substance in Opposing relationship with social function is
the first awkward formulation of what will eventually
develop into Sastre's dialectical concept of tragedy.

It is also important to recognize the denial of any
Judaeo—Christian interpretation of man in Sastre's "closed
situation;" By denying any sense of justice through
'known guilt' Sastre reestablishes the very possibility of
tragedy in terms of its prototype in Greek Theatre.10 Add
to this the fact that the concept makes tragedy first of
all situational and emphasizes man's inherent

("constitutive") desire andrhis resultant struggle and one

 

9With the possibility of social conditions changing,
tragedy need not be a form which deals with totally closed
situations (although the metaphysical tragedy remains
closed). Thus Sastre distinguished degrees of tragedy
according to the "poSsibility of an Opening in the Situa-
tion on which it is based and also according to the
magnitud of suffering of the characters implicated in the
situation." D. S., p. 37.

10George Steiner's thesis in The Death of Tragedy is
that the form is not universal but Greek and that the
Judaic (and Christian) view of man makes it impossible.
Sastre intuitively seems to find his way toward this view
in Drama and Society. The problem comes later when the
marxist influence becomes greater: tragedy does not fit
into any marxist view of man either.

17

has a concept of tragedy with emphasis strictly
Aristotelian, based on Aristotles' notion of praxis:

"a psychic energy working outwards."ll The inclusion of
the eXperience of horror and pity reinforce this
Aristotelian nature of.the concept.

Sastre cOntinues to develOp his concept of the
metaphysical substance of tragedy with a more detailed
description of what he considers the two fundamental forms
of the tragic situation found in the outstanding examples
of the genre. These he considers within the classic
Aristotelian mode.

There are two fundamental and concrete situations in
which complex men are always morally normal (insofar as
there are "good men" and "bad men," tragedy as such,
ceases to exist) and seemingly not very guilty (much to
blame) of the grievous situation in which they find
themselves; in any case, at best, they make a mistake
or bring about an act which results, consequentially in
an error. In the worst of cases they act excessively
out of a biological or social circumstance.

In situatidn A:

These morally normal men

a) who love or esteem one another, or, at least, do not
hate one another (mother and son, brothers [find
sisters-fl , friends... 1. .E ), .

b) harm one another (even to the point of blood or
death) .

0) without wanting to (fate).

In situation B:

These morally normal men

a) are tortured (made to suffer)

b) by a superior entity

c) under whose painful dominion they find themselves
without the possibility of escape.1

 

11Francis Fergusson, "Introduction," in Aristotle's
Poetics (New York: Hill and Wang, 1961), p. 8.

128a8tre' Do So, pp. 27-280

18

In both situations Sastre sees the tragic figures as
victims, dominated by internal (A) or external (B) forces.
Their guilt, as earlier described, is difficult to
ascertain, or, at best, slight. He has, however, elabo-
rated the description with the introduction of two
Aristotelian concepts: the morally normal man and the

13 Of the one he states, "A 'saint'

Plll4

mistake or error.
cannot be a tragic hero. Neither can a 'monster. Of
the other he goes slightly beyond his model in suggesting
the unwillful (blind) error or the excess resulting from
biological or social circumstance (determinism?). In any
case the intentional act, or any possibility of blame or
guilt, is excluded. This maintains the concept of a
totally closed situation.

The two situations, as described, and their
combination, are an attempt to delineate the most funda-
mental manner of treatment (plot-situation) of the subject
of human existence to be found in the genre of tragedy. As
such they can be interpreted as describing either a meta--
physical situation or a social situation. Sastre does not.
appear to be concerned with this apparent shift of

territory at this point in his supposed discussion of the

metaphysical substance of tragedy.

 

13Aristotle, Poetics, p. 76.

14Sastre, D. s., p. 29.

l9

Considered as descriptive of the metaphysical
substance of tragedy, situation A concerns the problem of
the ineXplicable nature of man, himself, and the acts that
result from his inner-self, acts_described as contrary to
his will. Fate is made to blame historically. Situation
B, in these terms, is man faced with the unhappiness of
life and then with death. This is strictly in line with
Sastre's earlier depiction of human existence. These
interpretations are seen to be always inherent in any
tragedy, and for Sastre constitute the ultimate tragedy.

In broader terms and for modern theatre these situa-
tions can be interpreted differently. Situation A
constitutes a psychological as well as an existential-
philOSOphical question, and fate is by no means the only
possible means of eXplanation. Situation B, as Sastre
pointS"out, is clearly Open to social interpretation. The
superior entity becomes "a factory, an institution,
capitalism . . ."15 And while this cannot constitute the
ultimate tragedy, it will.1ater be described as
constituting ”urgent" tragedy.i6

Sastre devotes a chapter of Drama and Society to the
concept of fear (horror) and pity (compassion, pain; he
finds any single term for either apparently insufficient).

In his discussion of these elements he wishes to emphasize

 

15Sastre, D. S., p. 29.

16”. . . the urgency of a purification," Sastre,
Do SO, p. 156.

20

the Aristotelian origin of the eXperience while at the same
time to carry his own interpretation beyond Aristotle.

This is in line with his general handling of the elements
of tragedy in Drama and Society, which he will describe
later as "scarcely anything more than a critical recall of
the basics (bases) of Aristotles' Poetics, bringing them

up to date."17

In the case of fear and pity Sastre ignores
the volumes of interpretative material which have built up
around Aristotle and, using the terms, attempts simply to
describe what he considers to be the experience "which

"18 A true tragedy for

occurs when we witness a tragedy.
Sastre is a "lucid representation of human existence."19
In being this it is an artistic accomplishment of that
earlier described revelation in those "rare moments when
the farce of daily life melts away,"20 or a "lucid mOment"
in real life. In both cases and at both moments.the same
eXperience occurs, and this anguished eXperience is one of
fear and pity.
We eXperience in the theatre the anguish that we
eXperience in those authentic moments [See p..12, note 3,
Heidegger] of our existence, when the veil of the daily

farce is torn away and the true reality of our human
existence makes itself obvious; when we are faced with

 

l7Sastre, A. R., p. 7.
18Sastre, D. S., p. 31.
19Sastre, D. 8., p. 33.

20Sastre, D. S., p. 24.

21

our true possibilities;21 when our existence and its

meaning become a metaphysical problem; when suddenly

we find ourselves alienated in our being and that

which we now call "nothing," for lack of any better way

to say it, throws us into anguish.

We eXperience in the theatre (when we attend the

performance of a tragedy), the fear and pity which we

feel in our lucid moments when confronted with the

grief, misery, disgrace of others in real life.23

Fear and pity are also seen as a unique experience

made possible by the very lucidity of the moment. They
become substitutes for apparently lesser passions of
anger, indignation, hate, the muddied passions of life and
melodrama which are distinguished from fear and pity by
their miSplacement of guilt. True tragedy (and lucid
moments of reality) refuses to accept a simplistic view of
good and bad men; it rejects the lesser passions' easy

placement of-guilt on the stereotyped strawmen, the

monsters of melodrama. Fear and pity occur with the

 

21This passage which relates the authentic moments of
,existence with the true possibilities seems very close to a
passage in Georg Lukics' The Meaning_of Contemporary
Realism (London: Merlin, 1962 Eninsh translationT,

p. 23: ”The literature of realism, aiming at a truthful
reflection of reality, must demonstrate both the concrete
and abstract potentialities of human beings in extreme
situations of this kind. A character's concrete
potentiality once revealed, his abstract potentialities
will appear essentially inauthentic." The similarity is
probably coincidental, eSpecially considering Sastre's
use of Heidegger, who is anathema for LukScs, but points
up the direction in which Sastre is moving. In Anatomy
of Realism Sastre indicates a good knowledge of Luk cs.

 

22Sastre, D. S., p. 32.

23Sastre, D. 5., p. 32.

22

"displacement of the center of guilt from the 'monster.'"24

And with this complex eXperience one reaches what might be
termed both the kathartic center and the outer circle of

Sastre's tragedy as described in Drama and Society.25 In

 

an Aristotelian sense it is in drama, and in a modern

sense, not Aristotelian, it is also in society. It is what

 

distinguishes tragedy from other theatrical forms.

Tragedy has a life--in the Spectator--beyond its
expectancy; the fear and pity stay in his heart because
his deepest motivations are outside of the theatre.
Melodrama ends--and for good—-when the curtain falls;
fear and pity are dispelled with the punishment of the
antagonist, who is guilty of all disgrace. While in
tragedy, who is to blame? Whom should be punished?
How? What can be done so that Willy Loman--in
reality--might stOp suffering and making his sons
suffer? The curtain falls. The tragedy continues.26

Sastre, therefore, implicitly rejects anyconcept of
katharsis as a purely aesthetic or artificial substitute
for a real life experience.27 Even in the theatre it is
not a vicarious experience, and while it may be seen as the
climax of awareness and suffering for the individual
spectator in terms of the metaphysical substance of

tragedy, it cannot be accepted, as in Aristotle, as whole

 

24Sastre, D. 8., p. 33.

25He has earlier called this a "double purification."
See the first quote in this chapter.

26Sastre, D. 8., p. 34.

27"In good tragedies the horrible is real . . . (and
produces real horror; not a 'horror' which is some form
of aesthetic emotion); and the pitiful is real . . . (and
awakens real pity, not an aesthetic emotion); pity which
finds its object after the curtain comes down, in the
social reality." D. 8., p. 95.

23

and wholesome because of the fact of the social function of
tragedy. Not only is katharsis the same eXperience for the
Spectator, confronted by the real tragedy of human
existence or by the imitation of that tragedy, but it must
also lead to a second katharsis of a social nature, outside
the theatre, not in the context of the closed metaphysical
situation but in that of an Open social situation. In his
critical reworking of the Aristotelian foundations of
tragedy for the modern theatre, Sastre dislodges the
keystone. "Perhaps the most important modern discovery is
the social sense of the tragic 'purification.' The old
discussion of whether in 'katharsis' it was necessary or
not to find the 'moral justification of tragedy" as simply
an 'artistic' moderation of 'real' passions has no meaning
for our time."28
This by no means is to suggest that Sastre rejects the
whole formal structure of tragedy according to Aristotle.
In fact his reinterpretation of katharsis as the central
concept of his tragic theory, holding together the elements
of metaphysical substance and social function, must be seen

29

to relate organically with the artistic form of tragedy

 

28Sastre, D. S., p. 83. Sastre also states at
another point that "the fear and pity offered by modern
tragedy sets up an ethical, social and political
purification." D. S., p. 83.

29Sastre Speaks in his prologue of the organic manner
of his study's develOpment, organic in a theatrical
sense, Opposed to systematic. D. S., p. 7.

24

as well. And for Sastre this formal aSpect is definitely
Aristotelian.

As stated above artistic form is viewed historically
as having both the qualities of permanence and plasticity.
This paradoxical condition is described by Sastre in terms
of the changing degrees of importance attributed histo—
rically to the same basic Aristotelian elements or tragedy:
plot, character, thought, diction, Spectacle, and music.
Accepting these parts as the constitutive formal elements
of tragedy, Sastre finds cause for the failure of modern
theatre to achieve tragic prOportions in the misunderstand-
ing and misuse of these elements. Tragedy should be seen
as drama, i.e., "action" and plot is the principal formal
element.

The most important thing, from a critical point of
view, that one can say about myth (which I shall always
call plot and story when I want to refer to myth as the
7invention of the dramatist from documentary data; that
is, as the result of an artistic effort whereby reality
acquires dramatic structure) is that--as Aristotle
wrote--"myth is the first principle and, as it were,
the soul of tragedy." In reality myth is the first
principle and soul of drama in general. Myth is the
first principle and fountain of ideology and of
language. In it and through their Situations
characters Should be revealed. Myth demands its
scenarios. Every attempt to reduce the importance of

myth has grought forth dramatically monstrous
products. 0

 

This formative principle, for Sastre, is manifest as

situation (with desire and struggle as described above) and

 

3OSastre, D. S., p. 45.

25

he discusses Aristotle's organic parts of plot in terms of
situation.

In the beginning is the plot with its temporal
unfolding of situations of which Aristotle studies
three: reversal, recognition and pathos or pathetic
occurrence, and out of this comes everything. In the
plot characters reveal themselves and out of the plot
ideas arise. At least that is how it should happen 31

He goes so far as to suggest that plot or Situation tends
to reveal character and ideas previously not anticipated by
the playwright.

Aristotle says that the natural causes of actions are
character and ideas but that only by means of action
can the characters acquire "character." And I would
add--are the ideas and characters revealed; even for
the playwright, who usually has, I think, a vague and
obscure enough approximate idea of the thought and
even, at times, of the character of the personages who
intervene in the drama (be it tragic or comic). The
result being then, that even though the natural causes
of the actions are the characters and the ideas, they
are not made clear until there is a revealing
situation, and that thi§ situation, besides being
revealing, is creative. 2

 

 

 

31Sastre, D. S., p. 123.

32The wording for Aristotle is translated from
Sastre's rendering. Butcher's translation of this
passage reads, "Tragedy is the imitation of an action;
and an action implies personal agents, who necessarily
possess certain distinctive qualities both of character
and thought; for it is by these that we qualify actions
themselves, and these--thought and character--are the
two natural causes from which actions spring, and on
actions again all success or failure depends." Aristotle
(Butcher) VI., p. 62. Sastre's idea of character
revelation through action (revelation even for the
playwright) differs from most interpretations of this
"chicken and egg" passage according to Geoffrey
Brereton's listing of interpreters. "What cannot be got
around is the fact that all the interpreters of this
particular passage attribute to Aristotle the Opinion
that Thought and Character are the cause of success or
failure, good fortune or bad—-whether directly or at

26

He SUpportS Aristotle's unity of action and accepts
the efficacy of polysituational plots. He rejects,
however, any idea of unity of time or place, seeing in the
dramatic mode the potential for freedom from the limita—
tions of realistic movement in time and place. "The
dramatist can realize Space-time recompositions of reality
in order to make it more intelligible, and this recomposi-
tion forms part of the most authentic possibilities of
drama."33

Sastre relates Aristotle's concept of character with a

34 He criticizes

modern, general concept of psychology.
modern psychological drama which he sees as principally

based on character rather than on plot, thereby overturning
the prOper Aristotelian formal structure. He also sees in

this drama a narrowness of approach which inevitably

sacrifices drama for psychology. O'Neill's Mourning

 

Becomes Electra is singled out as*a work which fails for
this reason,: "drama sacrificed for an exhibition of one
man's theory of the Oedipus complex."35 Character in

tragedy must develOp out of situation, i.e. dramatically,

and not situation out of character.

 

one remove through the actions which they 'determine.“"
Principles of Tragedy (Coral Gables: Un. of Miami Press,
1938), p.44.

33Sastre, D. S., p. 44.

34"This element, the second in importance according
to Aristotle, constitutes what we would now call
'psychology.'" Sastre, D. S., p. 45.

35Sastre, D. S., p. 46.

27

A Situation is not the mathematical result of the sum
of some previously determined and defined charac*. A
situation is a new reality, a reality pSYChOlOgiCdliy
distinct and unforeseen, a surprise. This reality is
that which dominates and to which the writer ought to
be faithful . . . The dramatist, from the situation,
accepts every surprise and has to be diSposed to break
the psychological data which serve him to begin the
unfolding of the plot; it is the plot which rules by
means of its Situation. 6

For Sastre ultimately, "in the theatre there Should be no
psychology but that which is produced in the eXplosion of
Situations."37
As stated earlier, the formal element of thought must
be no less a product of situation than is that of
character. In modern terms Sastre identifies this
Aristotelian concept with ideology, ideas, and Opinions.
To develOp tragedy out of thought is to create thesis drama
which is as unacceptable as psychological drama.
[The dramatist] is not here to eXpose his ideology.
He is here to provide a channel for the voice of
everyone, to whatever cry the situation produces. Here
begins and ends his compromise. Only in this sense is
the theatre prOpaganda. The theatre, either it is
everyone's prOpaganda or it is nothing.
Sastre's firm rejection of psychological drama and
thesis drama rests, however, not only on an adherence to
the specific Aristotelian formal principles for tragedy but

also on an acceptance of a general theory of social realism

in literature. In the sketchy treatment given to this

 

36Sastre, D. S., p. 47.
37Sastre, D. S., p. 46.

38Sastre, D. S., p. 48.

28

subject in Drama and Society (it becomes the major suhwent

 

of Sastre's second theoretical work, Anatomy of Realism,,
certain principles can be seen evolving, principles dealing
with both the formal (mimetic) and social (functional-
effective) aSpects of the literary arts (genus), tragedy
ultimately representing for Sastre the most viable Species
for modern society. Inherent in the "realism" of social
realism is the requirement to witness the whole of the
human condition. It "makes of the writer or the artist a
witness--exceptional, certainly--Of reality who selects,
probes, and elaborates according to his artistic impulse.
'Realism' has its demands and it excludes forms of an
evasive nature."39 One such form, for Sastre, would be
that which chose to ignore either the existential or they
social condition of man. Psychological drama evades the
latter problem in its emphasis on the former. Sastre sees
this as the drama of the "'clinical case' involved with the
perturbation or exaltation of the human being as an
individual."40 This must be superseded by "a more profound
consideration of the human person (being) integrally
submerged in the social order or social chaos . . ."41

Thesis drama (political theatre), by reversing the

emphasis, also fails.

 

39Sastre, D. S., p. 72.
4oSastre, D. S., p. 71.

41Sastre, D. S., p. 71.

29

. . . the artistic failing of political theatre
proceeds from the deformation of reality which the
political stance produces in the playwright's vision.
Defined by (political) sympathy toward his protagonist
and antipathy toward his antagonist, the author will
not allow the antagonist to Speak, or makes him eXpreSS
himself in an awkward, cruel or inhuman way. With
which the play gradually loses strength, the plot
ending up forced and the characters weakened. This is
the general danger in thesis theatre. The playwright,
faithful to his thesis, blocks any outlet for the
antithesis, and naturally ends up far removed from any
dramatic synthesis.

Political theatre is artistically valid--and only by

being so artistically can it be so socially--when the

political consequence is a final result brought about,

unforced, by the plot.42
Short of this political theatre cannot be considered
tragedy.

. . . melodrama is the logical outcome of political

theatre . . . moved by preconceived ideas and

intentions alleged at all costs; at the cost, precisely,

of the human condition of the agonists.45

Out of the loose collection of essays in the second
part of Drama and Society, two concepts begin to emerge
which, in terms of realism, support the formal,
Aristotelian structure of tragedy set forth in the first
part. In an attempt to characterize the "existentialist"
theatre of Jean Paul Sartre, Sastre says.

Perhaps an eXploration, an investigation of the

darkest zones of human reality, of human existence,

would be its most characteristic constant.

. . . it is precisely in the darkest zones where

existence is shown most purely, where anguish is
suddenly revealed.

 

42Sastre, D. S., p. 119.
43Sastre, D. S., p. 119.

44Sastre, D. S., p. 107.

30

This investigative quality of Sartre's "probed realism"
(realismo profundizado) serves to describe one function, or
aspect, of Sastre“s tragic theatre in its develOpment
toward definition. Another is found in Sastre's defense of
the documentary nature of Arthur Miller's theatre.

The best theatre of our time has an important
documentary side.

. . . a "document" is nothing more than the photograph
of an event, i.e., of an existential fragment. The
document, in itself, has no attribute of proof. That
depends on how it is used. A polemist will make it
into a "probatory instrument." A sociologist will turn
it into a scientific document. A dramatist will get
out of it the makings of drama. . . . On the basis of
the document the dramatist realizes a series of
discoveries, he finds the most intimate levels, he
probes. The document gives him the exact existential
supposition.4S

Developing out of this is a statement on what Sastre
considers to be the two forms of conceiving drama.
One starts with the existential document, that is, the
real comportment of man in determined place and time.
This form penetrates into man, through his existence,
by varying degrees of probing which are able to reach
the essential discovery, the universal human,
Ontological emotion. The other form starts with a
vague essence (the human essence), poetically glimpsed
in the general comportment of man.4
Overlooking whatever weakness of argument might exist
in this description, it stands, along with the statement on
the investigative nature of theatre, as a central concept,

based on a growing theory of "social realism," related to

Sastre's descriptions of the metaphysical substance, social

 

45Sastre, D. S., p. 134.

46Sastre, D. S., p. 134.

31

function, and artistic form of tragedy. It sees human
existence in reality as the prOper beginning and SUDJ;O( a:
drama which implicitly leads to tragedy since human
existence is tragic in Sastre's View. It implies in its
use of the concept of documentary, (and this is made
eXplicit in Sastre's works), the social sense of this
existence. And it begins to suggest a redefinition of the
Aristotelian concept of mimesis.

This redefinition, while admittedly in the formative
stage, is a major concept in Sastre's total theory of
tragedy in Drama and Society. Following Miller, Sastre
suggests documentation as the "Aristotelian definition of

"47 Theoretically

mimesis translated into a new conception.
it can be seen to counterbalance the concept of katharsis
in importance, the one being the starting point of tragedy
and the other, the ending and purpose. In dealing with
katharsis Sastre rejected the Aristotelian concept of a
final, closed, and aesthetic eXperience. Katharsis is seen
in both a consummatory and instrumental way: "the sense of
tragic katharsis must be found . . . in the effect tragedy
has on reality: tin'an immediate way on the Spectator and

n48 In redefining mimesis through

mediately on society.
documentation a similar disruption of Aristotle's organic

and aesthetic wholeness occurs. In Spite of Sastre's

 

47Sastre, D. S., p. 82.

48Sastre, D. S., p. 95.

32

insistence in following Aristotle’s precedence of plOL,
the apparent similarity in the imitation of action and
documentation of Situation, and although Aristotle grants
the poet the use of historical subjects,49 the theory of
documentation carries w1th it elements which ultimately
contradict Aristotle's axiom of organic unity which sets

50 Sastre's argument for

poetry, for him, above history.
the supreme importance and urgency of the social function
of tragedy, and his reCOgnition of the temporal
impermanence of this aspect, is an acceptance of the

tOpical, historical nature of tragedy at the risk of

possible future irrelevance of the work.51 Even in

 

49"And even if he chances to take an historical
subject he is none the less a poet; for there is no
reason why some events that have actually happened should
not conform to the law of the probable and possible, and
in virtue of that quality in them he is their poet or
maker." Aristotle (Butcher), p. 69.

50"The true difference is that one relates what has
happened, the other what may happen. Poetry, therefore,
is a more philOSOphical and a higher thing than history:
for poetry tends to eXpress the universal, history the
particular." Aristotle, p. 68. Farris Anderson (Alfonso
Sastre, p. 40) uses Aristotle’s passage on the use of
historical subjects as support to keep Sastre's theory
more purely Aristotelian than it is. The essential point
is the question of probability and the ultimate aesthetic
quality of the poetic result. Sastre breaks through this
aesthetic conception in both his theory of mimesis (as
pieced together here) and his theory of katharsis. It is
only later that he begins to recognize just how important
the historical can be in the develOpment of a marxist
historical consciousness. In Drama and Society however,
this historical (for Aristotle) quality, this tOpical or
social aSpect of tragedy is argued as the "urgent."

 

51In 1958, just two years after Drama and Soc1ety
Sastre states, "The social is a category superior to the
artistic. I would prefer to live in a world justly
organized and in which there were no works of art, than

 

33

Aristotlegs concession of historical subjects for poets, he
insists that what makes them poets of those subjects is a

strict conformance to "the law of the probable and

"52 53

possible. He argues against the use of the particular.
And he clearly depicts tragedy as aesthetic in the
perfection of its completeness and wholeness. "Tragedy is
an imitation of an action that is complete, and whole, and
of a certain magnitudeo . . . A whole is that which has a
beginning, middle, and an end."54
A theory of documentation suggests just the Opposite
for tragedy. In the fact of its photographic precision55
it asserts the value of the particular and the possibility
of the improbable. By connotation the term, itself,
suggests a continual breaking through the aesthetic
structure by the existing social reality "outside."
Finally the sense of completeness, of beginning, middle,
and end is ultimately contradicted by the impossibility of
solution inherent in the philOSOphy of social realism
supporting documentation: that the problems of reality (of

society) are to be solved not aesthetically but socially.

This is recognized in the redefinition of katharsis.

 

in an unjust world flourishing with excellent artistic
works." A. R., p. 18.

52Aristot1e, p. 69.
53Aristotle, p. 68.
54Aristotle, p. 65.

55Sastre, D. S., p. 134.

34

The concept of investigation works for Sastre in a
twofold way. SOCially it very often becomes a criminal
investigation, attempting to uncover true cause of social
ills. Metaphysically, it searches for the cause of man's
suffering in his human existence. In both cases the
question becomes one of where to place guilt. In the
eXperience of tragedy the sense of guilt is realized in the
spectators as individuals and as members of a society.
This, theoretically, can lead to social action or even
revolution. Sastre's theatre with its concept of beginning
Specifically with man in society through documentation and
returning to man in society in a purification (out of
reality and back to reality), is, in the etomological sense
of the word, truly revolutionary. Ideally it should
function this way socially as well.

While Sastre obviously felt it unnecessary to do so,
or outside of his purpose, it seems apprOpriate to attempt
some final schema of the concept of tragedy as it appears

to exist in Drama and Society and to place this outline

 

with Sastre's own earlier definition along the growing line
of his theoretical writing to be later set against his
dramatic works.

Tragedy is a revolutionary (beginning and ending with
the real human Situation) dramatic process which begins
with the documentary transference of the painful and tragic
struggle of real human situations (existentially: closed;

socially: Open [2]) into plots (and the total theatrical

35

eXpression deriving from plot). It is an investigation
into the meaning of human existence carried to the point of
anguish (fear and pity), moving the Spectators toward a
corre5ponding kathartic eXperience through action in

society.

CHAPTER I I

THEORY: ANATOMY OF REALISM

 

In the preface to Anatomy of Realism (1965) Sastre

 

sees Drama and Society as having been somewhat

 

anachronistic at the time of its writing because of his
ignorance of Brecht and Brecht’s already existing
dialectic with Aristotelian principles.l He further
admits his own earlier blindness to the larger dialectical
process itself, and with clearer vision declares that a
"present day 'Poetics' for the theatre will take the form
of a negation of the Brechtian negation of Aristotelian

drama, and not that of a reaffirmation of this drama in
2
I!

 

the face of Brecht's criticism. The purpose of Anatomy

of Realism, however, is not to create this "poetics" but

"3

rather "to present the theme of literary realism. The

 

1"Turning to the theatre and-to the 'poetics' of
Aristotle, I didn't know then [pt the time of writing
Drama and Society that someone (Brecht) had done--was
doing--somethihg ore with the 'Poetics' than 'bringing it
up to date': That is, destroying it, 'fertilely' negating
it dialectically. I was destined, therefore, to write an
anachronistic book, filled with profound virtues (moral)
and profound mistakes (ideological), the latter a result
of my then almost total blindness for the profound
structure of real events: for the Dialectic." A. R.,
p. 7.

2Sastre, A. R., p. 80

3Sastre, A. R., p. 8.

36

37

result, nevertheless, is a large number of highly
complicated essays, written over a period of years, NRECh
deal with both subjects and their inevitable
interrelatedness. And running through this dialectical
context is the thread of a still develOping theory of
tragedy, at times prominent, at other times, implied. And
this theory, in Spite of Sastre's statements concerning
the anachronisms of his earlier Aristotelian theory, is,
in large part, a reworking, aesthetically, historically,
socially, and in terms of a new perSpective of dialectic,
of many of the basic elements of his earlier theory.
Sastre's clearest statement of what he calls
"profound realism" describes the "literary mode [P3 that]
which assumes the tragic nature of the individual human
existence and the perSpective of historical develOpment,
without disintegrating, because of the first, into
pessimism, or being carried merrily off, without critical
sense, to some Optimistic outlook."4 Tragedy, by its
nature, situates itself precisely at this apex. "Tragedy
situates itself in a superior dialectical unity, which we
might call hOpe, above any exclusive Optimism or pessimism
or its Opposites. The Spectator becomes conscious of his
real situation as 'an existing being,“ a being-towards—

death, and of his social, historical situation in which he

participates--or should--as an agent: of his work or

 

4Sastre, A. R., p. 128.

38

'praxis' and of his angu1sh [agony]; of the Openness and
the closedness of his Situation; of the interactions
between that which his activity has of praXlS——aL times
anguished--and that which it has of anguish—-at times
sublimated in work."5 It is in this sense, and only in
this sense, for Sastre, that tragedy can be understood as
a legitimate literary mode for our time.

Mention of the "tragic nature of the individual human
existence," of the "being-towards-death," of "closedness,"
makes apparent the absence of any change in Sastre's View
of the existential situation of man, and this condition
still seems to exist in relation to tragedy. And while
the concept of man's social and historical role was not so
completely articulated in Drama and Society as it is here,
it was present implicitly. But no longer can the one be
thought of as a separate "metaphysical substance" and the
other as a "social function." Both must be looked at now
in terms of the creative tension brought about by their
dialectical relationship. And the existence of tragedy as
a viable literary mode, superior to other modes, Will be
argued by Sastre on the basis of this tension or
relationship. It will be argued, as in this instance, on
the basis of a larger concept of realism, on a formal

basis (negation of the Brechtian negation of Aristotle),

 

5Sastre, A. R., p. 129.

6Sastre, A. R., p. 129.

39

and historically and socially. And it will be seen to
exist as one part of a larger dialectical View which
attempts to deal with the process of artistic creation,
with the interaction of art and artist and society, and
with the process-of social change made possible through
thiS'interaction.

Sastre's eXpressions approaching a meaning of realism

 

(stated this way not to be devious, but because they do
precisely that in a continual dialectic of their own,
never reaching a definitive point) are in part derived
from the thinking of Georg Lukécs. ."True great
realism . . . depicts man and society as complete
entities, instead of showing merely one or the other of
their aSpects. Measured by this criterion, artistic
trends determined by either exclusive intrOSpection or
exclusive extraversion equally impoverish and distort

"7

reality. *"The central aesthetic problem of realism is

the adequate presentation of the complete human

"8

personality. '"Man is zoon politikon, a social animal.

 

The Aristotelian.dictum.is applicable to all great
realistic literature. fAchilles and Werther, Oedipus and
Tom Jones, Antigone and Anna Karenina: their individual
existence-~their Sein an sich, in the Hegelian

terminology; their 'ontological being,‘ as a more

 

7Georg Lukacs, Studies in European Realism (New York:
Grosset & Dunlap, 1964), p. 6.

 

8Lukdcs,Studies, p. 7.

4O

fashionable terminoloqy has it-—cannot be distinguished
from their social and historical environment. Their human
significance, their specific individuality cannot be
separated from the context in which they were created."9
In all of these examples the Similarities with
Sastre°s eXpressions are striking, but closer examination
reveals a greater insistence on Sastre's part than on the
part of Lukacs to describe a more perfect dialectic of
Opposites. Lukécs speaks of the "human significance,"
the "Specific individuality" in a "context;" he describes
the "ontological being" in a social and historical
"environment," but he does not describe the Situation in
reverse terms.. Sastre attempts to create a perfect
dialectical relationship to the point of Speaking of
"praxis--at times anguished, and anguish--at times
sublimated in work." The point of real difference becomes

evident when Lukacs,.in The Meaning of Contemporary

 

Realism, treats the problem of angst in modern literature.
At first this treatment appears to coincide precisely with
Sastre's consideration of the pessimistic and nihilistic
vision arising out of anguish in what he calls avant-garde
literature; Lukdcs uses the term modernism, linking this
historically with naturalism; a position that Sastre will
also take. He states that: "Angst, as a dominant

existential condition, leads to an impoverishment,

 

9Lukdcs, The Meaning of Contemporary Realism (London:
Merlin Pro, 1962)! p0 190

41

reduction and distortion of the image of man and of
described reality. It excludes everything lying beyond

its own radius, and particularly everything that invests

"10

man and his environment with social significance. It

is particularly in the area of narrative detail that
Lukacs makes his best case for a dialectical approach.

The problem of narrative detail, of naturalism, has
thus to be seen in a wider context. Since human
nature is not finally separable from social reality,
each narrative detail will be significant to the
extent that it eXpresses the dialectic between man—as—
individual and man-as-social—being. It is these
tensions and contradictions both within the individual,
and underlying the individual's relation with his
fellow human beings--all of which tensions increase in
intensity with the evolution of capitalism--that must
form the subject-matter of contemporary realism. The
realistic writer must seek the nodal points of these
conflicts, determine where they are at their most
intense and most typical, and give suitable eXpression
to them.11

‘éngst, by destroying the possibility of critical
detachment, precludes any eXpression of the dialectic
described. "The more gngst predominates . . . [the
greater] the loss of any concern for ethical complexity,
for the problems of society."12 Lukacs concludes that
there must be either an acceptance of gngst or a rejection.
The sense implied in his earlier descriptions finally
becomes clear: the existential concern must give way

finally to the social consideration.

 

10Lukdcs, The Meaning, p. 73.

11Lukacs, The Meaning, p. 75.
12

 

Lukécs, The Meaning, p. 83.

42

Sastre proceeds to a different conclusion. "The
rejection of nihilism cannot erase the consciousness or
objective nothingness, verifiable at the level of

h."13 He

individual existence; of the being-towards-deat
calls for a true dialectical relationship between this
case of individual existence and that of social, historical
activity. "Why not establish as fundamental the
dialectical relationship between that which human activity
possesses of praxis and that which it has of anguish."14
(Lukécs' angst; the Spanish term 18 agonia. This has the
sense of English "anguish" and the death-feel of "agony.")
Sastre accepts, with Lukécs, the inevitability of a
distorted view of reality in literature which derives
solely from a sense of angst, but he suggests an equally
distorted view in artistic creations which ignore this
condition. In fact the very process of artistic creation,
or realistic recreation of man's situation is seen in
terms of this dialectic.
It remains to be said that the first phase is, for the
artist, primordially death—related (creative agony),
and the second primordially practical, which is not an
attempt to separate but to blend in an interaction
these two modes of-human existence in the course of
this Specifically poetic activity . . . the function
of the "creative" phase does not consist in filtering
the agony of reality--the artistic Operation would
then consist of interposing a kathartic filter between
the Spectator and the work-~which would make it

evasive (escapist) or useful:‘ literature of
utilitarian Optimism; nor in filtering that which

 

13Sastre, A. R., p. 126.

14Sastre, A. R., p. 127.

43

human life has of praxis, progress, develOpment.
prOp051ng an element only concerned w1th man's

which would mean reducing reality to some nihilistic
formula: that characteristic of avant-gaide
literature . . . Art Opens up the dialectical pairs
which in everyday reality seem confusedly held
tOgether or separated. It shows the real underlying
antagonisms in what seems like a formless magma. It
discovers the underlying accord in these so-called
antagonisms. It discovers the latent agony in the
acts-~heroic or not--which everyday reality looks upon
as praxis and what there is of praxis in the agony of
the individual or collective hero, as well as the
general sense of how individual agony is integrated
into social—historical praxis, and takes on meaning in
the consideration of history as a total dialectic.
This is, I believe, the truth that "Opens up" or
"happens" (Heidegger) in the work of art . . . 15

In addition, any literary eXpreSSion which rejects this
dialectic cannot be truly tragic. "For the avant—garde
[here Sastre is Speaking of Beckett, Kafka, Dhrrenmatt,
Frisch, Ghelderode] tragedy has no meaning because 'there
is no hOpe' (I understand by hOpe the dialectical
transcending of pessimism and Optimism); for Brecht
tragedy has no meaning because it encounters and presents
a fundamental and institutionalizing Optimism."l6

Sastre continues to develOp this argument for tragedy
around historical and formal dialectical relationships
which correspond to the central dialectic of human
existence and realism's eXpression of it. Modern theatre
is discussed in terms of a triple root, three, and only

three, trends: epic, dramatic, and avant-garde. All

three are described as negations.of-naturalism: "drama,

 

15Sastre, A. R., p. 204.

16Sastre, A. R., p. 64.

44

from within and slowly, seeking to release itself as from

a shell; the avant-garde-—also from within--Spasmodically;

"17

the epic, from outside. Dramatic theatre (Sartre and

Miller) is seen existing between the two more liberated
forms of avant-garde (Beckett) and epic (Brecht). This
position can be related to the transcendent one described
above and will be defended historically, eSpecially
against Brecht's theatre.

If the epic theatre (Brecht) acts on transpersonal
material—-man, in this theatre, is a historical
subject, an Object of a progressive transformation,
social relation, transcendency of himself in "others"
of today and the future--, the theatre of the avant-
garde (Beckett) is blind to history: it is a theatre
of concrete existence: Of grief, of the absurd, of
incommunication, of the immanence Of death. ("Action"
for the epic theatre is exclusively "praxis:" for the
avant-garde, exclusively "angst.")

Coexisting with these we find the trend which,
apparently, remains somewhat behind, in this
tripartite effort to liquidate naturalism: the drama
(Sartre, Miller) which rejects equally the temptations
of bureaucratic Optimism and the solicitations Of
‘nihilism, the immersion in anguish; without giving
up--difficu1t equilibrium--the preposition of a double
sense of consciousness before the spectator: that Of
his condition as a concrete, existing entity (besieged
by anguish, grief and death), and that of his reality
as a historical subject, participant in the
develOpment of the human toward more just forms Of
coexistence. This theatre rejects the didactic
expedients which would free it from ambiguity, but
takes no satisfaction in being submerged in the
equivocal.18

Based on earlier descriptions, drama is Obviously the
theatrical trend into which tragedy fits. It is for

Sastre now to show that historically this genre or genus

 

17Sastre, A. R., p. 224.

18Sastre, A. R., p. 223.

45

Of the dramatic (of which tragedy is a Species) is more
viable than those of the avant-garde or the epic.

The real question of viability, however, is between
the epic and the dramatic theatre. The avant-garde, while
recognized for the worth of its formal innovations, must
ultimately be rejected for its nihilistic view
and its complete lack of historical vision. It can be
best described as a final penetrating glimpse (and is
accredited with the ability tO be penetrating, compared
with naturalism's surface view Of reality) into (and out
of) the condition of middle-class man in his "twilight

crisis."19

The epic theatre, on the other hand, by being
antitragic, stands ahead of its time historically, and
fails to relate to a society of men caught in tragic
predicaments.. In its Optimism it carries with it the

20 It

danger Of creating a complacency in its Spectators.
is the theatre of a post-revolutionary society. And while

it also tends to liberate the theatre in a formal sense,

 

19Sastre, A. R., p. 223. In another essay he
describes the avant-garde as "the last gaSp of yesterday's
liberated, individual, middle-class man, who has either
reached such independence that he is alone (in the upper-
middle-class, intellectual milieu) or fallen into the
abyss of capitalist alienation." A. R., p. 189.

20"Historical Optimism can hold the Spectator back
from practical action: if suffering is presented as in
the past (narrative), one assumes that it will pass. If
the spectator who is presented suffering as irremediable
does not act because it is useless to try to change
things, the Spectator who is presented history as a happy
progress may decide not to act in view of the fact that
history will do it for him." A. R., p. 221.

46

in this liberation there is a tendency toward disintegra—
tion into "music-hall" theatre. This is a present—day
distortion of what Should be, and Will be eventually, a
festival (didactic) theatre, a rectifying theatre, a
theatre with the goal Of perfecting a new society already
underway. But this society and time have not yet
arrived.21
Sastre argues that "the best theatre for today is a
critical theatre, just as the best theatre for the future
will be a Theatre of.Construction in the sense Of a
communitarian humanism."22 And if Brecht's epic theatre
is admitted to be the prOper theatre for some future
society, an Aristotelian (or-neo-Aristotelian, anti-
Brechtian) dramatic theatre is the apprOpriate theatre for
a pre-revolutionary, middle—class society. This theatre
carries innit "a.great subversive power, as the revolu-
tionary theatre Of our time makes.clear--with the
exception of Brechtr-mounted on dramatic postulates, in
forms Ofra=realistic.nature, and with modern (dramatic)
acting techniques (Stanislavsky) of dramatic texts."23
It is not, however, the distinctive attributes Of the

dramatic theatre functioning alone which make this form

more viable for a present-day society, but rather these

 

21Sastre, A. R., p. 49.

22Sastre, A. R., p. 68.

23Sastre, A. R., p. 49.

47

attributes in a dialectical relationship with others
usually thought to be exclusively characteristic of
Brechtian theatre but Shown by Sastre to exist as well in
Aristotelian theatre. The major concept Of distancing, or
the alienation effect, exists at different levels Of
dramatic theatre. The Spectator always accepts some sense
of distance between himself and the action of the stage.
His relationship to that action is not that Of his
relationship to a real action. The action Of the stage is
accepted ironically. The characters are not, in the final
analysis, confused with the actors by the Spectator nor do
the actors confuse themselves with the characters
portrayed. On this point Sastre refers to Diderot's
"paradox" and sees it as already containing the basic idea
of Brecht's.actor-alienation theory. On the stage the use
of unrealistic or "stylized" sets also helps to create a
"V effect" in Spite Of highly realistic, Stanislavskian
acting. Wilder's empty stagevand imaginary prOps (925
2233), and Miller's (Melziner’s) abstract house (Death of
a Salesman) produce a distancing effect. The playwright
is also seen to be capable of operating at a distance from
his play while writing for the dramatic theatre. But in
each case this alienation effect Operates in dialectical
conflict with what might.be called an "identification

effect"24 commonly attributed to dramatic, Aristotelian

 

24My term. Sastre implies this dialectic throughout
his discussion of "Brechtian" effects in dramatic theatre,

48

theatre and discredited by Brecht. The importance of this
relationship becomes most evident in the central kathartic
eXperience Of the dramatic theatre.

The distancing effects described (which in no way
should be interpreted as evasive, but rather as the
"condition Sine qua non of profound penetration into the
native milieu and of social action here and now")25 are
related to the Aristotelian concept of reCOgnition
eXpanded to include the eXperience of the Spectator.26
This results in achieving a point of view which allows one
to "step back from himself (estrange himself) and, at the

"27

same time, recognize himself. The Aristotelian moment

of recognition in the character(s) becomes the critical
point Of the dialectic between alienation and recognition
in the Spectator.

. . . if the "anagnorisis" of Oedipus, as a tragic
subject, through himself and through the characters
who surround him, is a tragic Situation, it is also
one that we step out of ourselves and recognize
ourselves in those characters, subjects and Objects of
the catastrOphe. And this double impact--alienation
and recognition--is the purifying and kathartic moving

 

but he only really states it clearly when describing the
"recognition-alienation."

25Sastre has-been accused Of writing exotic and
evasive plays in that his works Often take place outside
of Spain. While this has the effect he describes here,
and has been common practice of the theatre since
Shakespeare, LOpe de Vega and before, one Obvious reason
for it in his case iS to stay clear Of the censors, not
that it has helped much.

26Sastre, A. R., p. 53.

27Sastre, A. R., p. 53.

49

force Of human actions, on leaving the theatre and
later . . . when the performance has become a v;.:
memory, and other things, not even associated With the
play, are acted out in our existence . . . the
Spectator is presented, represented as "another"--
another who is Often guilty—-and this causes the purge
to penetrate easily, almost with pleasure on our part.
When the revelation (anagnorisis) occurs, it is too
late: the drama has thrown us into the crisis . . .
Without the "recognition" aSpect Of this dialectic,
which is brought about by the dramatic nature of the art
(actor vs. narrator), the theatre risks leaving the
present-day Spectator withrnothing more than "historical

superficiality and anecdote."29

Sastre insists, as he did
in Drama and Society, in a katharsis which leads to social
(or at least personal) acts or agitation. But the
eXperience is now seen through a relationship Of Brechtian
and Aristotelian concepts rather than through the Simple
reinterpretation Of the latter. And this active, V
kathartic nature of theatre iS>again linked to its mimetic
nature, as it was in Drama and Society, in a statement
which is the most concise thus far made on the subject.
“The metaphor of theatre--and of literature and art in
general--as a 'mirror' or.'reflection' is 'now' an empty
image. Today, instead Of 'mirror,’ we must say,
'interaction.‘ Art is action--out of reality and on

reality."30

 

28Sastre, A. R., p. 53.

29Sastre, A. R., p. 54.

30Sastre, A. R., p. 68.

50

This mimetic aSpect again involves the concept of
investigation, and this, like other aspects, is now
considered in terms of a dialectic. Sastre sees the
investigation Of reality by literature to function through
imagination. But imagination can exist on different
levels: the "practical-reproductive" (naturalism), the
"oneirologic" (avant-garde, eXpreSSionism, surrealism),
the "pure” (fantasy literature), and the "dialectic"
(realism). In the dramatic arts this "profound unfolding
of the imagination" in a dialectical way crystallizes in
myth (Aristotle; for Brecht: story; in either case it is
still the heart of the theatrical form). "How does the
writer act or intervene in reality? ’How does he
communicate? .-. . by means of the myths resulting from
his efforts. The writer is, in the last analysis, a
storyteller. The myth is a 'conducting cable" between the
'world' (of the writer) and his reader or Spectator; but
it 18'3180 a 'resistor' (to use terminology borrowed from
physics): it brings together and separates the terms of
communication;.and.this contradiction becomes a kind of
'incandescence': an 'illumination' of reality in the
awakening of self consciousness and political awareness."31

At this juncture Sastre continues his socio-historical
defense of his pre-revolutionary, neo-Aristoelian,

realistic drama in terms of his own relationship with the

 

31Sastre, A. R., p. 256.

51

middle-class reality out of which his art grows and on
which it attempts to act. In an apparent reply to
criticism aimed at the absence of "socialist" solution in
his theatre, he attacks such literature of "Official
Optimism" as the greatest enemy of the "realism of
urgency."32 He then supports his own case by using

Engels' argument in support of Balzac’s realism against

ZO-la's.33 In SO doing and in Specifically referring to

 

32Sastre, A. R., p. 28. Sastre attacks both Official
Optimism and planning and metaphysics in the urgency of
the moment. ”Blood, hunger, injustice: this is radical
reality in the moment Of happening . . . reality whose
demands--it screams at us--are most urgent. In these
moments metaphysics is impossible . . . (as are)
dogmatically simplistic materialistic theses (Spiritualism
cannot satisfy our material wants and materialism causes
us to stOp thinking). DO you see how I ask for freedom
and reject anarchy." Sastre foresees (with scepticism) a
coming constructive period.‘ "I ask for collective action,
but I feel a horror Of the uniformity Of style, technique
or literary content." A. R., p. 28.

33Sastre quotes from Engels8 letter to Minna Kautsky
of November 26, 1885 defending Balzac's realism. "'But I
believe that the point of View [Sastre: tendencia from
German tendenz; George Steiner: "Edmund Wilson renders
this crucial term by 'tendency” but 'thesis' and
'programmatic bias“ are closer." Language and Silence
(N. Y.: Atheneum, 1967), p. 306. should arise out of
the Situation and the actions themselves, without it being
eXplicitly formulated, and that the poet is not obligated
to give the reader a pat future historical solution to the
social conflicts he describes. . . . I believe that a
novel of a socialistic point of View accomplishes its goal
perfectly when, by a faithful depiction of real relation-
ships, it destroys the conventional illusions surrounding
the nature of those relationships, when it disrupts the
Optimism of the middle-class world, when it makes one
doubt the perenniality of the existing order, even if the
author does not directly point to the solution; even if,
as the case may be, he does not ostensibly take sides.'"
A. R., p. 29. This is strong historical support for
Sastre's realistic style and the absence of solutions in
his works. Lukacs, in Studies in EurOpean Realism uses

 

52

the present (at least for Spain) as still "the critical
epoch: our public belongs to the middle—class,"34 he
clearly places himself with the writers of "critical
realism" (to use Lukécs' term). The role of the middle-
class writer is carefully delineated. "The writer of
middle-class origins . . . has the advantage of treating
the middle-class theme in the way of a negation born in
the breast of middle-class-reality, that is, with the
assumption Of that reality in all its complexity, acquired
not through study but through the eXperience of living it;
but he runs grave risks in trying to deal with the
proletariat theme for whose content he feels some
attachment but without class roots which causes his best

intuitions to turn shallow and his work, begun on a

ll 35 By

profound note, to degenerate into pure mannerism.
thus accepting himself and his circumstance realistically
Sastre reCOgnizes that his best work can come from this
Situation, and this work can be revolutionary. "The
exigencies Of a literature for writers of middle-class

origin (and for whatever reason characterized as

cultured--self-taught or university products-—), is not to

 

Engels' statement in support of his critical study of
"non-socialist" prose writers.
34Sastre, A. R., p. 30.

35Sastre, A. R., p. 87.

53

renounce their cultural burden and the possibilities that
are derived from it, the which augment their revolutionary
capacity."36
This leaves the writer again at the point of the
creative dialectic described earlier. Sastre relates this
dialectic to the middle-claSs society in a process of
ethical develOpment termed "revolutionary humanism." This
process is seen as apprOpriate for the present society and.
grows Out of the now irrelevant polemic between "art for
art" and middle-class didactic moralism. "The concern of
a new humanism-~and Of the art which corresponds to that
humanism--is for the integration of those elements
diSpersed by middle-class frustration; integration in a
human equilibrium that saves nihilism--i.e., the prOper
consciousness of limited (closed) Situations--from
burocratic danger, and protects the develOpment Of
Objective totality from the threatening danger of a
deforming, subjective nihilization. In this sense, the
revolutionary artist will set his compromise-towards—
freedom against the middle-class self declaration of
freedom for nothing; the self declared freedom in the
manner of 'Sein-Zum—Tode.'"37

While tragedy is not mentioned in this and other

descriptions which deal with the general theory Of the

 

36Sastre, A. R., p. 89.

37Sastre, A. R., p. 193.

54

artist and society it must be understood to be implicitly
included. Every level Of the discussion ultimately
relates to the central dialectic that Sastre sees inherent
in man's existence, and this same dialectic is precisely
that which tragedy reflects and prOposeS. "Tragedy is a
“rare bird' in western culture. This is not strange:
Since it prOposes a difficult tension between the two
poles Of a double seizure of consciousness: of our
situation as existing beings and Of our historic
Situation; between the immersion in the very anguish of a
being-towards—death and the collective activity in the
sense Of progress; between ethical purity and social
efficacy; between private anguish and public action, as
far from a disintegrated existential nihilism as from an
38

imperturbable political activism." In one sense Anatomy

Of Realism is a dialectical rediscovery of the tragic

 

reality of life which justifies the existence Of tragedy
in the theatre.

In a historical period (Sastre’s Spain) which calls
for a literature Of critical realism (Lukacs out Of
Engels) which must come as an expression (with revolution-
ary potential) Of the life eXperience of the middle-class
writer, for the theatre a dramatic (anti-Brechtian, anti-
avant-garde, neo-Aristotelian) form is most apprOpriate.

Tragedy, as a Species of the genre, drama, has the unique

 

38Sastre, A. R., p. 66.

55

capability Of revealing (investigating through dialectical
imagination) the dialectical tension between the agony and

39 And in the unique

praxis of real human existence.
eXperience Of katharsis brought about by tragedy, there

lies the potential for the art form to interact with

 

39Sastre's View Of tragedy through the dialectical
tension between agony and praxis relates to Lukacs
discussion“of potentiality in The Meaning Of Contemporary
Realism. '"PhilOSOphy distinguishes between abstract and
concrete (in Hegel, 'real') potentiality. These two
categories, their interrelation and Opposition, are rooted
in life itself. Potentiality--Seen abstractly or
subjectively--is richer than actual life. Innumerable
possibilities for man's develOpment are imaginable, only a
small percentage Of which will be realized. Modern
subjectivism, taking these imagined possibilities for
actual complexity of life, oscillates between melancholy
and fascination. When the world declines to realize these
possibilities, this melancholy becomes tinged with
contempt. . . .

"In life potentiality can, Of course, become reality.
Situations arise in which a man is confronted with a
choice; and in the act Of choice a man's character may
reveal itself in a light that surprises even himself: In
literature--and particularly in dramatic literature--the
denouement Often consists in the realization Of just such
a potentiality, which circumstances have kept from coming
to the fore. These potentialities are, then, 'real' or
concrete potentialities. The fate Of the character
depends upon the potentiality in question, even if it
shouldicondemn him to a tragic end. . . .

"The concrete potentiality cannot be isolated from
the myriad abstract potentialities. Only actual decision
reveals the distinction.

“““The literature Of realism, aiming at a truthful
reflection Of reality, must demonstrate both the concrete
and abstract potentialities of human beings in extreme
situations Of this kind. A character”s concrete
potentialities once revealed, his abstract potentialities
will appear essentially inauthentic.

"Abstract potentiality belongs wholly to the realm of
subjectivity; whereas concrete potentiality is concerned
with the dialectic between the individual's subjectivity
and Objective reality. . . . Only in the interaction of
character and environment can the concrete potentiality Of
a particular individual be singled out from the 'bad
infinity' of purely abstract potentialities." pp. 21-24.

 

 

 

 

56

reality (man and society) in order to bring about change.
While the dramatic mode rejects ultimately both the aVant-
garde and the epic forms of theatre, it possesses the
existential anguish of the one and the theatrical
alienation effects of the other. Inherent in the theory
of katharsis and of realism is the impossibility Of any
reSolution within the work, either Of an Aristotelian,
aesthetic nature or of a burocratic, didactic nature.
There is a kind of hOpe, vaguely eXpressed that tragedy
can lead to, but this is by no means certain. "This
tension is sometimes resolved in the active and
transcending hOpe that great tragedies produce for the
Spectator; but at other times the Spectator falls wounded,

torn, and bloody with the hero."40

 

4oSastre, A. R., p. 67.

CHAPTER Ill
THEATRE: EXISTENTIAL TRAGEDY

Sastre's plays can be separated and categorized in a
number of ways depending on one's approach to them. Farris
Anderson has suggested, and used, a reasonable classifica-

1 This image

tion according to the image Of man presented.
in one group of plays is generally that of man in the
existential sense and depicted in the tragic situation
described as metaphysical substance in Drama and Society.

In these plays the social context and social forces are not
a major issue, and Specific social action is not designated.
In the other group the Opposite is true: man is definitely
seen as a social being, and his relationship to society is
thematically central to the work. Anderson calls the first
group, "dramas of frustration" and the second, "dramas of
possibility." In terms of Sastre's own theoretical
discussions concerning tragedy and realism one can describe
the first group as existential tragedies or dramas of a

closed Situation and the second as dialectical tragedies or

dramas Of dialectical tension.2 No single term is entirely

 

lAnderson,p. 70.

 

28astre says Of his theatre in Anatomy of Realism: "If
on the one hand I have asked for a theatre ”sustained by
the postulates of realism'--'Correo literario,‘ August Of

l952--and I have defended . . . the work Of the
57

58

satisfactory as the discussions of indiVidual plays will
Show, but this separation will serve for the study or the
tragic aSpects of the works.

In the first group are Uranium 235 (1946), Q§£gg_9§

 

Dreams (1946), Anna Kleiber (1955), ThewBiood_Of God

 

 

(1955), and The Raven (1956). In the second group are

 

pathetic Prologue (1950), The Garbage Can (1951), The

 

 

Condemned Squad (1952), Communitwaread (1953), The Gag

 

(1954), Red Earth (1954), A Death in the Neighborhood

 

 

(1955), Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell (1955), Nocturnal

 

 

Assault (1959), In the Net (1959), Death Thrust (1959), and
3

 

 

The Tenebrae (1962).

 

 

”witness-dramatists' (like Miller and Sartre), and the
thesis of Upton Sinclair [These are six theses cited in
Drama and Society from Upton Sinclair”s Mammonart: against
art for art's sake, against artistic snobism, against
tradition, dilettantism; the most important theses are that
all art deals w1th moral questions and that all art is
prOpaganda], on the other hand I have continued to try to
provide a theatre with these characteristics, from my first
production of major consideration (The Condemned Squad,
1953) to that which was produced this year: Death Thrust
[1960]: a line in which The Raven, The Blood of God, and
Anna Kleiber represent derivaCions of a_partially
suffocated theatre. A. R., p. 26.

3This list does not include Death Knell (Ha sonado la
muerte), Sleepwalker“s Comedy (Comedia sonambula), or The
Little Chalk Circle (El circulito de tiza). The first—EWO
are not included by Sastre in his valume Of complete works
because they were the products Of jOint efforts. The third
is a children’s play based on Brecht's work and does not
strictly fall within Sastre's tragic theatre. His
unpublished plays and his translations are not listed here
either. The Spanish titles of the plays listed are:
UraniO 235, Cargamento de suefios, Ana Kleiber, La sangre de
DiOS, El cuervo, PrOlogO patetico, El cubo de la basura,
Escuadra hacia la muerte, El pan de tOdOS, La mordaza,
Tierra rgja, Muerte en el barrio, Guillermo Tell tiene 103
0403 tristes, AsaTEE—fiocturno, En la red, La cornada, and
Oficio de tinieblas. -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

59

Regarding formal aspects Anderson has attempted to
Show a division which is coincidentally similar tO that
already established in Situational terms. He argues that
Sastre's "dramas of frustration" are experimental in form
while his "dramas of possibility" are examples of
"penetrative realism" and observe basic Aristotelian
principles. This division is somewhat superficial in the
light Of Sastre's own difficulty in defining a concept of
"penetrative realism" and in linking such a concept to
specific theatrical techniques. In the earliest plays he
is more obviously derivative perhaps, but his continuing
attempts to eXplore the boundaries of realism result in
eXperimentation throughout the entire corpus Of his work.
This will become clear in the discussions of individual
plays.

Accepting the general division of plays in the terms
described above, and recoqnizing this division to be
arbitrary and at best imperfect, the works of the first
group will be discussed in this chapter in their chronolog-
ical order.

The earliest Of Sastre's plays scripted entirely by
him is Uranium 235. It was written and staged in 1946 when
he was twenty years old, and it grew out of an intense
personal reaction to the bombings Of Hiroshima and

4

Nagasaki. It represents a symbolic and tragic, though not

 

4"I wrote and staged this little work in 1946, at the
age of twenty. A few months before, the atomic eXplosionS

6O

hOpeless, view of twentieth century, scientific man. The
first scene, entitled prologue, Opens on a public lecture
in progress (a kind of cinematographic fade-in) by a
PROFESSOR later identified as a character from H. G. Wells'

novel, The World Set Free. The theatre audience serves as

 

the PROFESSOR'S public for the prologue scene. The lecture
deals with the great potential for progress and the
improvement Of the human condition locked up in the Uranium
atom, a potential whose method Of release is still unknown.
This fact brings the audience to realize that the lecture
is out of the past, and its continuation grows increasingly
ironic up to the closing line: "I see the power of man

extending to the stars."5

At this point a character (MAN)
who has been unobtrusively standing downstage, perhaps
leaning against the proscenium arch, perhaps even in the
audience, holding two books, listening to the PROFESSOR,
steps forward and identifies the speaker as a Wells”
character, indicating with one of his books the character's
origin. He then reads from the other book, "'SO they two
went until they came to Bethlehem. And it came to pass,
when they were come to Bethlehem, that all the city was

moved about them, and they said, IS this Naomi? And She

said unto them, Call me not Naomi, call me Mara: for the

 

of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been heard round the world.
In my ears they sounded a greivous note." Sastre, Complete
Works (Obras completes [0. CJ), p. 7.

SSastre, o. c., p. 12.

61

Almighty hath dealth bitterly with me.”6

He identifies
his source as the Old Testament book Of Ruth.

The scene then changes to the terrace of a sanatorium
with a view Of distant mountains. Across the upstage is a
row Of chairs; in the center areas are various chairs on a
veranda; downstage are two chairs and a table and lamp
which the actors remain apart from during the scene. A
number Of peOple are seated and engaged in rather depres—
sing and even morbid conversation. It becomes Obvious that
they are types representing humanity and are waiting to
die. The speeches are heavily symbolic: "OLD MAN.
(looking up from his neWSpaper) It's already too dark to
see. How soon night comes onl"7 "This sanatorium is
immense, Mara . . . How big it is! A person feels
overwhelmed, so small . . . Each Of us is only a cell, a
Simple diseased cell in a gigantic body putrefying in these

mountains."8

"We each have inside us a tiny, still
death."9 This death overcomes one character after another
through the scene, and the dying is symbolized by having
each character move upstage and take a place in the row of

chairs as a bell tolls. The characters are an OLD MAN, an

OLD WOMAN, a WOMAN IN MOURNING, a CYNIC, a DREAMER, a

 

68a8tre' 00 Ce, p. 120.
7Sastre, O. C., p. 15.
88astre, O. C., p. 17.

9Sastre, O. C., p. 17.

62

BRITISH and a GERMAN SOLDIER, a YOUNG MAN (BENJAMTN) and
MARA (a young girl). At one point in the conversation the
matter Of the atomic bombings is mentioned as an item in
the neWSpaper. There is little discussion Of it: "the
world has one less city . . . there were children . . .
their eyes are shaped differently . . . there must have

"10 The war and its end are

been homes, and children.
discussed. The soldiers talk Of their favorite songs,
"Lili Marleen" and "It's a Long Way to Tipperary." The
YOUNG MAN and MARA are finally left alone as the last
person dies, going upstage to join the long row of
characters in chairs, and the bells toll twelve while the
two move to the downstage part of the set, and a curtain
closes in front Of the dead.

The next scene moves quickly through the lives Of the
two characters, and the birth and growing up of their son,
IVAN. All Of this takes only Six pages and includes a
dream sequence in which MARA recalls the characters from

the sanatorium. 'For his twentieth birthday BENJAMfN

brings IVAN a book entitled Uranium 235. IVAN appears on

 

the stage for the first time in the last page; he is
exhausted and in a state Of anguish. He falls into a

chair in a state Of near collapse.‘ "I have pains in my

«11

chest; I'm cold. Dying. MARA is weeping. Suddenly

 

10Sastre, O. C., p. 18.

llSastre, O. C., p. 29.

63

MAN reappears with a book under his arm and begins to
speak to IVAN. "I have seen God. He is not dead. He

"12 He reads from the first

loves us more than ever.
chapter of Genesis. IVAN revives and takes up the reading
and the play ends with his words, " And the earth was
without form and void; and darkness was upon the face Of
the deep. And the Spirit Of God moved upon the face of

the waters.’ (While he reads he sits Up and smiles for the
first time. In the center of the scene, holding the book,
he looks upward. The curtain comes down on MARA'S
inquietude.)"l3

Perhaps because it is the earliest play Of a writer

whom most critics discovered late, Uranium 235 has

 

received only superficial consideration. Typical is Cyrus

DeCoster's one—line summary: "In Uranium 235 Sastre

 

presents a pessimistic picture Of modern society unable to

14 When the work is

control the advances of science."
treated in more detail the tendency is to compare it
unfavorably with later works and to‘see it as a fumbling

grOping for eXpreSSion. "His rebellion, his criticism has
15

 

still not found Specific form." But in fact Sastre's
12Sastre, O. C., p. 29.
13

Sastre, O. C., p. 30.

14Cyrus C. DeCoster, "Alfonso Sastre," Tulane Drama
Review, vol. 5, no. 2 (Dec. 1960), 123.

 

15A. C. Van Der Naald, "E1 teatro social de Alfonso
Sastre," DiSS. Un. Of Ill. 1967, p. 45.

64

eXpression has very definite form in Uranium 235. True,

 

it is not the form Of his later plays, although certain
very clear similarities exist and can be seen, if one
takes the time to look at the work carefully. But it is
not reasonable to condemn this early effort through
comparison with later successes. The play exists both for
itself and in relation to later plays.

Uranium 235 is an attempt to wrestle with the problem

 

Of the life and death forces in the universe and in
society. (The inadequacy of any grouping becomes apparent
with this first play when one considers the fact that the
play was inspired by a social act, and that symbolically
society is being dealt with at every moment.) The
question Of death (and life) is central, but what Sastre
will later call the "ultimate metaphysical tragedy"l6
(i.e., the death of the individual) is placed in a unique
twentieth century context: the new capability for mass
death or even total universal death of Man by Man through
atomic energy. The "tiny death" that MARA describes as
being in each person is implicitly related to the
macrocosmic death potentially existing in the "gigantic
body" Of human society that BENJAMfN describes as already
sick and dying. The GERMAN SOLDIER Speaks Of carrying a

piece Of shrapnel in his chest which could kill him at any

moment. The patients at the sanatorium react with terror

16In Drama and Society.

65

at this possibility. Their reaction is ironic in light of
their own slow dying condition, but it iS apprOpriate as a
symbol Of society's reaction to the new possibility of its
own "death at any moment." The "age of atomic energy" has
begun. The eXplosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki have
broken the timeline Of man's history. The peOple at the
sanatorium, with the exception Of MARA and BENJAMfN, are
the last generation tO die unique and individual deaths,
deaths that come slowly from inside. MARA and BENJAMfN
begin a new age anthhe future will rest on IVAN, their
son.

The prologue serves not only to introduce the new age
of man, but it does SO in an ironic way, Showing the new
age to be the product Of a blind, nineteenth century,
middle-class Optimism. Sastre is already setting his
Sights on the middle-class, capitalistic society which is
to be his target in future plays. The prologue also
introduces a secondary theme by making the professor a
character from an H. G. Wells‘ novel and then placing the
false Optimism of that novel against the harsh realistic
vision Of the Bible. This might be called the theme Of
"the word." "The word" is something which has the power
to guide or to mislead man, to bring him to hOpe or to
deSpair. In the play the pseudo-scientific word Of Wells

and the scientific word Of the book, Uranium 235 (the gift

 

for IVAN'S twentieth birthday) are placed in conflict

(contradiction) with "The Word" Of the Bible. This

66

allegory is apprOpriate to the play which is itself cast
in the form of the traditional Spanish allegorical auto

sacramental. But this structure and other elements of the

 

work suggest modern influences as well, Specifically that
Of Thornton Wilder.

Sastre intentionally develOps stereotypical characters
in the manner of Wilder. He uses these in the sanatorium
scene to represent society and he uses MARA, BENJAMfN, and
IVAN to form the typical Wilder "family of man" unit
complete with the symbolic names (and as Wilder, insisting
at times on pointing out the Obvious (Henry/Cain in The
Skin Of Our Teeth): "My name is Mara. _What does that
mean? . . . Bitten").l7 In the Prologue scene the fourth
wall is broken and MAN Speaks to the audience about a
character. The sanatorium scene contains the feeling and
technique Of Wilder: death is indicated by a character
crossing upstage and Sitting in One Of a row Of chairs
(Our Town) to the tolling Of bells. The SOLDIERS have
Wilder's nostalgic moments in which they sing bits Of
pOpular war songs. The skillful scene depicting the
'passage Of time in the married life of MARA and BENJAMfN
is reminiscent Of The Long Christmas Dinner:

[Speaking of their baby IVAN]

MARA. What was he doing when you came in?
BEN. He was Sleeping. (long pause.)
MARA. Humanity's hOpe is in him.

BEN. Humanity is Mara, like you.
MARA. Bitter.

 

17Sastre, O. C., p. 17.

67

BEN. But it used to be happy.

MARA. Call me not Naomi, call me Mara; for the
Almighty hath dealt bitterly With me.

BEN. Humanity is Mara.

MARA. But it wants to laugh.

BEN. And it will.

MARA. Because Of our son.

BEN. DO you know what he was doing when I came in?
MARA. Yes, he was Sleeping. (A long silence. The
bells Of a distant clock tower strike two. BENJAMIN
sets down facing MARA. Another Silence.)

BEN. I didn't get much sleep last night. I couldn't;
the baby was SO restless.

MARA. He cried all night.

BEN. What was wrong with him?

MARA. He“s sick. He's not feeling well. (A Silence.)
BEN. Are you going to take him to the park?

MARA. Yes, tomorrow. It's not Spring for nothing.
(They smile. Pause.) It's nice in the mountains.
This climate is magnificent. Do you remember?

BEN. Yes, I remember another mountain. (Another
silence.)

MARA. (Somewhat sad.) It was nice in the mountains.
It was nice there.

BEN. There?

MARA. NO. The ones we just left . . . where the baby
played so much. (Pause.) It's cold Benjamin . . .
autumn chill.

BEN. I don't like winter.

MARA. Nor I. Who could?

BEN. It's so cold! And I'm worried about Ivan.
What's his temperature?

MARA. A hundred and four. (Hiding her face in her
hands.) And no doctor. Where is he? (A Silence.)
BEN. Are you taking him to the park?

MARA. (Laughing happily.) Yes, tomorrow. It's not
Spring for nothing. (Long pause.)

BEN. (Afraid and cold.) Fall is here . . . that
chill. (Shivers.)

MARA. My God how it“s raining! But the leaves are
dry, Benjamin.

BEN. It's awfully cold this afternoon. Make Ivan
wear a heavy coat when you take him to school.

MARA. (Going upstage and looking Off in the
distance.) Look, it's Spring! (Looks again and
murmurs sadly.) Raining again and dry leaves, Benjamin.
(Long pause.)

BEN. It's cold enough to chill you to the bone . . .
(Shivering, huddled in the chair.) Mara . . . I don't
know what has happened. (She looks at him in
anguish.) I don't know where the years have gone . . .
MARA. (Sighing.) Fall again, Ben.

68

BEN. (Deep in thought.) We look at each Other and see
we're not young anymore. '
MARA. (Shaking her head and sighing.) NO, not anymore.

BEN. (Coughing.) We're almost old . . . and we don't
even know what“s happened.

MARA. And it doesn't even matter anymore. (Long
pause.)

BEN. It's Ivan”s birthday. Twenty years ago, do you
remember, just at dawn.

MARA. Twenty years!

BEN. (Taking a book from the desk.) I bought him
this . . . It's what he ask me for.

MARA. What is it?

BEN. Uranium 235. (Silence. Lights dim.) It's
called . . . Uranium 235.18

 

 

The Simplicity Of Sastre”s set for this work, for the
most part chairs, further suggests Wilder's influence.

Sastre in a later writing makes Specific reference to this

19

simplicity and to its effectiveness in Our Town. And

 

the use Of "the word" to achieve a theatrical moment Of
great inSpiration for both characters and audience is

another Of Wilder's devices. The final scene of The Skin

 

Of Our Teeth cites the same passage from Genesis that IVAN

reads in Uranium 235.

 

The evidence Of this probable influence, as the last
example suggests, is not all in theatrical devices. There
is a thematic similarity between Wilder's plays and this
early work of Sastre. And it is difficult to see Why
critics insist on reading a pessimistic conclusion into
the play or worse, complain that the writer has botched

the ending by not making it pessimistic when the

 

18Sastre, O. C., pp. 26-28.

19Sastre, A. R., p. 55.

69

Similarities suggesting the influence of Thornton Wilder
on Sastre would make one anticipate the Optimistic
conclusion Of the work. Admittedly Sastre is never
exuberantly Optimistic as Wilder sometimes is, and he most
definitely lacks the sense Of humor that Often serves to
rescue Wilder from his more sentimental moments. But the

ending of Uranium 235 can at least be seen as one Of

 

cautious Optimism even if that Optimism rests on a curious
base when compared to the later works.

But the ending contains more than Optimism. Anderson
comments on it: " . . . as SO frequently happens,
Sastre's attempt at Optimism appears to be forced and in
conflict with his immediate inclinations. EThis is the
curious kind of retrospective statement used by critics
who insist on treating early works in terms Of later ones,
and not enough in their own terms, as if the writer's
production followed some Darwinistic evolutionary process,
and even to the point Of suggesting the absurdity that the
writer wrote his earlier works with the later ones already

in mind; at the writing Of Uranium 235, nothing in

 

Sastre's career as a writer had happened frequentlyi] The
play's ending is arbitrary: a pessimistic ending would
have been perfectly consistent with the rest of the work.
LAbitrary the ending may be, but this is the playwright's
privilege. Sastre is not into his Aristotelian phase yet,
lNJt even when he gets there, he never concerns himself

nunah with the probability problem. If the entrance of MAN

70

with the Bible at the end is a Deus ex Machina, SO be it:

 

there is plenty Of precedent for theta Furthermore, Ivan
discovers the Bible only moments after he has found
another book with entirely different implications for the

future: Uranium 235. Thus, the Spectator, and probably

 

Sastre, is not convinced that faith in God will be
sufficient to keep man from destroying the world and

himself."20

Letting pass the mistake in stating that IVAN
found the other book (he never sees it although he
apparently requested that his father buy it), it is
unusual that Anderson, whose work on Sastre is primarily
concerned with the existence of a dialectic in the plays,
fails to see an early example Of the dialectical tension
(at the heart of tragedy) present here. The ending of the
play with IVAN'S strange physical and psychological
'condition is an apprOpriate climax well prepared for
throughout the work.

The play, as earlier stated, deals with the tragic
struggle Of the life and death forces in man and in
society (the universe). Without being aware Of formal
concepts of dialectical relationships (as he later is)
Sastre has structured this early work around many
conflicting elements which can be seen in such a

relationship. (This dialectic is definitely not that

which Sastre later proscribes for tragedy, but the

 

20Anderson, p. 75.

71

structure as structure exists here.) In the Prologue a

 

contradiction is established between the pseudo-scientific
word of H. G. Wells (statement of nineteenth century
middle-class Optimism) and the Word Of the Old Testament
(depiction Of the bitterness Of Naomi [MARAJ, i.e.,
Humanity). This contradiction (words) becomes a historical
reality and is depicted through theatrical allegory in
scenes and characters leading to a climax in the inner
conflict Of IVAN, the original contradiction being
restated, pseudo-scientific having become scientific,
through the two books presented at the end. MARA, who
represents humanity, is a negative Symbol through her name
which had been Naomi (pleasant) and now is MARA (bitter).
BENJAMfN is a positive force. His name BENJAMfN (son of
my right hand) has a Biblical history of change too, but
change from the negative to the positive. First called
Benoni (son Of my sorrow) by Rachel, who died at his
birth, this Biblical character's name was changed to
Benjamin by his father Jacob. The son of the union
(dialectic Of positive and negative forces) Of BENJAMfN
and MARA is IVAN. IVAN (John) is "the gift Of God," and
his name, here in the Russian version indicating perhaps
the hOpe for a new brotherhood Of men, is related to the
New Testament while his parents' names are Of the Old
Testament. And like the New Testament IVAN is seen to be
the new hOpe Of man. The moment Of greatest awareness of

the tragic condition of man is that moment Of IVAN'S

72

symbolic incorporation of that awareness and struggle, his

one moment on the stage, man in extremis, saved by the

 

Deus ex machina which in this case is The Word. Sastre
brings the tragedy to the level Of the Single individual,
but by intentionally investing that individual with a
symbolic existence, he achieves a relationship between the
tragedy Of a man and the tragedy Of mankind. An
acceptance Of a religious direction and a recognition of
God as the force that dominates the universe and a rejec-
tion Of the "power of man that extends to the stars"
.become the answers to the dilemma of the play. And if
there is anything that dampens the Optimistic last moment
it iS not the book, Uranium 235, but MARA'S inquietude
mentioned in the stage directions at the curtain.

While the religious conclusion Of this first play can
be seen in retrOSpect tO represent something Of a false
direction in the develOpment of Sastre's tragic theatre,
the fact must be recognized that his interest in that
direction was not exhausted by this work alone. And in
his next work Sastre again relates man's tragedy to
religion, and he suggests that the production Of Uranium
225 may have inSpired him to write it. "After the
premiere of Uranium 235, almost the next day, I wrote
93539 of Dreams (1946)."21 The symbolic style suggests a

relationship, and Sastre's reaction to the reception Of

 

21Sastre, O. C., p. 33.

73

N

22

Uranium 235 ("laughter and foot stamping") is echoed,

 

but the general mood of the play is far more negative than

that Of Uranium 235.

 

The setting is "any crossroads whatsoever of the Old
EurOpean continent."23 This, however, meant to be a more
surrealistic than realistic crossroads which represent not
only geOgraphy but also the inner crossroads of the
individual mind. It is as well the crossroads of the
temporal and the eternal: the point of death for one man.
The Signpost reads "Ewigkeit" (eternity); unrealistic
Sphynxes are seen scattered in the distance symbolizing
the persisting question of "What is man"; a huge chess-
board sits waiting for the endgame Of another life; a
spiritual medium's table is onstage to be used in a final
tragicomic joke. In this setting is discovered "the body
Of a man (MAN) stretched on the ground, face toward the
stars."24 Two INDIFFERENT MEN pass by, see him, kick him
to determine if he is alive, and move on when he stirs.

MAN sits up staring out at the audience. He begins to cry.

 

22Sastre, O. C., p. 7.
23Sastre, O. C., p. 36.

24Sastre, O. C., p. 37. Ricardo Doménech has called
Cargo Of Dreams a pre-Beckett work. ("TreS Obras de un
autor revolucionario," in Alfonso Sastre, EA. 8.] ed.
José MonleOn [Madridz Taurus, 1964], p. 40). It has many
Of the elements that will appear five years later in
WaitingAfor Godot. One Of these is the frequency of the
prone position in which man, the upright animal, finds
himself. The irony is exaggerated here by having man face
the stars with eyes closed.

74

From upstage JESCHOUA appears, umbrella on arm, and
approaches unnoticed by MAN. He places a cigarette in
MAN'S mouth and lights it for him still without receiving
reCOgnition. MAN addresses the audience. "Well, let's
see. Why have you come here? (Sarcastically) I'd like to
know. (In a bored tone.) It strikes me as curious that

"25 He then addresses

you don't even know yourselves.
JESCHOUA. The two disagree on the matter of their being
Observed, MAN contending that they are being watched and
laughed at while JESCHOUA insists that they are alone. He
implies that MAN'S feverish state is causing him to
hallucinate. MAN describes how he came to be where he is.
MAN. I walk a lot. I've never done anything else. I
like it.
JESCHOUA. And . . . tonight?
MAN. Let me remember. I was walking and suddenly I
saw two roads. (Pointing.) Those. (Reflecting.) Then
I caught myself crying. I was remembering, you know?
JESCHOUA. And then?
MAN. I felt . . . I don't know how to say it. A
sensation . . . And I couldn't go another step. 'I'm
tired' was the only thought that wanted to come to
mind . . . and I stretched out here."26
He eXpresseS the desire to gO to Sleep which seems to
disturb JESCHOUA who suggests that he might never wake up
again. This terrifies MAN, and his reaction causes
JESCHOUA to move from the subject of death and to ask MAN
about life. MAN'S reply is that thoughts of himself and

the world bring on disgust and loathing (nausea).

 

25Sastre, O. C., p. 37.

26Sastre, O. C., p. 39.

75

"JESCHOUA. I understand. I can almost see your life:

"27 MAN describes his

disillusions . . . and failure.
life: "There is something that gets between me and truth.
An Obstacle, both desired and absurd. A stupid crutch.
Dreams. And, what's more, I may even be a dream myself,

a passion without Object, an error in space. Things take
no notice Of me. I don't even exist for them. They don't
exist either. NO one sees them. Sphynxes . . . Oh yes!
Sphynxes terrifyingly peaceful in death. And that's what
I am: something behind a mask, something behind a
biological mistake. Here I am, lOOk at me. I wear myself
like a suit, an Old, worn, favorite suit. My body. You
see it. (Touching his brow) And something Odd, that
annoys me, here inside."28 He goes on to deScribe a life
Of continual searching, for dreams. "I drag a cargo Of
dreams with me. That's what Humanity does. It's like a
caravan dragging a terrible cargo of dreams across the
centuries."29 JESCHOUA, Observing MAN'S rapidly declining
condition, begins to press him with extreme urgency for a
recounting of his life. As MAN recalls his parents, they
‘appear and in the Simplest terms describe their empty
lives. He continues, on the insistence of JESCHOUA, by

telling and dramatically reliving the central eXperience

 

27Sastre, O. C., p. 41.
28Sastre, O. C., p. 41.

zgsastre, O. C., p. 42.

76

and relationship of his life; he saves a prostitute (FRAU)
from throwing herself Off a bridge, lives with her for a
time and falls in love with her; she leaves him, but he
follows and finds her (on another bridge); he forces from
her a confession Of her life, a life of apparently
predestined self-degradation which brings him to kill her
in a fit Of rage. "'In life we all kill the thing we
love."'30 After this confession JESCHOUA encourages MAN
to sleep. MAN asks: "Jeschoua, Am I alone?" and,
"JESCHOUA (Rises. A Silence. JESCHOUA'S words now sound-
ing deep and transcendental in an absolute silence.)
Verily I say unto thee, This night you have not been
alone."31 With the first light Of day JESCHOUA looks at
MANFRED for the last time and departs in silence. MAN
begins to suffer his final agony, hallucinating wildly,
calling out for JESCHOUA, recalling his parents, crying
out for the belongings Of his childhood bedroom, including
the bleeding Christ that hung at the head Of his bed. The
parents go Off, carrying with them the umbrella which
JESCHOUA left behind. MAN cries out for JESCHOUA, and
looking deSperately for him comes upon the chess board.

He plays out his final moments against the emptiness

 

3oSastre, O. C., p. 50.

31Sastre, O. C., p. 51. The passage in Luke (23:43)
reads "Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise." This
passage is discussed by Vladimir and Estragon in Waiting
For Godot.

77

across the board in fear and trembling losing with a final

submissive acceptance.

All right. You"ve won. (He rises, and begins to walk
Off slowly but firmly. He takes Off his jacket and
throws it on the ground. He walks up to the
SPIRITUALISTES table and raps on it three times. The
SPIRITUALISTS look around surprised. Then MAN exits,
whistling, his hands in his pants' pockets, out the
same way that JESCHOUA went. The two INDIFFERENT MEN
enter. One carries a pick, the other a shovel. The
one points the jacket out to the other and they
exchange an indefinable look. Then, between the two
they take the jacket and exit by the Opposite way.
The SPIRITUALISTS have remained frozen in their
attitude Of astonishment. Curtain.32

Cargo Of Dreams has been called "the best Of Sastre's
early plays,"33 "without a doubt the most complete and
develOped (of the early works) . . . Of incredible
depth."34 Ricardo Doménech "would praise the dramaticity
Of its dialogue and situations, but would attack and

"35 He accuses the author

perhaps violently its content.
Of creating intentionally equivocal symbolism and Of
miSplacing the problem of man's existence by ignoring
historical context and meaning.36 A. C. Van Der Naald
sees the work as Sastre's most religious play but anti-

Christian in its conclusions. She interprets MAN as a

man, humanity, and EurOpe in crisis, and within the

 

32$astre, O. C., p. 53.
33Anderson, p. 75.

34Eugenio Garzo, "El teatro de Alfonso Sastre," CHA,
NO. 59 (1954), 213.

35Doménech, A. S., p. 39.

36Doménech, A. S., p. 40.

78

metaphysical pretensions of the work finds the love
episode more "Shocking and out Of place than effective.”37
If Van Der Naald is correct in interpreting the
symbolism of MAN to represent modern EurOpe in crisis, and
Sastre's stage directions would suggest this possibility,
Doménech's criticism of the lack of historical perSpective
is somewhat weakened. Certainly, however, Sastre is not
dealing directly with man in terms Of social and
historical context as he will in later works, and his own
retrospective criticism Of this play might well be similar
to that of Doménech. The work seems to fit very
definitely within the confines of Sastre's later descrip-

tions Of the avant-garde theatre. It relates man and

history far less than did Uranium 235. In fact it serves

 

almost as a perfect theatricalization Of Sastre's later

description (Drama and Society) of the tragedy of human
38

 

(individual) existence. MAN is at the point of
approaching full awareness and realization Of the closed
nature Of his Situation. (In the tempora1,sense the work
is like Everyman, i.e., involving a Short Span Of time at
the very end of Man's life.) His desire for happiness
("I tried to be happy and couldn't.")39 inevitably leads

him to defeat: he is destroyed by killing FRAU and

 

37Van Der Naald, pp. 50-54.

38See Chapter I.

39Sastre, O. C., p. 44.

79

ultimately by Death itself, both moments causing fear and
pity. The question Of guilt remains unanswered. When
JESCHOUA asks MAN if he repents, MAN'S reply is, "for
what?"40 MAN'S situation also fits precisely one of the
two archetypical situations described by Sastre in Drama

and Society: "Morally normal men who love . . . one

 

another, harm one another (to the point of blood or death),

"41 The irony Of this situation

without wanting to (fate).
is heightened in MAN'S case by the fact that he "saved"
FRAU from death twice, only to kill her himself. (In A223
Kleiber, which uses the MAN-FRAU story, the murder does
not take place.)

The intensity Of this tragedy is achieved by Sastre's

42 From

having situated it at the terminus Of MAN'S life.
this point all Of MAN'S life is truly a dream; the tragedy
of his life is this retrOSpect of lost potentialities.
Uranium 235 ended with a beginning, with some apparent

potential in man (IVAN) for the future. Cargo Of Dreams

 

begins with the ending Of MAN'S life. From this ultimate

vantage point man's life is seen as a "cargo of dreams,"

 

4OSastre, O. C., p. 51.
41See Chapter I.

42Sastre will use the cinematOgraphic "flash-back"
technique again in Anna Kleiber and variations Of it and
other free-time eXperiments in A Death in the Neighborhood,
The Raven, and Nocturnal Assault. With this technique goes
the tendency or necessity to use narrative. This cannot be
attributed to Brechtian influence; Sastre admits later
(Anatomy Of Realism) that even as late as 1956 He was
unfamiliar with Brecht.

 

 

 

 

80

and humanity as an endless caravan of dreams. The
symbolism of the play reveals that the irony of MAN s
existence rests on his efforts to escape this condition by
further dreaming. "I felt . . . I couldn't go another
step. I"m tired . . . Then I tried to sleep."43 MAN'S
mechanism for survival pulls him from the pain of
consciousness to gaze at the stars. "'11 dolce far
niente . . . ”"44 JESCHOUA, however, as conscience,
religious anxiety or Christ, functions to force MAN to
engage in the tragedy of retrOSpective consciousness in
the moments Of final agony. But the modern "everyman'I
looks back, not forward, seeking cause, not redemption.
"JESCHOUA. You think the cause Of our existence must be
something tremendous, don't you? MAN. Yes, there must

45 At the

exist some reason . . . some enormous reason."
edge Of eternity MAN'S efforts are not those of EVERYMAN
but those of OEDIPUS, and this fact is central to Sastre's
tragedy.

But JESCHOUA functions as more than a Spur to
consciousness, and if he fails to redeem mankind, as Van
Der Naald points out, this does not constitute a totally

anti-Christian conclusion as she insists. If religion in

the modern world can no longer redeem, it can still

 

43Sastre, O. C., p. 39.
44Sastre, O. C., p. 42.

45Sastre, O. C., p. 43.

81

comfort. MAN”S greatest fear is the fear of solitude, and
JESCHOUA, if he cannot be with MAN in death, remains with
MAN through his night Of suffering. Religious confession

and tragic katharsis overlap in Cargo of Dreams. Pity

 

replaces forgiveness in the absence of guilt and fear is
met with human comfort. Christianity is viewed, therefore,
as incapable of overcoming human tragedy (contrary to the

suggestion in Uranium 235) but still capable Of relating

 

to it.

Two moments of the play Stand out as examples Of
Sastre's ability to utilize the unique nature Of the
theatre to realize a truth. The first of these is MAN'S
awareness Of the audience, and the diSpute between
JESCHOUA and him concerning it.

MAN. Well, let's see. Why have you come here?
(Sarcastically.) I'd like to know. (In a bored
tone.) It strikes me as curious that you don't even
know yourselves. (He takes a drag on his cigarette
and turns toward JESCHOUA, who has Opened his umbrella
and is protecting MAN from an imaginary rainfall. He
looks at him, and tempering his voice somewhat, adds:)
And you, what do you want?

JESCHOUA. (With no visible reaction.) Hello, friend.
(Casually sitting down beside him.) Were you talking
to someone?

MAN. (Looking toward the audience nervously.) There
are a lot of peOple out there watching me. .
JESCHOUA. (Thoughtful, Observing him.) How can you
say that? We're alone. You see? (Pointing around.)
Completely alone.

MAN. (Distrustful.) Really? (Looking again, trying
to convince himself.) Alone?

JESCHOUA. Yes, you and I, alone, under the night sky.
MAN. (In a hoarse voice.) Nevertheless . . .
JESCHOUA. What are you thinking?

MAN. (Trying to put his finger on it.) It's as if
all of humanity were watching me tonight.

JESCHOUA. Ridiculous.

MAN. (Convinced.) NO. I know they're watching me.

82

(A pause.) And some of them are laughing. I can hear

them laughing . . . Listen.

JESCHOUA. I don't hear anything.

MAN. (Laughing.) They think I'm a fool. (Listening.)

DO you hear that?

JESCHOUA. (Looking at him worriedly.) No.

MAN. You're deaf. Listen . . . ha, ha, ha! . . .

peOple laughing.

JESCHOUA. (Closing his umbrella.) Look, it's very

simple. You have a fever.46
This diSpute over the existence of the Spectators is on
one level, of course, simply an eXperiment with the fourth
wall convention Of the theatre, and as such was seen
before in Sastre. But in this case it also serves to
realize artistically a paradox Of the tragic human
condition: man's agony is suffered alone but before all
humanity. Sastre's brings "everyman" to eXperience a
momentary awareness of this state, to see himself playing
the fool. The truth reflected in this moment is one that
Sastre will later describe as tragicomic and will reject

aS incomplete. The tragicomic katharsis (found in

Beckett) is one Of fear and laughter. JESCHOUA rejects

 

46Sastre, O. C., pp. 37-38. Beckett writes similar
situations. In Waiting For Godot; "ESTRAGON moves to
center, halts with his back to auditorium.
ESTRAGON: Charming spot. (He turns, advances to front,
halts facing auditorium.) Inspiring prOSpects. (He turns
to VLADIMIR.) Let's go." (New York: Grove Press, 1954),
p. 10.; and in End Game: "CLOV: Things are livening up.
(He gets up on ladder, raises the teleSCOpe, let's it
fall.) I did it on Purpose. (He gets down, picks up the
teleSCOpe, turns it on auditorium.) I see . . . a
multitude . . . in tranSports . . . Of joy. (Pause.)
That's what I call a magnifier. (He lowers the telescOpe,
turns towards Hamm.) Well? Don't we laugh?" (New York:
Grove Press, 1958), p. 29.

83

the Situation in the stage develOpment of it here, but the
predicament is intentionally left unresolved.

The tragicomic note, however, is picked up again at
the end of the play. After Death wins the match, MAN
xvalks to the table where a Seance is being held and raps
<1n.it.three times. The SPIRITUALISTS react with great
.SILrprise, and MAN with his hands in his pockets goes

whistling Off .
Van Der Naald called this ending, "eXpressive of an

aritzichristian death."47 She attributes Sastre with having

described it as "a Scandalous and shocking trick for the

time, worthy of avant-garde theatre."48 Other critics

luaxrea failed to mention it. Obviously Sastre could have
achieved, and did in fact, the sense Of MAN'S death
‘Witzklout creating this strange Seance scene. It should
therefore be seen as part Of the eXperiment with the
tragyicomic described above. As with the earlier scene
$3431:re has taken full advantage Of the theatrical unique-
ness of the moment. In this scene, reminiscent of

EVreinov (Veselaia smert’ [A Merry Death]) , and 0f the

Chaplin ending,49 Sastre seems to be deliberately playing
\

47Van Der Naald, p. 51.

48Van Der Naald, p. 51.

Re 49In an essay on "Vanguard and Reality" in Anatomy of

mealism Sastre discusses Beckett and Tragicomedy and

.czgttlions Chaplin. He describes the situation Of the

n (DVua' (fool:. in Cargo Of Dreams the word MAN uses is

tigfdn") and the 'straight manr as a "simplified presenta-
r; of a complex relationship: that Of man and his

84

a theatrical joke and commenting on his own seriousness.
AS such it is a rare moment. But it is also a reminder
that the prOper subject of man's concern is man's
existence, and the tragedy Of it. The Seance is attacked,
'theatrically and humorously, as a frivolous business. And
:if eschatology is not Specifically dealt with in terms Of
Christian concepts, then JESCHOUA'S major function has

been all the more clearly seen to be related to this life.

"This night you have not been alone."50 has replaced

"Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise."51

92339 of Dreams was written in 1946 and first
performed in 1948. Sastre did not complete another play
until 1950. This was Pathetic Prologue. With it, in a
Sense, his playwriting career begins again. He Says:
"W1 th Pathetic Prologue I finally considered myself
'baptized as a dramatic author.” This work, which will
be dealt with in the next chapter, is, in fact, Sastre's
first "drama" according to the Aristotelian principles
develOped in his later theoretical works. But while the
first two works can be seen to be outside Of the main—
stream Of his develOpment in some of their eXperimental

asPects (particularly the use of narrative story line in
\

geighbor." (A. R., p. 34) This relationship is already
psing eXplored in "Cargo." Of Tragicomedy he says, "the
re tragicomic situation: that strange situation before

which, horrified, we laugh." (A. R., p. 35.).
SOSastre, O. C., p. 51.

51Luke 23:43.

85

place of dramatic plot develOpment, essential and symbolic
character creation in place Of existential and situational
character develOpment, and the theatrical breaking of the

fourth wall),52 they must also be seen to possess central

dramatic moments which project Sastre's tragic View of

human existence. IVAN'S concentrated moment Of anguish

and hOpe, while suggesting a solution which would later be

unacceptable to Sastre, can be seen as a dramatic

prototype for many later Situations. And MAN'S scenes

with FRAU, and his final agony are the first dramatic

realizations Of Sastre's tragic view. The story Of MAN

and FRAU is in fact later develOped into a full length

drama: Anna Kleiber .

Anna Kleiber was written in 1955. Sastre had written

313-: plays after Cargo Of Dreams, all with themes related

to social Situations. Of these The Condemned Squad was
clC>sed by the authorities after three performances, The

6&3 was performed and subsequently became Sastre's most

Produced work by Spanish professional companies.53 (It

was considered, for some reason, a rural drama, and even

an attack on the French Resistance Movement. Sastre was

\

t 52Sastre continues to eXperiment with narrative
eechniques, particularly in Anna Kleiber; the temporal is
2“E>erimented with in The Blood Of God, Nocturnal Assault,
eSpecially The Raven; the flashback is used in Death in

thorhood; the recurrence Of images and actions, the
e vu eXperience occurs in one form or another in Cargo

W (bridge scenes), Anna Kleiber, Red Earth, The
%d O God, and The Raven.

53Sastre, O. C., p. 284.

 

86

not able to eXplain these interpretations which apparently

were partially responsible for the Official permiSSion
granted for performance.) The other four works (Pathetic
Prologue, The Garbage Can, Community Bread, and Red Earth)

had not been performed by 1955, because of Official

censorship or lack of interest on the part Of the theatres.
In the 1957 edition Of Anna Kleiber Sastre wrote: "I take

advantage of the publication Of Anna Kleiber to bring news

of myself to my friends. I want you to know that I keep
the faith, I work, I hOpe, I live. They will find in Anna

Kleiber a drama that does not correSpOnd to the mainstream

 

(linea medular) Of my work. From the formal point of

View, it represents a utilization Of the eXperiments

realized . . . during 1946, 1947, and 1948. Anyone who

knows my short works . . . will also recognize . . .

Situations . . . outlined in Cargo Of Dreams."54 He made

it clear in an earlier edition (1955), however, that he

did not consider the work a betrayal of his main

in"lerest. 55

The play Opens in the vestibule of the Hotel de los

Extranjeros (foreigners) in Barcelona. Three simultaneous

dialogues are in progress: the WRITER (Sastre) and some

NEWSPAPERMEN discussing the former'S playwriting career;

a SENOR and his mistress arguing over the problem Of her
\

 

54Sastre, O. C., p. 415.
55$ee below following synOpsis.

87

pregnancy; and the hotel DESK CLERK'S conversations with

incoming guests and the BELLHOP. ANNA KLEIBER enters to

check into the hotel, and is given room sixty-six. She

appears extremely fatigued. She asks to be awakened at

nine the next morning so that She can make an important

engagement. When she exits the WRITER steps from the

dramatic Situation and begins to narrate informing the

audience that ANNA did not make the engagement and that

she died that night in her room. He and the CLERK begin

to discuss the occurrence and move back into a dramatic

reenactment Of it. This moves back into a narrative

discussion which describes the appearance Of ALFREDO

MER'I‘ON at the burial. The WRITER moves into a dramatiza-

tion of that scene and begins an interview with ALFREDO
which serves to hold together the rest Of the play moving
back and forth between dramatic and narrative moments in

flashbacks Of the story leading up to ANNA's appearance at

the hotel. (The CLERK and BELLHOP make minor set changes

between scenes so that the story line is unbroken by
blackouts.)

ZKLFREDO begins the story with his first meeting ANNA
one l'1:|.ght as she stood on a bridge contemplating suicide.
He mOVeS into the scene and begins the dramatic recreation
wj. th ANNA who is already seen standing there as described.
She tells him that she is an actress, and that on the

previous night she deliberately allowed herself to receive

the
a~G.vances of the director of the company, an Older man,

88

physically repugnant to her. She tells ALFREDO that she

"56

"feels an attraction for the base and the dirty, and

that that night she was "ready to touch bottom . . . the
bottom Of death,"57 but a moment later she says that "the
only thing I desire in the world . . . is to make a man
happy . . . to belong to a man . . . forever."58 The
first act ends with a kiss as they dance (having moved
from the bridge scene into a small club) to "Mam'selle."
The music, the kiss and the dance bridge the first
arni second act, and with the exception Of the disappearance
Of some shadowy couples who had been dancing in the back-
grcnind of Act I, the situation with its conversation
continues as if unbroken. As Act II continues, ALFREDO
tells of ANNA'S leaving him after eight marvelous days.
She is heard reading her farewell letter to him in which
She Sizaates her reason for going to be her love for him and
her ffiaéar, because Of it, Of a later undesirable separation.
"MY lCDxre, goodbye. I have come tO love you so much that I
Cannot stay with you any longer. Before I go for some
Other pitiful and dirty reason, before something happens
that; llurts you tOO much, before that hell begins, which,
because Of me, our life will become, I have decided to

go.n59
He follows and finds her with a small touring
\
56
5'7
£5

Sastre, O. C., p. 438.
Sastre, O. C., p. 439.
£3

Sastre, O. C., p. 439.

9Sastre, O. C., p. 442.

 

89

company in Germany. Their reunion is warm and she even

promises to marry him the next day. Their plans, hochCK,

are disrupted when later the same night her former

director, Charles Cohen, shows Up. Cohen's conversation

is filled with insinuations Of turpitude in ANNA'S earlier
life. ALFREDO in a fit of rage kills Cohen and is

assisted in escaping from the authorities by a young

zealot of the new and growing Nazi Party. Cohen had

already been sentenced by the Party. ANNA and ALFREDO

prtnnise to meet each other in Breslau after he has been

assaisted by the Party in Berlin. At the moment of their

palating ANNA pleads with ALFREDO to Spend the night with

her; Her inclination toward self-degradation appears

again.

ANNA. I thought that tonight . . . Where I live no
one thinks it strange when a woman like me brings a
man to her room. We could spend the night there.
Nothing will happen to you. They won't find the body
that soon.
‘AJLIFREDO. Anna, how can you talk like this? I've
1(illed someone. Tonight . . . I've killed a man. And
IY‘DIJ laugh and joke as if nothing has happened.
AFINA. What is SO strange? Don't you know me yet?
Ii'ru hard and cold. Did you forget? Alfredo . . .
dicin't gO like this . . . Kiss me. I remember those
nights . . . that week. I've never been so happy.
‘Wliat are you doing? Why won't you kiss me . . . I'm
wEiiting for you . . . Don't be afraid Of me . . . You,
lie prOper young man, don't be afraid Of me . . .
IDon't make me that important . . . DO the same as when
lfcau go to a brothel . . . as if I were the most
jLInsignificant prostitute . . . as if I already were
wflat I will be some day: a whore.6

AIJF
ITIEIDO leaves while she Speaks and picks up the narrative,

teal
l’j-Ilg Of his experience in Berlin, his failure to meet

 

e
c)Sastre, O. C., pp. 451-452.

90

her and his attempts to forget her. The play turns into a

narrative duologue covering rapidly the passage of time to

the point of their next accidental meeting and period of

real happiness and finally their separation brought about

by the war.
The third act begins with a group of GERMAN SOLDIERS

at the front singing "Lili Marleen." ALFREDO is one of

them. As he joins with the singing, the scene shifts to

ANNA's apartment where she is entertaining a young man.

He resembles the younger ALFREDO of the first meeting in

his being drawn to ANNA. She talks of ALFREDO. The

narrative follows telling of ALFREDO's being wounded and

The two are reunited, but the

returning from the front.

relationship is strained. It finally ends with a dramatic

scene in which ALFREDO's insults bring ANNA to torture him

by telling him of an affair she has had. He strikes her

With a poker and leaving her for dead, turns himself in to

the Police. On the news of her‘recovery he is released to

go back to the front. After the-war he writes to ANNA
from Barcelona and arranges the meeting which she never
makes . The play ends with the“ reenactment of ANNA's

entrance in the hotel and a closing narrative SpeeCh by

t
he W:E'IITER: "And that's how it happened . . . As for me,

I' .

‘11 make a play out of this love story; it occurred to me
to

and it just as it began, with Anna's arrival at the

hotel ”
-. . She'll get on the elevatorand not be seen

393.111
. . And you'll [ALFREDO] begin to cry, as you do

A

91

now, with overwhelming grief . . . And I will say to you,

as now, that it is very possible that you will meet again,

and forever! . . . if it's true that the body shall rise

again . . . And you will feel some slight comfort at my
the curtain will fall."61

words . . . and then . . .

Sastre revised the ending of
In one earlier version the

if it's true that the
Si es

") has

61Sastre, O. C., p. 475c

Anna Kleiber a number of times.

important line, "and forever! . .
" ("y para Siempre! . . .

body shall rise again . . .
verdad que los cuerpos han de resucitar un dia .

the phrase "as you and I believe" ("come usted y yo
This was struck in the edition of

creemos") in it.
complete works as were other lines that show up in Leonard

Pronko's translation in The New Theatre of EurOpe (New
York: Delta, 1962) pp. 146-192. In this version the
afterlife is not mentioned, and the Speech becomes almost

didactic in its attempt to point out the lesson learned by
" . she'll get into the

the play's experience. . .
elevator and disappear . . . Then you'll break into tears,
just as you did . . . and I'll tell you, just as I'm doing
now: that life isn't over just because Anna Kleiber has
disappeared. Leave the night behind you, my friend! Look

The night has been long, full of bad dreams

around you!
Many were lost in it, like you. No

and anxiety.
don't Speak. . . . You have nothing to say to me

yet. - . . I'm looking at you. . . . I know the placid
1003‘ Of hangmen's faces. Yours, no . . . it has the

convulsive look of a victim who is asking fearfully, 'What
have I done?‘ How can we put you on the bench of the
accused! Someday you'll put yourself there, and then .

Perhaps then, you'll decide to live a new life in which
Then you'll

Anna Kleiber will only be a human memory.
never be a coward again. (Transition.) That's what I'll
. you'll feel a little better when

say - . . andyou. .

is“ hear what I've said (ALFREDO raises his head and looks

Slihim with moist eyes.) and then . (a Silence; a

gal ght gesture as though there were nothing left to

thi’é) . . . then the curtain will fall . . . " p. 192. In

have ending Sastre illuminates something of what he may
een trying to present in the tragedy, particularly

1;:
c
oncerning ALFREDO; the idea of being a victim, and the

u
gr:stion of guilt.
gedy of ALFREDO than that of ANNA or of the inability of

h>\r .
e to overcome the tragic condition.

0 O

In this sense it becomes much more the _

92

Sastre has said, in a note to the first edition, that

he wrote this love drama while waiting for conditions to
improve regarding his "broader and social conceptions,"

but that, in this play, he tried "to remain faithful to

the general sense of [his] work."62 This "general sense"

can only be interpreted as the tragic sense, and Anna
Kleiber must be seen as one more attempt to probe the

tragic human condition. If the play fails, therefore, as

most critics state or imply, its failure ought to be

understood in terms of Sastre's own concepts of tragedy,

and not simply on the basis of certain outside criteria.
The tragedy of Anna Kleiber is an attempt to develOp

the themes, Situations, and techniques sketched in 93592

g Dreams. Sastre again begins with the end of his story,

but the realistic nature of the later play precludes any

retrOSpective reliving on the part of. the character who

dies. The focus, therefore, has had to be shifted, and in

the process some aberration has perhaps occurred. In
"Cargo " the problem was that of the suffering of a single,

symbolic individual: the agony of facing death, of

revieWing life, and of ultimately being alone in the

pr°°ess. In Anna Kleiber the problem is the suffering of

two people; the agony of death is not considered; the
s
uffering in the reliving and the question of solitude

(t
he love problem) become central.

\

6
2Sastre, O. C., p. 415.

 

93

There is, however, a confusion of subjective and

Objective perspective: the WRITER and ALFREDO both

function to provide the narrative (subjective) and both
appear dramatically as characters (objective); ANNA is
usually presented dramatically (objective) but is provided
'With some monologues (subjective) apparently by the WRITER
f°r they appear to be outside of the narrative control of

ALFREDO. The result of this complex theatricalization is

a distancing or alienation of the audience (and of the

chaJl‘acters as narrators from the characters as dramatic

Parsonages) with regard to the central concern: the

human,-existential (psychological) condition. (At the

writing of Anna Kleiber Sastre was unfamiliar with

Brecht's theory and theatre.) The intense psychological

realism of the characters requires develOpment out of

dramatic situations rather than preparation during

narrative transitions. Even during the dramatic scenes

too much of the characterization depends on the

character‘ 8 own telling about himself or herself. ANNA is

constantly telling someone (ALFREDO, a MAN, her producer,

the audience) that she is a drunkard, an alcoholic, a

whore, that she wants to lower herself, dirty herself,

Sink to all depths; but in the dramatic moments one does
not see the struggle of this tortured soul. ALFREDO is
better developed dramatically and can be seen to be
motivated Often by the fear that tends to dominate his

9X18tenc
a 3 "From the time I was small . . . fear has been

94

the center of my life."63 The fatal scene of the play

Which determines ALFREDO'S future is one in which he acts
Ont of fear of the truth, killing COHEN. Out of fear of

the consequences he allows himself to be blackmailed into

the Nazi Party. Out of fear of ANNA and of his own

incompetence in meeting her love he leaves her when she

mOSt wants him. Nevertheless, this partial success in the

deVe10pment of ALFREDO, allowing situations to reveal

character,64 does not seem to be sufficient to overcome

the weakening effect of the dominating narrative. The

Struggle of the two characters to achieve some kind of
happiness through love never convincingly reaches that

level of "those authentic moments of existence"65 that

Sastre feels tragedy should reach. And the major fault

lies with the failure of the chief characters to develOp,
a result of the confusion of perSpective and the complexity

Of theatrical techniques.
as in Cargo of Dreams, Sastre is using the

Again,
situation of persons who are fateda' to hurt one another.
The rather unsubtle dramatization of "in life we kill the
thing we love," in the earlier play becomes, in 5312

M: the more complex process of destroying the

“Quad love relationship itself. With ANNA it is the
‘ \
63S
astre, 0. C., p0 441'

 

 

64
saStre’ D. 5., p. 1230 Cf. Chp. I, n. 32.

65Cf
‘ Sastre, D. 8., p. 32; discussed in Chp. I.

95

"demon inside" which drives her toward self-destruction
and against the love of and for ALFREDO. In his case it
is his fear. But without the psychological or social or
dramatic context no sense of reality develOps. Sastre can
be accused of that procedure, which he will describe and
reject in Drama and Society, of "startEingJ with a vague
essence (the human essence), poetically [psychologically]
glimpsed in the general comportment of man . . . [rather
than starting with] the existential document, the real

"66

comportment of man in determined place and time. What

was possible and successful in Cargo of Dreams, because of

 

its intentional symbolism and surrealistic approach, fails

in Anna Kleiber because of its demand for realism.

 

The work, nevertheless, is an important statement
regarding the tragic, existential condition of man. It
rec0gnizes the solitude of man: "WRITER. Each of us has
to hear his own grief. In that we can help each other
very little. I can't suffer for you. All I can do is
listen to you."67 The WRITER becomes the helpless
listener for ALFREDO that JESCHOUA was for MAN. Against
this condition of solitude Sastre places love in an
existential experiment which tends to reinforce his tragic

iniew of man. The failure of the eXperiment in terms of

<1ramn does not negate the conclusion arrived at: that

 

66Sastre, D. S., p. 134.

67Sastre, o. C., p. 433.

96

love fails to bring man more than an instant of happiness,
and that the final irony of love is found again in
Solitude._ "ALFREDO. [at the graveside] . . . Here you
are at peace. I don't have to worry about you anymore. I
have you. No one can kiss you now, Anna Kleiber, but

me . . . no one put his arms around your waist or feel the
touch of your legs. Goodbye Anna! We'll meet again!"68
The WRITER echoes this final hOpe at the end of the play.
But placed beside the tragedy of life presented, it only
serves to point up the pathetic in man, and the hOpe
itself becomes ironic.

Sastre's growing preference for Aristotelian

principles is largely set aside for Anna Kleiber. The

 

plot, or, for Sastre, Situational develOpment, is replaced
by the narrative line which works to tie together a series
of episodic scenes. For ALFREDO the central dramatic
scene is that in which he kills COHEN and discovers his
fear of knowing the truth about ANNA. This scene also
functions as a turning point: it determines socially and
psychologically ALFREDO'S future actions, in one way
binding him to the sweep of EurOpean history leading into
the Second World War, and in another causing him to
struggle to avoid a future relationship with ANNA.

.ALFREDO reaches a second (in the sequence of the play, his

first) recognition scene which exists more on the level of

 

68Sastre, o. C., p. 430.

97

his subjective-narrative role. This is at the graveside.
The Speech in this scene also serves to take the place of
what should have been a dramatic scene of recognition for
ANNA. But ANNA is a character who, within the context of
the drama, never discovers anything. Throughout the play
she exists as a character who fully knows herself and her
fate. She talks about herself as if she were her own
psychiatrist. The fact that she is helpless against her
fate is in itself not enough to overcome the problem
created by her cognizance of these facts. There is no
possibility of an Aristotelian recoqnition (except ANNA's
recognition of what ALFREDO is in the COHEN scene).
ANNA's transcendence can only come with death, and
ALFREDO, in his graveside Speech, must tell of it. Only
in death has ANNA overcome the ”demon inside" and come to
rest; only in death can She be faithful to the one man she
has always loved. Again the final note is one of irony.
If Sastre's testing of lgyg against the tragic
condition in Anna Kleiber ends with irony, his eXperiment
with fgith in The Blood of God has similar results but is
dramatically more successful. The play was begun a week

after the completion of Anna Kleiber, and it was dedicated

 

to Sbren Kierkegaard whose Fear and Trembling inspired its

 

writing. The eXperimental aspect of the work is limited
to its having a double ending.
With the exception of one scene the action of The

Blood of God takes place in the vestibule of professor

98

JACOBO PARTHON'S home, an old chalet on the outskirts of a
northern EurOpean city. At the Opening LUIS OPULS, a
former student of the professor, passing through the city,
has arrived to make a courtesy call on PARTHON. The
somber nature of the room, the howling wind outside, and
the strange reception by the maid work to produce a
generally ominous atmosPhere which is only reinforced by
the staring silence of the professor's wife, LAURA, who
appears momentarily, and the unusual conversation of his
son, BEN, who entertains OPULS before his father arrives.
BEN talks of PARTHON'S forced retirement from the
university where he taught theology and of the illness and
death of the older son, his brother, some years earlier.
This latter incident has left the parents somewhat
estranged owing to the professor's unusual attitude toward
it. BEN eXplains that his father was not disturbed at the
discovery of his son's illness or during his suffering and
death. This brings OPULS to declare something he claims
to have always suSpected: that the professor, underneath
his typical middle-class exterior, is a man of the most
profound faith in God. Whether he sincerely believes this
or is simply attempting to justify the father's actions to
himself and to the young man is uncertain at the moment,
but the insight leads to a discussion of faith and to
mention of the Abraham and Isaac story (after an incidental
.mention of Job, and rejection of him as prototype).

OPULS' traditional interpretation of the story as a lesson

99

in faith is contradicted by BEN'S reaction to it which is
one of terror, he being able to understand the story only
from Isaac's point of view. The discussion is interrupted
by the professor's entrance. BEN is sent off to have the
maid prepare OPULS a room for the night, and the two old
friends begin to talk. LAURA, the wife, passes silently
through the room again, initiating conversation about her
condition and about the death of their son which
apparently caused it. The discussion leads OPULS to
comment on his inability to understand the kind of God who
would permit children to suffer. This brings PARTHON to
‘state his understanding of God. "I think that with every
drOp of blood that is Spilled in the world, the blood of
God is spilled . . . And that God writhed and screamed out
with my son in his bed, and that from the eyes of God
broke forth the tears of my wife and the tears of all the
women in the world . . . God is the first who suffers in
the suffering of men . . . Christ is eternally on the

cross."69

He then Speaks of his release from the
university and of the causes for it. He eXplains that he
began to develOp an antipathy toward the teaching of
theology, that it appeared to him to be a cold and heart-
less understanding of God. He tells of his growing
nwstical understanding of God and finally.explains to

OPULS that he actually hears the voice of God. OPULS

 

69Sastre, O. C., p. 492.

100

insists on some rational eXplanation for the professor's
eXperiences and admits of his own inability to accept a
mystical interpretation. PARTHON grows more and more
distracted until finally he begins to talk to God. OPULS
leaves the room in search of BEN as the professor slowly
continues talking through his ecstatic eXperience through
which it appears that God is calling on him to provide a
modern example of faith in the manner of Abraham by
killing his son. He goes off and the stage is empty for a
moment. OPULS and BEN arrive discussing the professor's
condition. PARTHON returns acting as if nothing has
happened and begins some small talk with OPULS and
prepares coffee for everyone. OPULS, eventually reassured
that the professor is recovered, decides to go to his room
and leaves PARTHON and BEN. As the two of them talk,
BEN'S love and concern for his father become apparent.
Also apparent is the fact that BEN'S life has been filled
with unusual fears and that his father is seen by him to
be the only safe haven from those fears. BEN'S faith in
his father is very close to his father's faith in God.
Finally PARTHON begins to prepare BEN for the impending
sacrificial scene. He relates his mystical eXperience and
its command for him to re-enact the Abraham story. BEN
reSponds by eXpressing his paradoxical loss of all sense
of fear, and, with apparent reconciliation to his fate,
prepares himself to accept death at his father‘s hand.

“I don't ask for any eXplanation. I need no certainty in

lOl

order to die. I don't have to believe in anything to die.
If I were told now that there is nothing after this life,
I would let myself die just the same. It would be all

right . . . being nothing . . . all that matters to me is
that you do what you believe you must do, and that you be

70 The scene ends with PARTHON stabbing BEN to

happy-"
death with a knife.

The first scene of the second act is Simply the
arguments to the audience of the PROSECUTOR and the
DEFENSE ATTORNEY in PARTHON'S trial, played in front of
the curtain. The prosecution calls for conviction on
ethical grounds. "This man's crime deserves the harshest
punishment, the most exemplary punishment, so that the
ethics, which make it possible for us to live together,

"71 His argument recognizes the

may remain intact.
mythical pattern in PARTHON'S act, but ironically no
comparison is made with Abraham, but rather with the Greek
myths of Medea and Orestes-Electra. The case for the
defense rests on temporary insanity. PARTHON, it is
learned in the next scene, is acquited and sent to a
hOSpital.

His return home begins the second scene which is, for
the most part, a long and bitter dialogue between PARTHON
and LAURA, his wife. Ironically his act has brought her

to communicate with him again but only in a manner of

 

7°3astre, o. C., p. 509.

71Sastre, O. C., p. 512.

102

sarcasm and condemnation, attempting to destroy PARTHON'S
concept of God and faith. "Don't you realize by now that
God doesn't exist? And man's existence is nothing but a

"72 Against his declarations of faith

loathsome mistake.
she throws up his family history of insanity; for his
expressions of love for her she has only disdainful
laughter and the suggestion that he must want to hang
himself to end his disgusting existence. PARTHON, who has
eXpressed his loneliness in his apparent abandonment by
God, can only repeat "I believe in God" over and over as
LAURA goes into hysterical laughter, and the scene ends.
The third scene of the second act is one of Sastre
eXperimenting. He picks up the action just before the
murder in act one. BEN Speaks his same last Speech to his
father. The knife is raised, but, before it is brought
down, the screams of a woman and a dog's growling are
heard from the garden. PARTHON runs off toward the sounds
and returns a moment later covered with blood. A young
girl, SOFIA, follows him on. In the ensuing discussion it
appears that SOFfA had, for no apparent reason, decided to
come to the Parthon residence and that while crossing the
yard she was attacked by the usually peaceful dog, Grok.
She screamed for help and PARTHON came out and killed the
dog. PARTHON insists that she was inSpired to come by God

and to play the role of the angel providing the sacrificial

 

72Sastre, O. C., p. 520.

103

animal for the test of faith. AS he kisses BEN and
prepares to retire, LAURA appears at the tOp of the Stairs
and a Short scene of reconciliation between her and her
family occurs. BEN and SOFIA remain. BEN attempts to
eXpress his sense of rebirth in the evening's eXperience
and his renewed sense of the value of life. The scene
ends with him telling SOFfA of his love for her.

The Blood of God is an investigation into the

 

question of faith and the meaning of God and the relation-
ship of these to the tragic condition. Sastre discovered

in Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling the potential for a

 

dramatic eXpression which would mythically incorporate

some of his basic views of human existence. It is not an
attempt to dramatize the complicated theological eXpression
of Kierkegaard and should not be criticized as an

unsuccessful effort to do 50.73

In that work, however,
Sastre did discover a dialectic of existence capable of

tragic interpretation for modern man. Kierkegaard states,

 

73Most of Van Der Naald's discussion of the play deals
with it in relation to Kierkegaard's work and treats it as
a failure to dramatize the theological sense of Fear and
Trembligg. pp. 150-157. J. Villa Pastur (on whom Van Der
Naald draws) makes the same mistake of interpreting
Sastre's dedication as a declaration that the work was a
treatment. "Anyone familiar with the Danish Theoloqian's
work will easily recognize that Sastre's prOposal couldn't
have been more ambitious. . . . The drama is built on weak
supports, and naturally, since those supports are not
capable of bearing the enormous conceptual weight of
Kierkegaard's book, at the least critical wind, the
dramatic edifice, like a fragile castle of playing cards,
tumbles down." "Teatro," from Archivum, VI, No. 3 (Sept-
Dec., 1956), 394, 5. '

104

"when the ethical is teleOlOgically suspended, how does
the individual exist in whom it is suspended? He exists
as the particular in Opposition to the universal . . . How
then did Abraham exist? He believed . . . the individual
puts himself in an absolute relation to the absolute."74
Sastre in reworking the myth focuses on this relationship
of Opposition. He insists on studying the act Of faith in
terms of a human-social context and not just in terms Of
the man-God relationship. Throughout the play Oppositions
(dialectics) are set up and left unresolved. PARTHON'S
faith is set against BEN'S fear (and later resignation)
and OPULS' scepticism and rationalist eXplanation.
PARTHON'S God is in Opposition to the God Of OPULS and to
LAURA'S. The prosection and defense provide Opposing
relativistic eXplanations of PARTHON'S act which, in its
relation to the absolute, is in Opposition to both of
them. Finally one denouement is set against another
carrying the problem beyond the stage.

PARTHON'S faith is first described by OPULS in
reSponse to BEN'S relating his father's unconcern for his
other son's sickness and death. "He feels [grief] only
through faith, and not a muscle in his face moves . . . He

has accepted in advance every suffering and he is

serene . . . He smiles . . . he lives suffering deeply but

 

74SOren Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling - The Sickness
Unto Death, trans. by Walter Lowrie, (New York: Doubleday,
1954), p. 72.

105

does not show its outward Signs . . . like Job, who on
hearing of the death Of his children . . . Showed no Sign
' of grief . . . never vacilated in his heart, never for a
moment thought: 'Perhaps GOd does not exist.”75 Job,
however, as BEN points out, is not the best example of
faith in biblical literature. OPULS, realizing his error,
moves to the example of Abraham. But the mention Of Job
has been made, and it exists not merely as some awkward
mistake of a character, but as a device designed to
irelease the images of another myth SO that they may
continue to be sensed from time to time as the myth Of
Abraham is recreated. The destruction of PARTHON'S
children, LAURA'S and OPULS' concept of God, the .
desolation Of the first ending, and LAURA'S "curse God and
die" brutality reflect the Job myth. The sacrifice Of BEN
and the second ending Of the work come out Of the Abraham
story.

PARTHON, like the Abraham Of Kierkegaard, "puts
himself in an absolute relation to the absolute." In SO
doing he exists in OppOSition to everyone around him.
Sastre works toward his mythical climax by means of the
dramatic dialectics made possible by PARTHON'S position Of
faith. OPULS, in addition to providing cause for

necessary exposition, brings with him a concept Of God in

75Sastre, O. C., p. 489.

106

Opposition to that of PARTHON.76 "It seems as if God were

something different, something absolutely alien, something
strange and unknown . . . unmoved, unshakable, unchanging,
isn't that what they say? Something that does not change,
that does not shudder; something quiet, serene,
invisible, aloof from the torrent of human suffering, this
torrent of blood and slime dragging down the dead bodies
Of children and filled with the cries Of alcoholics . . .
Unmoved, distant, unknown . . . Isn't that God?"77
PARTHON'S concept of the suffering God is presented to
contradict OPULS' view. That it can only be comprehended
through PARTHON'S faith is clear in the logical contradic-
tion presented in his own act Of faith, which by his
concept would only be an example of God bringing further
suffering on himself. This is apparently what Kierkegaard
means by "believing by virtue Of the absurd."78

The Opposition of OPULS' rationalistic views is
followed by the human Oppositional relationship provided
in BEN'S Isaac-perspective. Standing on the other side of
the act Of faith, the eXperience is seen in terms of fear,
but fear confused by love and Obedience. The relationship

is not clearly worked out in the play, but BEN in one

sense is to his father what his father is to God. This

 

76Parthon's "blood Of God" concept is quoted in the
synOpsiS.
77
Sastre, O. C., p. 492.

78Kierkegaard, p. 47.

107

typology was general in the medieval reworking of the
Abraham myth. In an awkward speech immediately preceding
the "act of faith" BEN transcends his fear, and recognizing
the purpose of his life (a life described as not really
lived but experienced "from afar") reaches a state of
resignation. The moment is unconvincing but apparently
thought necessary in order not to shift the tragic focus
from PARTHON to BEN.

In the second act the play continues in a dialectical
fashion in its interpretation of the climax after the fact.
The trial scene depicts the inability of relativistic
ethics and psychology to come to grips with man's tragic
condition as exemplified by PARTHON. Neither the
prosecution nor the defense is capable of comprehending
the problem that the re-enactment Of the myth presents.
This is precisely part Of the lesson Of Sastre's work and
good reason for the impossibility of any clear resolution
in the context of modern society. The ultimate, tragic,
existential condition cannot be resolved by social means.

Following the trial scene, the encounter Of PARTHON
and LAURA provides the final Opposition. Again the Job
myth overrides the myth of Abraham. LAURA can only
understand PARTHON'S act in universal terms, from outside
faith. She represents the reaction Of society to such an
act and her personal relationship to her husband can only
be one Of hatred. PARTHON has reached not the position Of

Abraham but that of Job, one of utter desolation and

108

solitude. His continued belief in God for anyone but
himself appears absurd and pathetic. The suggestion is
strong by this point in the work that faith leads to the
‘same desolate solitude that deSpair leads to. Certainly
faith has separated PARTHON from all human understanding
and relationship. In any context other than its own it
must be seen as tragic. Led by faith PARTHON has been
brought to fit the tragic description that Sastre provides

in Drama and Society. The question of guilt on the social

 

level is in the arguments of the PROSECUTOR and DEFENSE
but on the religious-existential level falls back on the
Opposing views of God provided by PARTHON, OPULS, and
LAURA.

But the play does not end with PARTHON'S pathetically
repeated "I believe in God." It throws the audience back
to the climax, back to that kathartic moment when PARTHON
plunges the knife into BEN. The second ending is that
of the Abraham myth, and the dog Grok is substituted at
the last minute as the sacrificial victim. PARTHON'S
faith is vindicated, LAURA becomes reconciled, and BEN

begins to live for the first time. As with Anna Kleiber,

 

one can question the effectiveness Of a positive ending
which follows such tragic desolation, and the tendency is
again to interpret the final scene as ironic. Anderson
suggests that the first ending indicates the possible
outcome in a world where GOd no longer exists, where faith

becomes "self delusion, hallucination, or insanity. Its

109

rewards are loneliness and death." The second ending he
sees as being that of a world where the God of love
continues to exist, the GOd Of Abraham, where "faith and

life give meaning to each other."79

There are other
possible interpretations, and, of course, the fact that
both endings exist must itself be interpreted.

The suggestion made earlier of the existence Of the
Job myth places a different meaning on the first ending
from that Of Anderson. The God of Job existed as clearly
as the God of Abraham. It was noted by OPULS that Job
never questioned this existence. But Job's faith was
tested in a different way, and the image of God presented
was that of an almost terrifyingly whimsical power willing
to play with his creatures in a cosmic wager. OPULS'
silently withdrawn God is benevolent by comparisOn. The
reference to Job, and the FROSECUTOR'S reminder of the
Greek tragic figures serves to suggest a Greek tragic
universe. In this context PARTHON becomes a tragic figure
in obeying the gods as Agammenon did in his sacrificing of
Iphigenia. In this sense PARTHON is in the precise tragic
situation, described by Sastre, of "morally normal men
EDPULS calls him a man who "moves normally through life by

(the strength of) something as simple and rare as faith" 80

[whcfl are tortured by a superior entity under whose

 

79Anderson, p. 83.

8OSast'i-e, o. C., p. 489.

110

painful dominion they find themselves without the
possibility Of escape."81

The irony of the second ending is that it does not
necessarily undo the possibility of the first to occur.
That is, PARTHON'S faith is not the essential factor. The
God of Job tried faith through desolating the faithful
while the God of Abraham rewarded it by a last minute
intervention. But the fact that Sastre uses both throws
the question ultimately to the Spectator.

Forcing the problem beyond the boundaries Of the
theatre for a solution is a precept that Sastre's more
socially oriented tragedy follows. Theoretically it
develOps out of the concept Of katharsis (see Chapter I)

and in The Blood Of God it hinges on that mythical-

 

sacrificial, climactic moment. With the moment replayed
in its alternate form, and the question Of faith held
against both, the Spectator is required to leave the
theatre in a perplexed state Of mind. That critics can
condemn this lack Of resolution only indicates their
misunderstanding of Sastre's concept Of tragedy and its
purpose, which is one Of forcing problems toward real

solutions in the real world. In the case Of The Blood Of

 

God the final interpretation rests with the individual

Spectator.

 

81Sastre, D. S., p. 28.

lll

Sastre“s view Of tragedy in its develOpment also
incorporates the concepts Of documentation and investiga—
tion (see Chapter I). These concepts were not yet in

evidence in the earliest works, and with Anna Kleiber,

 

certain eXperimental aspects, particularly the use Of the
narrative, tended to overcome what may have existed of

them. In The Blood of God something Of a middle position

 

is achieved between these works and the more socially

oriented works of this same general period (Red Earth and

 

A Death in the Neighborhood). While he is not attempting
to start with the "photOgraphic document" of social
reality, he is attempting a process of penetration into
man's condition by beginning with a mythical document.
The "accepted" truth Of the Abraham myth is placed against
that of the Job myth, and the combination, placed in a
modern context, provides the basis for an investigation of
the religious aSpect of human existence. The use Of myth
also provides the tragedy with the capability Of achieving
irony and anticipation. The Slaughter of BEN is effective
through anticipation growing out Of two mythical lines:
the hOpe that develOpS with the myth of Abraham and the
desolation and death that are part of £22. The layering
Of one myth over the other with the double ending is an
attempt to extend the experience of katharsis beyond the
Aristotelian boundary and into the real life Of the

individual in a continuation of the investigation.

112

Sastre’s last work in this group of existentlal

tragedies is perhaps as baffling as The Blood Of God in

 

its attempt to manifest the relativity Of time, but it is

not the Open work that The Blood Of God is.‘ The Raven

 

 

does not insist in the extra-theatrical resolution of its
problem. In fact it is one of Sastre's tightest, most
Aristotelian dramas in terms of plot develOpment, and it
can be seen as an eXperimental study Of the relativity Of
"beginning, middle, and end."

The Raven was written in 1956. At the time Sastre's
situation as an author was little short of deSperate. His
(major social theatre, including his two most recent works,

A Death in the Neighborhood (1955) and Sad Are the Eyes of

 

William Tell (1955), were still not permitted production.
In addition he was indicted and convicted of "clandestine
publication" and "illegal assembly" for his participation
in the student "disturbances" Of February, 1956° His
prison sentence was suSpended, but his savings were frozen
by the courts to cover his bond, leaving him without
income. He and his new wife were living in a hotel room.

"I wrote The Raven under these circumstances. It is,

 

if you wish, an attempt at abstract theatre, without
concern for characterological, moral, or socio-political

content. ”The Raven is, in this sense--I wrote in a

 

review-~a witness-piece, a deluding form Of protest, like

su82-

a scream in the night. This paradoxical statement has

 

82Sastre, O. C., p° 661.

113

83

caused some confusion (Van Der Naald) as has the play

itself (Tecglen).84 But it appears that what Sastre is
saying is that the conditions which force a playwright to
create works so much in Opposition to what he would
prefer, make a protest of these works themselves. In
addition, while this work is out Of the mainstream of
Sastre's major tragic theatre, it still contains tragic
implications which are in line with the concepts of that

theatre.

The Raven Opens on a darkened living room of a house

 

on the outskirts of a city.' Through the window snow can
be seen falling. Someone is heard trying to get in,
failing, then knocking at the door. In the absence Of any

reSponse the person comes round to a window and

 

83Van Der Naald, p. 162. "A witness Of what?; protest
against what?; cry directed at whom? Is it possible that
this work attempts to be something more than 'a formal
game." Perhaps it is a protest against the irrevocability
of time and of life. The loved one is 'nevermore' able to
return from death. But this protest, if there is one,
remains hidden in a confusion of theatrical machinery."
The protest described here is always a part of Sastre's
theatre, and is certainly not hidden here. But Sastre is
here making a protest as a writer who is not permitted to
write what he wishes, although in this case he does better
than most critics have noticed in making his tragic point.

84"I do not understand how time can be reversible, nor
how some peOple can live at a rhythm different from others;
nor do I 'feel' déja vu or déja vécu; nor do I have a
futuristic imagination which will permit me to see how
science will clear up these questions later on in a totally
realistic way in the same way that the earth's roundness
was a mystery centuries ago and now is a commonly accepted
fact . . . This incapacity of mine prevents me from forming
a judgement concerning The Raveg." Eduardo Haro Tecglen,
"IntroducciOn a Alfonso Sastre," in Alfonso Sastre (Madrid:
Taurus, 1964), p. 75.

 

 

 

114

successfully manages to Open it and to enter the room. He
lights a match and, finding his way slowly around the room
begins to light a number Of candles. As he Sits down, the
maid is heard calling Off stage. She eventually appears,
candle in hand and discovers the man to be JUAN, the
master of the house. The conversation which follows
provides the background exposition to set the situation
for the rest Of the play.

The time is New Year's Eve, 1955, one year precisely
from the night in which JUAN'S wife LAURA was brutally
murdered by a maniac just outside in the snow-covered
garden. The murder took place while JUAN and a number of
friends were partying inside, oblivious to LAURA'S cries
for help because Of their intoxicated state. Now, a year
later, JUAN and the maid, LUISA, find it difficult not to
bring the subject into their conversation. Both begin to
admit a number of eXperiences of déja vu relating to the
night Of the murder. In their recollection of the events
of that night they become'aware Of the time which is the
hour of the guest's arrival of a year ago. At that moment
the doorbell rings and JUAN Opens the door tO discover
PEDRO and INES, just as he had at that moment on the
previous New Year's eve. A few moments later, the other
guest, ALFONSO arrives. Little by little they begin to
sense the evening taking on the precise aSpects Of the
evening of the murder. ALFONSO even imagines seeing the

maniac looking in the window at them. A sense of terror

115

and confusion begins to grow when a physical object
becomes proof of some disruption Of time. JUAN at one
point brings out his Cigarette lighter, and ALFONSO
recognizes it both as the one which he and LAURA had given
to JUAN on the day before the murder 329 as one which he
saw INES use within the past two days. INES eXplains that
she lost hers in a taxi, and ALFONSO remembers that he and
LAURA found it in a taxi, but a year earlier. INES is
terrified when she examines the lighter and discovers that
it is definitely hers, having a small circle on it which
she herself scratched. The illogical time situation
presented brings them to discussing the small amulet which
hangs on the lighter. JUAN points out that the amulet is
believed by the Indians to have magical powers, and he is
reminded Of a story Of Visnu in which the relativity of
subjective times plays a part. AS the tension increases,
the characters begin to discover themselves moving toward
the exact situation and attitudes of the moment when LAURA,
herself, made her appearance from upstairs on that evening
a year earlier. As they all turn to eXpect her, she is
seen starting down the stairs, and the curtain falls on
the first act.

The second act begins with the next moment of action.
Throughout the act a complex situation exists in which all
the characters except LAURA sense themselves reliving an
event whose outcome they know and which they are able to

view from outside and attempt to interpret but over which

116

they have no power. LAURA eXperiences everything for the
first time and is progressively amused, confused and
frightened as the other characters attempt to eXplain
their experience to her. The guests attempt tO change the
conditions leading up to the murder by leaving, but they
are forced to return to the house within a few minutes
because a heavy snowfall has made it impossible for them
to get their cars to the main road. They call a taxi to
come for them in hOpes that they may still be able to
change the direction of events. But the recurrence Of the
murder is inevitable, and at the critical moment everyone
but LAURA moves into the same precise attitude of frozen
helplessness. The doorbell rings. LAURA Opens the door,
sees no one, and walks out into the garden. The others
begin to move out Of their tableau as LAURA'S screams for
help are heard. They rush out tO find nothing. After
some futile attempts to understand what has happened to
them, PEDRO and INEE decide to leave and walk to the
nearest subway station rather than wait for their taxi.
ALFONSO and JUAN talk for a while longer and recite
portions of Poe's "The Raven" which seem to them to relate
to the events of the evening. Finally ALFONSO leaves.
LUISA comes in from the kitchen to inform JUAN that some
taxis have arrived. She comments on the strange exchange
she has had with the drivers concerning the date. They
had been amused by the fact that her calendar was wrong

and had explained to her that it was 1954, not 1955. When

117

she showed them the date on the daily paper they became
quite frightened. JUAN notices that his cigarette lighter
is missing, and he remembers having given it to LAURA
during the evening. The act ends with LUISA wishing JUAN
a happy New Year.

Sastre has gone to some length to eXplain the Space-

time complexity of The Raven. "It is conceivable that one

 

and the same event may be lived through by a group of
peOple according to different rhythms of time . . . the
'objectivity' of the event is placed in doubt . . . the
concept Of simultaneity is in a state Of crisis . . . one
group (JUAN, INéS, ALFONSO, PEDRO, LUISA) would be
reliving a past which for another group (LAURA, the

85' If

murderer, the taxi drivers) is still the future."
this conception has not been carried out with the
precision Of a physics eXperiment, it has in its imperfect
way at least provided a unique dramatic situation Of a

86

tragic nature. The perspectivism that Sastre eXperi—

mented with in Anna Kleiber, combining narrative

 

(subjective) and dramatic (objective) lines Of various

narrator-characters, and in The Blood of God, working

 

through dialectical attitudes and arguments (PARTHON: the

particular in Opposition to the universal), is clearly

 

853astre, o. C., pp. 662, 663.

86Van Der Naald nit-picks over some Of the physical
inconsistencies. See page 160 Of that work. See note 91,
this chapter.

118

time-related in The Raven. The least correct detail in

 

this multiple time perSpective, by physical laws, would be
the recognition factor Of the "faster" group and the
commentary on the occurrence—recurrence, all Of which
changes the recurrence from the occurrence. But this same
factor is of central importance in its dramatic function.
Sastre has created in this "innocuous" piece a dramatic
representation of the closed tragic Situation and made
some of the trapped individuals highly aware Of their
condition, aware to the point of terror. The flow Of time
is a dominating force carrying one towards an inevitable
rendezvous with some murderous maniac with one staring
eye. The breaking Of time into relativistic rhythms
ironically only provides man with a greater awareness Of
his own helplessness. And if, as Sastre admits, the work
fails to develOp its characters in terms of moral and
socio-political problems, it must be understood as more
than a Simple eXperiment with time. The relativity of
time is being used to discover tragedy.87
Just before the climax LAURA, who has been made aware
by the others of her impending doom, attempts to describe
what lies outside. "That poor garden which was so
beautiful last spring . . . tonight . . . tonight is the

meeting place Of demons, the great hell . . . inhabited by

 

87Cyrus DeCoster calls the work "a mystery play with
metaphysical connotations." Unfortunately he doesn't gO
into a discussion Of these connotations. DeCoster, p. 131.

119

a solitary man with only one eye. Who is he? A Single
eye watching us from the Shadows . . . Some being who is
there, constantly . . . to think of him terrifies us . . .
we don't understand him. What does he want of us? Is

he . . . God?"88

If The Raven is a work Of abstract theatre, as Sastre

 

describes it to be, then certainly one is free to
interpret the symbolism that LAURA suggests. The mythical

ambiguity of the nature of God in The Blood of GOd has

 

become a symbolic certainty in The Raven. God is some

 

homicidal maniac watching and waiting in the Shadows;
"someone . . . playing with us from the shadows."89
drags the victim to the inevitable meeting with this "mad

beast."90

Escape is impossible and prescience of events
Only magnifies one's sense Of terror and absolute
helplessness.

In Aristotelian terms Sastre is working, as he did in
The Blood of God, with the principles Of reversal and
recognition and with the combination Of the inevitable and
the uneXpected. In the earlier play the confusion of
myths and the double denouement were used to achieve a

reversal and a reversal Of the reversal and recognition

(BEN) and lack of recognition (PARTHON); the inevitable

 

88Sastre, O. C., p. 706.
89Sastre, O. C., p. 681.

90Sastre, O. C., p. 701.

120

and unexpected were, and were not, in terms of the myths

employed (i.e., the climax was inevitable according to

 

the Abraham myth to the point of the slaying and

unexpected in the absence of a sacrificial substitute, but

 

still inevitable in BEN'S death by the terms of the Job

 

myth). In The Raven the relativity Of time affects these

 

principles. For the major group Of characters the event
has already occurred bringing with it a reversal and
recognition which for those characters make the recurrence
of the event uneXpected but finally inevitable. The
recurrence of the event is interesting dramatically as a
coincidence Of non-reversal and recognition for this
group. The suffering Of the group (particularly JUAN,
symbolically man) comes out Of the irreversibility of the
Symbolic event and the recognition Of this truth
("nevermore"). The slow agony Of eXperiencing the
inevitable as it becomes the case is made possible
dramatically by this time-play.91 The "happy New Year" at

the end is very bitter irony indeed.

The Raven is the last of Sastre's existential (non-

 

social) tragedies and Of the five is the most pessimistic,
nihilistic even in its representation of the slowly
sharpening awareness Of the tragic condition. Because of
the confusion resulting from its experiment with

relativity, and because Of Sastre's own statement on its

 

91Sastre is attempting tO create a dramatic impossible
probability out Of a physical improbable possibility.

121

non-moral and non-socio-political nature, its devastating
view of man and God has not been largely discussed by the

92 The work is written in a closed form. There

critics.
is no breaking through the dramatic structure to bring the
problem Off of the stage. With the other plays of this
group, as negative as they may be, and without the social
relatedness Of the "mainstream" works, there is always
some device which brings the situation Of the stage
directly to the level Of the reality of the individual in
the audience. In the first three works some form Of
narrative or recognition of audience by character existed

to perform this function. In The Blood Of God the double

ending served to this end. The Raven in its closed form

 

and inevitable conclusion contradicts Sastre's concept Of
the function Of tragedy in society.

With the exception of the first play, which dealt
symbolically with the idea of man's social relationship,
the focus in these works is on the individual and his
tragic condition. He is seen through his relationship
with another individual or with GOd or he is seen as a
victim Of superior forces. Any sense Of real potentiality

is greatly reduced or destroyed by the fact that the time

 

92Anderson is an exception. He sees the play as a
'questioning Of man's existence and the nature Of GOd. He
says that Sastre does not answer these questions and sees
the same sort of ambivalence toward the problem as
eXpressed in The Blood Of GOd. Anderson, pp. 80, 81.
Perhaps Sastre does not answer the questions (who does?)
but his symbolic suggestions are quite definite and the
play leads to a clear conclusion.

122

to act has passed (Cargo Of Dreams and Anna Kleiber are

 

 

retrOSpective, retelling and re-enactment, The Raven is

 

"real" re-enactment devoid of potentiality) or that the

critical moment is beyond man's control (The Blood Of God).

 

In either case the Situation appears to be that closed one

described by Sastre in Drama and Society. Uranium 235 is

 

 

an exception in its potentially hOpeful ending. Man's
greatest suffering grows out Of his awareness of his
helplessness. Human compaSSion for one's fellow man is
significant (JESCHOUA for MAN, ANNA and ALFREDO for each
other and the WRITER for ALFREDO, BEN for his father) but

ultimately man is alone in his suffering.

CHAPTER IV

THEATRE: DIALECTICAL TRAGEDY

The second group of Sastre's plays are those which

Anderson calls "dramas of possibility." This mainstream

of the playwright's work is to be distinguished from the
first group of plays generally in its concern for man as a
social being without, however, neglecting his existential
self. Within the group there are a great many experimental
attempts to represent the complicated dialectical relation-
ship between the anguished, existential individual and the
active, historical and social person. These plays

represent in practice a great many of the ideas eXpressed

 

in theory in Anatomy Of Realism. As a group they can

 

comprehensively be referred to as dialectical tragedies.
Formally they run the gamut Of eXperimentation.

In considering these tragedies one separation is
obvious and useful if not well balanced in terms of
number. Four of the twelve plays deal directly with some
phase of that tragic Situation of political revolution.

These are Pathetic Prologue (1950), Community Bread

 

 

(1953), Red Earth (1954), and In the Net (1959). The

 

 

remaining eight plays deal with the individual-social
dialectic in an indirect way (allegory) or with less a

sense of immediate political involvement and more
123

124

Specifically with that tragedy of an existing unjust
social order, an Oppressive status quo. The distinctions
are not always precise. This group includes The Garbage
9&2 (1951), The Condemned Squad (1952), The Gag (1954), A
Death in the Neighborhood (1955), Sad Are the Eyes Of

William Tell (1955), Nocturnal Assault (1959), Death

 

 

 

Thrust (1959), and The Tenebrae (1962).

A.

Pathetic Prologue is the earliest of Sastre's dramas

 

which attempts to deal with man in a situation Of
political revolution. The outline for the play was drawn
up in 1949;.the play itself was first written in 1950 and
revised thereafter, reaching its final form by 1953. It
has never been produced.1
The work consists Of six scenes. In the first of

these three young university-students-turned-terrorists
are introduced as they await the fourth member and leader
Of their group. BELTRAN, in whose toom the scene takes
place, is sitting and playing at a piano, OSCAR is trying
to read, and ANTON, Obviously restless, is moving about.
It is raining outside. The phone rings. ANTON moves to

. ,
answer it, but BELTRAN stOps him, reminding him of the
secrecy of their meeting. An atmOSphere of tension is
built up. ANTON'S nervousness and conversational

direction reveal his advanced state Of mental anguish over

 

lSastre, O. C., p. 57.

125

the group's terrorist activities. The entire discussion
begins to revolve around the changed nature of their
lives. OSCAR attempts to eXpreSS a sense of direction,
but ANTON feels only alienation and unclear purpose. He
is tormented by the impersonal kind Of killing that their
bombings is. PABLO arrives and overhears part of the
discussion. His reaction is to declare ANTON a coward.
His manner is cold and harsh, that Of a completely
pragmatic person. He brings the orders for the next day.
The lot falls to OSCAR. A bombing Of the war minister's
car as it passes along a pOpular boulevard.

The second scene is something of a contrast although
it is develOped along the same growing line Of tension.
There is, however, the suggestion Of the warmth of family
life. OSCAR arrives home, kisses his MOTHER, loosens his
tie, seemingly preparing to relax, turns on the radio, and
asks about his brother and sister. They are still out.
He appears somewhat restless, and when he tries to pour
himself a drink, he Spills it. The two Of them talk Of
the student demonstrations and Of the growing support for
the students among the laborers. The MOTHER is not able
to understand the social changes going on. She continues
to remind OSCAR of the family happiness that used to
exist. Things used to be better. LAURA, the daughter,
finally arrives and is Obviously shaken about something.
Eventually she tells them Of her boyfriend's witnessing a

bombing of a double-decker bus that was turned over and Of

126

a number Of innocent peOple killed. OSCAR is visibly
disturbed. The son, JULIO, is unusually late, and LAURA
realizes that he would have had to come home by a route
which would have taken him through the bomb area. The
scene ends with the family in a state of great anxiety.

BELTRAN attempts to warn OSCAR in the following
scene of a tip-Off which is bringingfthe police. OSCAR'S
concern for the fate of his brother causes him to ignore
the warning. He is caught in the street in front Of his
apartment as he desperately searches a newspaper for the
names Of the bomb victims.

The fourth scene finds OSCAR in his prison cell. He
has been beaten. In a long speech directed partly to the
GUARD and partly to himself he talks Of the beating, Of
his sickness, and of his desire to reach his family to
find out about his brother. An INSPECTOR arrives with an
"INTERROGATOR" who proceeds-to beat OSCAR in an attempt to
get the names Of the party members from him. The
INSPECTOR then shows him a hOSpital photograph Of his
dead brother. OSCAR is left meaning on the floor of his
cell. But the "INTERROGATOR" returns in a moment to tell
him that he is a party member and that there is a plan for
his escape.

The next scene is again in BELTRAN'S room. He and
PABLO are discussing the recent success Of the movement.
An article by OSCAR justifying terrorism is mentioned as

having been rejected by the party paper because Of its use

127

of the word. OSCAR bursts into the room. He is highly
agitated. In a confused manner he talks of taking over
the cell and of changing from indiscriminate bombing tO
gangster style Shootings. PABLO reacts in his cold way
but fails to conceal Some nervousness. OSCAR talks of his
brother and is told by PABLO that the death of his brother
is of no importance. When OSCAR is informed Of ANTON'S
suicide, he breaks; leaping up he grabs a knife from a
table and thrusts it into PABLO'S throat. He runs out
leaving PABLO dead on the floor with BELTRAN standing over
him.

In the last scene OSCAR returns home. He enters the
darkened room through a window; He sees a figure
approach. It is his brother, JULIO. In the emotional
reunion that follows JULIO explains to OSCAR that he was
simply late in returning home on the fateful evening and
that apparently the police had used a photograph of an
accident victim as an interrogation tactic. He informs
OSCAR of the success Of the bombing in the death of the
war minister and Of the growing support Of the peOple for
the activists. OSCAR finds comfort and encouragement in
JULIO as their talk continues. He finally understands his
new purpose to be one Of exemplary suffering for the
revolution. The Scene ends with OSCAR'S Optimistic vision
of children again playing freely in the flowering parks as
they used tO play once before. The arrival Of the police

is imminent.

128

Nearly everyone has pointed out that the central
question of this social tragedy is that moral one
underlying acts of terrorism: "can one justify the
killing of innocent peOple with a terrorism whose ultimate
aim is a greater degree of social justice for all?"2
Sastre's own statement about the tragedy Of revolution
which his plays of this group attempt to encompass puts
this moral dilemma of terrorism in the prOper context:

"If revolution is a tragic fact, unjust social order is an
unacceptable muffled tragedy. I try to place the
Spectator before the dilemma of electing between the two
tragedies. It seems obvious that the muffled tragedy Of
an unjust SOClai order can only be destroyed by the
revolutionary tragedy. The hOpe is in the happy outcome
of this tragedy, which is, or should be, acute and Open,
compared to the other, muffled, chronic and closed one."3
The dilemma of the terrorist is one element of the tragedy
of revolution, perhaps the most tragic element, but it is
ultimately justified in the effort to overcome the

unacceptable tragedy Of an unjust social order. There is

 

2Anderson, p. 107. Also Doménech, p. 45. "The
conflict which the tragedy poses . . . is of a moral
order: the moral conflict that underlies terrorism. The
question is this: from an ethical point Of view, can the
Spilling of innocent blood, which the terrorist act
presupposes, be justified if this act leads to an
objective--the creation Of a just social order--which is
ethically good?" And Van Der Naald, p. 106: The same
‘words Of Doménech without prOper credit.

3Sastre, O. C., p. 226. Quoted from Primer Acto,
Madrid, (Nov.-Dec. 1957), no. 5.

129

some hOpe in the outcome of the tragedy of revolution;
there is none in the tragedy of an unjust SOClal order.

It iS important to note that this central moral
issue, while it exists theoretically, is not precisely
that which dramatically drives the play. ANTON, a minor,
cardboard figure, is that character who acts out this
Specific problem and finds no resolution but suicide. His
negative resolution must be placed beside OSCAR'S
rediscovery and affirmation of purpose at the play's
conclusion. But OSCAR does not reach this discovery
(recognition-reversal) through a dialectic of the abstract
moral dilemma cited as the major question of the play
(that of ANTON). TO Sastre's credit as a dramatist
OSCAR'S dialectical struggle is on more realistic grounds.
He has not been disturbed by the abstract moral issue as
has ANTON. He has even written a paper in defense of
terrorism. His crisis comes when the family, Specifically
JULIO, is weighed against the good of the cause. Only
with the death Of a real, flesh and blood person, a
brother who "used to take my hand and help me cross the
street," only with the death Of this person who could
comfort OSCAR, the frightened little boy, is there a
crisis. And it is only and precisely this person, and
what he represents, who can restore purpose and provide
the correct answer to the larger dilemma in question.

The central dramatic movement Of the play is

structured around OSCAR'S process of discovery. (PABLO

130

represents a partial concept of the revolution which tends
to create the moral predicament for ANTON and later for
OSCAR. ANTON, himself, can be seen to represent the
Opposite position Of PABLO: extreme and equally
inadequate. Both positions are eventually eliminated
symbolically in the deaths Of the two young men.) This
process can be traced through a series of struggles
(agons). He begins more or less at PABLO'S position (he
demonstrates human understanding Of ANTON'S anguish while
disagreeing) by accepting without question his assignment
and in having written his defense of terrorism. His first
suffering comes with the family scene awaiting JULIO.

This scene begins the dialectical movement by its
relationship with the first scene.

The next agon is both physical and psychological. In
the prison OSCAR suffers the loss Of family and is unable
to discover purpose in his revolutionary acts. The crisis
is one Of anguish brought on by the mistaken belief that
the wrong death has occurred: a personal death where
there should have been a political death. At this moment
symbolically PABLO (the revolution as then understood by
OSCAR) and JULIO (the human element, the family) are
brought into conflict in OSCAR's thinking. The death Of
JULIO will inevitably lead to the death of PABLO.

The reunion of OSCAR and PABLO is the next moment of
struggle. The degree Of change in OSCAR is dramatically

underlined by the discussion Of his article in defense Of

131

terrorism (his earlier self) which precedes his entrance.
His stabbing PABLO represents his final rejection of this
erroneous revolutionary position. It is the mention of
ANTON'S suicide which brings OSCAR to the critical point
of killing PABLO. Represented here (if one may push the
symbolism to a near breaking-point) is the dialectic (in
death) of the two extreme positions out Of which will
come, through JULIO, the ultimate, acceptable position.
This position is achieved as a result of the final
agon: the reunion of OSCAR and JULIO. In addition to
being the next scene in the process Of discovery through
tragic struggle, this scene is also structurally in a
balanced position with the preceding reunion scene.
JULIO's symbolic resurrection immediately follows PABLO's
death. JULIO now transcends his previous role and exists
as the new concept of revolution. Replacing PABLO'S
inhumanly pragmatic position is JULIO's humanly compas-
sionate one. JULIO recognizes the tragic situation of
man. He recognizes the tragic failure Of men to love one
another which necessitates revolution. Out Of this
recognition Of the human aSpect OSCAR is able to discover
meaning in suffering itself. His new hOpe is based on the
exemplary suffering which he, himself, will provide. "Now
I know that I can still do something important for the
cause: suffer for it . . . I will be useful to the cause

'by suffering.”4

 

4Sastre, O. C., p. 105.

132

OSCAR is able to transcend the tragic dilemma posed
by revolution by finding revolutionary purpose in his own
human suffering. But it is not through party dicta alone
that he has arrived at this discovery. PABLO'S concept
fails to recognize the individual, existential crisis.
"You feel something missing and you're flailing about.
But you're only one more individual case which doesn't
mean a thing."5 JULIO's human reaction tO the human
condition is necessary to give the political concepts
meaning for OSCAR. The revolutionary tragedy is
ultimately Opened by purpose and hOpe.6

In the first scene of Pathetic PrOlOgue BELTRAN

 

introduces the subject of family and the apparent conflict

 

5Sastre, O. C., p. 95.

6Ricardo Doménech rightly criticizes Sastre for his
stiff characters in this work. He also suggests that it
would have been more convincing had the situation been
more historically concrete. "Perhaps Situating the action
in.a concrete historical moment would have given the
tragedy the realistic basis it lacks." p. 44. Why this
critic feels that theatre has to be based on actual
incidents and historical facts is uncertain. Sastre tends
to run the gamut from historical realism to abstract
symbolism. In this work he is somewhere in between.
Leonard Pronko feels that the ending is, at best, only
vaguely hOpeful. " . . . the vague suggestion that the
future may bring something brighter.” "The 'Revolutionary
Theatre' of Alfonso Sastre," The Tulane Drama Review,
vol. 5, no. 2, (Dec. 1960), p. 118. Typically Van Der
Naald ends her discussion with a subjective statement
unsupported by textual data. "Unfortunately this note Of
hOpe which follows the pathetic prOlogue (OSCAR's final
Speeches) does not manage to convince one, nor does it
erase the melodramatic flavor of the final scene."
p. 110. This, unfortunately, is not atypical of most
commentary on Sastre's works. The major exception is
Farris Anderson.

 

133

between family loyalties and revolutionary principles.
He says to OSCAR: "The family of a revolutionary is
something that disappears very quickly . . . and you end

"7 The prediction is only partly

up alone, you'll see.
true for OSCAR, for his ultimate concept of revolution
grows out of the human understanding provided by family as
represented through JULIO. This conflict, however, has
been shown to be central in OSCAR's develOpment as a
tragic figure. And it is used again by Sastre as a tragic

dialectic in the second of his dramas which investigate

man in the context Of revolution: CommunityyBread.

 

Community Bread was begun in 1952 and completed in
1953. It was produced in January of 1957 in Barcelona.
In the preface to the play, published in the Complete
‘ngkg, Sastre cites from a note Of his own interpretation
dating from the writing Of the work. "The tragic
dimension of this drama is already in Greek tragedy:
Orestes kills Clytemnestra and is pursued by the Furies.
Community Bread is, in this sense, an ancient tragedy.
But its present articulation has only been possible since
the great revolutionary eXperiences Of the twentieth
century."8

The action takes place in an imaginary country under

the rule of a new revolutionary government. (In defending

 

7Sastre, O. C., p. 66.

8Sastre, o. C., p. 226.

134

the relevance of his plays Sastre has said that, "in every
case, Spain is the country Of [my] imagination.")9 A
young leader Of the Party, DAVID HARKO, iS playing a major
role in a tough reform which is underway to improve the
new rule and tighten regulations. The prologue scene is a
public meeting, with audience as public, at which DAVID
announces the reforms. His Speech makes it clear that he
is an ardent revolutionary prepared to lead the country
into a general purge if necessary to achieve the desired
goals. "The time for bloodshed has not passed. Days of
anguish and grief may still await us. But the Revolution
will triumph, and some day we will be happy that we
undertook this rigorous journey."10
The scene Shifts to the seventh floor apartment
dwelling of DAVID'S family. His wife, MARTA, and his
aunt, PAULA, are talking. Their conversation deals
largely with DAVID, his present travelling for the reform,
his extreme dedication to the Party, and his early life as
a physically weak and solitary child. They also talk Of
DAVID'S mother, JUANA, and of her anxiety over him based
on the politically motivated death Of the father in an
earlier period Of the revolution. The women eXpress their
dissatisfaction with the revolution which has failed to

change their lot. "My sister and I never understood

 

9Sastre, O. C., p. 227.

loSastre, O. C., p. 232.

135

anything that happened. We were still at the stove, or in
the laundry, or down on our knees on the floor,
scrubbing . . . while everything happened. For us there

"11 The

haven't been any changes. It's always the same.
mother, JUANA, arrives very exhausted. She tells them
that she has taken a 23232. They sit down to eat. In the
ensuing conversation between JUANA and PAULA it becomes
apparent that JUANA is disturbed and hiding something from
the other two. Finally She tells them of meeting a
certain PEDRO YUDD, an Old friend Of the father in earlier
days, but at present one of the most corrupt Officials of
the government, the kind about to be purged by DAVID and
his group. She has accepted money from YUDD in anticipa-
tion of taking her family out Of the country, something
which she feels will soon be necessitated by the
develOping political situation. She eXpresses no faith in
the revolutionary government and only longs for some
security and happiness for her family in some "other
country." DAVID finally arrives home, and a short scene
follows with MARTA and him discussing their life together,
a life in which the human relationShip is constantly being
broken by the intrusion of political matters. Even while
MARTA attempts to talk of their earlier happiness, DAVID

can only think Of the possibility Of a new purge.

 

11Sastre, O. C., p. 237.

136

In the second scene two major confrontations occur.
YUDD calls on DAVID at his home to prevent himself being
turned over to the authorities because of his corrupt
practices involving the distribution Of wheat. DAVID
informs YUDD that all the evidence has been collected to
convict him of having made personal gain by depriving the
peOple of the community bread. YUDD stuns DAVID with the
information that his mother, JUANA, has been involved in
the corruption. He assumes that DAVID will cover up for
both of them because of his mother's implication. Instead
DAVID calls the police on the phone to bring them to
arrest YUDD. While they await the arrival Of the police,
YUDD presses DAVID to change his mind, initiating the
eXpression of the moral dilemma which develOpS through the
rest of the play. The police come and carry Off YUDD.
DAVID remains alone. After a lighting change indicating a
passage of time, JUANA appears in the room. DAVID tells
her of the YUDD incident, and she very calmly admits her
participation. The scene ends with DAVID attempting to
comprehend the truth of the dilemma. HeedeSperately
begins to hold on to memories of happier moments with his
mother--even recalling his parents wedding photOgraph.
His mother comforts him as they prepare to go Off to the
authorities.

MARTA and PAULA are awaiting DAVID'S return in the
third scene. PAULA is unable to understand DAVID'S

actions. "I was the first one to tell my sister she was

137

doing something wrong. You remember? But I would have
done anything for her. And David, no? Why? Because he
belongs to the Party? What kind Of age are we living in?
Children no longer feel devotion toward their mothers?"ll2
DAVID arrives back somewhat intoxicated. He cannot stand
to have PAULA look at him. He admits to MARTA that he
declined an Offer from the committee to forget the affair.
In an almost grotesque seeking for comfort he turns on the
radio and begins to dance with MARTA. She attempts to
console him, but their final embrace and kiss appear only
pathetic.

In the fourth scene DAVID, PAULA, and MARTA await the
hour Of the execution. DAVID is apparently asleep at his
desk as the two women talk in deSperate helplessness. The
atmOSphere is heavy with PAULA'S anger and MARTA'S
deSpair.

PAULA. In this whole city there is nothing but slime
and filth. Everything is dirty and sad.
MARTA. I look at David, I look at you and I realize
that tonight we can do nothing for each other. . . .
PAULA. After what he's done there's nothing left for
him but to die, to die in the worst way . . . hanged
from a tree, that's what left for him! The worst
possible death.
DAVID, who has not been asleep, begins to talk. The
conversation turns into a dialogue between DAVID and PAULA

'which eventually transcends the realistic level Of the

scene becoming a climactic conflict between a new Orestes

k

12Sastre, o. C., p. 260.

13Sastre, o. C., pp. 267, 268, 269.

138

and the Furies. A horrible silence follows the clash. It
is the hour of the execution. DAVID leaves to go to his
bedroom. He locks the door behind him. As MARTA begins
to frantically beat at the door, a woman's scream is heard.
DAVID has leaped from his seventh floor bedroom window to
the patio below.

In the short epilogue the Shadowy silhouette of a
crowd can be seen forming around DAVID'S broken body.
MARTA and PAULA appear. MARTA throws herself sobbing on
'DAVID and holds him. FESSLER and a number of uniformed
OFFICIALS appear. They apparently were on their way to
inform DAVID Of the execution. They inquire about the
death. PAULA tells them that he committed suicide.
FESSLER orders someone to telephone the story as an
accidental death and declares DAVID a hero of the
revolution and the great example for the youth of the
Party. The scene closes with MARTA's SOliquuy over
DAVID'S body.

The critical work dealing with Community Bread has

 

not been very insightful, most of it consisting Of facile

4
plot summary or one line statement of theme.1

 

l4Three examples of this are Jacqueline Chantraine
de Van Praag, "Alfonso Sastre: La eSperanza del joven
teatro eSpafiol," La Torre, X, NO. 40 (1962), pp. 115—
116. Miss Chantraine de Van Praag even refers to David,
the hero, as Daniel part Of the time. Juan Emilio
Aragonés, "Alfonso Sastre y el 'realismo profundizado,'"
Punta EurOpa, NO. 83 (1963), pp. 29-32. Sr. Aragonés
does include the poem which is said to have inSpired
Sastre to write the play. F. Garcia PavOn. El teatro
social en ESpafia. (Madrid: Taurus 1962) pp. 176-178.

 

139

E. H. Tecglen insists that the play "is an anticommunist
work . . . anyone familiar with it couldn't think
otherwise."15 Cyrus DeCoster sees in it Similarities with

Sartre's Dirty Hands. He states that, "Sastre is intent

 

on portraying a crise de conscience, a set Of circumstances

 

which drive a tragic character of considerable magnitude
to destruction."16 This, of course, could be said about
almost every work Sastre has written. Leonard Pronko
feels that "David is fighting for ideas rather than for

peOple.“l7

A. C. Van Der Naald eXpresses the idea that in
"Community Bread Sastre is dramatizing another negative
aSpect of Revolution: the idealistic fanaticism of the

revolutionary David Harko."18

In the only criticism of
value Farris Anderson attempts to Show that the inherent
weakness of the play lies in the "diSprOportionate
emphasis on the individual and [the] deficient eXposition
of the social context."19

Anderson's point is correct if "context" is understood
in terms of its usual realistic presentation. The

addition Of scenes involving members of the revolutionary

government in action or Of scenes Of the larger society

 

15Tecglen, p. 73.

l6DeCoster, p. 127.

l7Pronko, "The Revolutionary Theatre of A. S.," p. 116.

18Van Der Naald, p. 113.

19Anderson, p. 87.

140

under this government might well have sufficed to fill out
this contextual requirement. In this sense the balance
develOped between OSCAR's inner (family) and outer

(societal) life in Pathetic Prologue provided clearer

 

results. But if the idea Of "context" in a more symbolic
and, in this case, psychological sense is accepted, the

social context of Community_Bread is not SO lacking in

 

eXposition as Anderson indicates. In terms of dramatic
metaphor DAVID'S family is a microcosmic representation
of the society existing under the revolutionary government
(DAVID, himself). Psychologically DAVID is a microcosm
of the societal struggle between the old family-bond order
and the new order Of the community-bond. In following the
Orestes myth Sastre is not only working with the central
situation Of matricide but also with the Aeschylean
family=society, individual=ruling order symbolism.
Through theatrical metaphor the action and context are
classically contained. The four major scenes occur in the
family living quarters. The outside world, or social
context is represented in the more traditional, realistic
fashion in the prologue and epilogue scenes. It is
otherwise "felt" to surround the family scenes on a
realistic level while it is represented by them
symbolically in those scenes. In this manner Sastre finds
the cleanest dramatic presentation Of the tragic dilemma.
This dilemma is similar to the one posed in Pathetic

PrOlOgue. In that work OSCAR, after his terrorist act,

141

was brought to an awareness of the conflict between the
human and the social. In an ironic twist his Spared
"victim" was able to bring him through the dialectical
struggle to a new concept of revolution, one which tended
towards a synthesis of the human and social conditions.

In Community Bread the crisis again grows out of the

 

human-social conflict. Again the family (blood) relation-
ship is used. But the tragic action gains greater depth
of meaning through the reflection of its mythical
archetype. Sastre has discovered in the Orestes' myth the
pattern of a dilemma which exists again for modern man.

In carrying out the purge Of the revolutionary
government, DAVID is in the role Of the mythical hero
(Orestes) whose task is the purification of the existing
order. The establishment Of a new order of justice
demands this. In him the revolutionary principles
(Apollo) come into conflict with the Old law Of the blood-
bond. This law is broken in the attempt to purge the
society Of corruption. After DAVID breaks the Old law he
is pursued by the Furies (represented by PAULA; MARTA can
be seen as a symbol of the Eumenides) to the point of
recognizing in himself the same human weakness that he had
condemned in his mother. In this moment a second purge
occurs involving pity and fear.

PAULA. You're mad! But that won't help! I'll drag
you out Of that refuge too! And someday you'll have
to think about your mother and you won't be able to
bear it.

DAVID. (Screaming.) Someday! NO! Now! I can't
stand it now! SO Shut up! Please don't say anymore!

142

Why did I ever let you talk to me? You've hurt me.

I'm not strong! Now I can see that! I've gone r13,nd

my strength! Everyone has put too much confidence in
me! They've all put their hOpe in me! But I won't
do. I still belong to your world! I stand here,
terrified! I can't stOp shaking! I want to stOp the
whole thing, I want to tear down the scaffold!
Comrades, I'm sorry; forgive me! GO forward . . . in

Spite of everything! Don't listen to me! Don't

listen to me! . . . but I'll shout it as loud as I can

(Almost howlingz) Have pity on me! (A tremendous

silence. The women look at him in horror.)20
DAVID'S discovery that the weakness of man must be met
with human compassion comes too late, and even as it is
made, the other half of him, the revolutionary dogma,
struggles against it. At the final moment, in a reversal
of the myth, the hero destroys himself.

The epilogue represents the dialectic Of the play by
concluding with Speeches from JACOBO FESSLER and MARTA.
FESSLER has been develOped previously through DAVID'S
remarks as the incorruptible Party leader. MARTA's story
and her relationship with DAVID is a minor plot which
relates ironically to the major situation. Before meeting
DAVID she had been a "ruined woman," a drunken prostitute,
an example Of the worst corruption of the society.

Through him she became a useful member of the society
again. DAVID'S success in this purification, which came
through relating human values and social principles,
stands in contrast to his failure in the major Situation.

In the end the "incorruptible" FESSLER attempts tO advance

society through fabrications which deny the truth Of the

 

20Sastre, O. C., p. 275.

143

human condition while MARTA eXpresseS a helpless awareness
of this condition by her compassion.
Sastre has managed, by various means, to bring the

human-social conflict into sharper focus in Community

 

‘nggg than in Pathetic Prologue. By bringing all the
major elements of action and context to realization in the
family relationship he achieves greater dramatic impact.
He adds another dimension by the mythical relationship.
Finally, in this work, Sastre finds in the problem Of
purification an effective and significant center point in
the conflict, Significant thematically as it relates in
one direction mythically and in another psychologically
and sociologically, and effective dramatically as it
relates to the concept of katharsis. In one sense the
play is an analysis of Sastre's concept of katharsis as an
individual and social purification. The problem for DAVID
is the purification of the society (political purge). But
this presupposes a purification of the individual. For
DAVID, however, this has not occurred. He acts purely on
the basis of his revolutionary principles. His action
ironically, on the other level, turns into corruption, a
destruction Of the blood-bond. "I have defiled the taboo;

21 When the

I have broken it into a thousand pieces."
individual purification takes place, the experience for-

DAVID is one of finally allowing himself to release the

 

2J'Sastre, O. C., p. 275.

144

human feelings suppressed by the revolutionary dicta. He
discovers himself through fear and pity, and in recognizing
himself, reCOgnizes, for the first time, the whole meaning
of his earlier act of social purification.

JUANA, the Mother, functions dramatically and
archetypically in the blood relationship and symbolically
as the society, corrupt in its pathetic and fearful human

n22

existence. YUDD says "the corruption is in us, but

DAVID fails to graSp the truth Of the human condition in
his statement. MARTA, also part of this society, has
reached a higher level Of understanding, less fearful and
pathetic, ironically through a purification that DAVID has
helped achieve before being dehumanized by the revolution
(FESSLER). PAULA is the negative force of the old order,
which works against the possibility Of future good through
the revolution. She represents the nihilistic side of
man.
PAULA. Everything will be the same, and the sacrifice
will have been for nothing, and the peOple will still
be hungry while a few stuff themselves on the
community bread, and you'll demand that the rest make
them pay in blood, and the blood and hunger will gO on
for years just like it is now.
DAVID. It's possible that everything might happen as
you say, aunt Paula. But I realize that the worst in
man is Speaking through your mouth, everything that I
hate in man! And I can't answer you!

Mythically she is the embodiment Of the Furies which

pursue the hero after he breaks the blood-bond. The

 

22Sastre, O. C., p. 253.

23Sastre, o. C., p. 274.

145

ending of the myth is changed, and the hero is driven to
suicide. The Optimism of Aeschylus which grew out Of his
own period cannot be shared by Sastre in the light Of
conditions in present day society. The conflict is a long
way from its resolution. FESSLER”S conclusion of social
action which denies the human condition is as unacceptable
as MARTA's final eXpression of helpless compassion.24
Sastre's next drama to deal with an aSpect of
revolution breaks free from the moral conflict, and its

lack of resolution becomes purely a historical matter.

Red Earth differs from the two earlier works in depicting

 

an individual (and a segment Of society: the miners) who
acts against society without suffering any major crisis of
conscience. The revolutionary action is limited (a
strike) and defeated, but ultimately recognized in a
historical perSpective. History becomes a significant
factor for the first time in Sastre's theatre Of
revolution.

The play was written in October and November of 1954.
The second scene of the epilogue was revised in 1956. It
has not been produced. Sastre discouraged any attempt to
relate the action of the play to a Specific historical

incident or geographical place. It is historically

 

24Sastre would see Brecht's Optimism, as expressed in
'the revolutionary justice Of Azdak, as unrealistic and
irrelevant to the real problems of a pre-revolutionary
society. For this reason he focuses on the conflict which
is destined to precede the establishment Of any new
.AreOpagus.

146

important in reflecting all real incidents of its kind

anywhere, at anytime. "Thus, Red Earth, which is not a

 

geographical description, nor a historical account, nor
even a story set into an exact historical context, is a
drama that trys to give an account of reality."25

Red Earth like Community Bread, also develOps meaning

 

out Of its relationship with theatrical myth. In this

work Sastre draws on the Spanish myth Of Fuenteovejgna

 

(Sheep Well). The historical incident Of the uprising Of
the townspeOple Of Fuenteovejuna in 1476 was dramatized by
LOpe de Vega in 1619. LOpe's play depicts the uprising as
a result of a world thrown out Of order (injustice) by its
leaders, the princes. The peasants' unity is dramatically
demonstrated in the torture scene when each man persists
in proclaiming Fuenteovejuna as the only party guilty of
the uprising. Sastre attempts to rework the myth in terms
Of modern society.

Red Earth is in five scenes and a two scene epilogue.
The stage, as suggested by the author, is divided into
areas, one representing a part of PEDRO'S house, interior
and exterior, one a part Of the town tavern, and one a
prison cell and part of the police station.

In the first scene PABLO, a young man, arrives at the
house Of PEDRO, a retiring miner, having been invited by

the latter for the traditional farewell celebration given

 

255astre, o. C., p. 347.

147

by the retiring man for his friends before vacating his
company-owned house. INES, the daughter, is awaiting the
return of her father from the company Office and of her
mother from the market. She invites PABLO in, and the two
engage in some general talk concerning the policy of
having the miners vacate their homes and concerning her
family's uncertain future. PABLO tells INES that he only
plans to work at the mines for a Short while until he can
find some better position. INES sees his aSpirations as
only the hOpeless repetition of a scene always played by
the young men beginning in the mines. She has been made
aware of the inevitable cycle of life that the mines
represent, Of the inescapable situation Of generations who
begin with hOpe and end in resignation. "Life has taught

"26 PABLO is disturbed by this general

me not to hOpe.
resignation. He asks if the miners have ever attempted to
act against the company's policies. INES tells him of an
attempted strike years ago which failed, and Of her
father's leading role in it. Eventually PABLO confesses
to INES the real reason for his being at the mines: he
has killed a man in a brawl, and the courts have exiled
him to the mines. As PABLO finishes his story, PEDRO
arrives home followed soon after by his wife, TERESA. A

few moments later the miners begin to arrive for the

party. Just as the men begin to enjoy themselves, PEDRO

 

26Sastre, O. C., p. 353.

148

stands to make the traditional toast. In his effort to
find something happy and Special to say he inadvertently
begins to review his life and leads himself into a
discovery Of its meaninglessness. "SO many years Of
suffering . . . of little moments Of happiness and . . .
(looking at TERESA) Of love . . . haven't left a trace on
earth . . . we poor, we live and die and disappear."27

In the next scene PABLO is in the tavern trying to
drink himself into forgetting the pathetic Situation at
the farewell party. Some of the miners, in a friendly
way, try to suggest that he not drink SO much. He begins
to see in them a kind Of tranquility and resignation which
eventually disturbs him enough that he begins to insult
them. Through embarrassing them he finally rouses them to
accepting a plan to block the eviction Of PEDRO'S family
the next day.

Before dawn the next morning the men are found
standing about in front Of PEDRO'S house. PABLO inside
explains the plan to PEDRO and tells the family to remain
in the house. There is a nervous excitement among the men
caused by the uncertainty Of their action's outcome. They
discuss the probability-Of police intervention and what
their reSponse should be to it. One Of the men sings a
mining song. Another, slightly drunk, does a grotesque

little dance. The work whistle has blown, and some

 

27Sastre, O. C., p. 361.

149

reaction to their absence becomes imminent. Finally an
OFFICIAL appears and asks them to return to the mine
eXplaining that the incident will be forgotten if they
comply. They send him back with their rejection and
inform him of their simple demand to be allowed to live
out their lives in their homes after retirement. Within
minutes the police arrive. The SERGEANT attempts to enter
the house but is stOpped by PABLO. The OLD MAN talks to
him, reminding him Of their friendship, Of the times they
have played cards together. But the SERGEANT refuses to
understand the situation on the human level and insists on
following his orders. He trys to force his way into the
house. He and PABLO exchange blows. One of the police
fires at PABLO but misses him, and the fighting stOps.
Suddenly a WOMAN appears with her dead and bleeding infant
in her arms. Like a priestess she holds up the dead child
and with a trembling and strangely exalted voice invokes
the men to revolution. "Now you will set the Englishmen's
house on fire and kill all Of them. What are you waiting
for? IS this a town of men? I want to see a bonfire
tonight . . . dead men hanging from the trees . . . you
will all go to do it. . . . They have killed my child. . .
Let the blood flow!"28
Scattered shooting can be heard and the distant Sky

is aglow with flames in the next scene as TERESA bandages

 

28Sastre, O. C., p. 383.

150

PEDRO'S head. PABLO comes into the house and reports the
burning of the owner's mansion and the deaths of several
of the officials. More police have been summoned, and it_
is only a matter of time before the uprising will be put
down. PABLO, realizing that the police will come first to
PEDRO'S house tries to get the family prepared to go
elsewhere to hide. Before they can get out, however, the
SERGEANT arrives. Just before they are taken Off PABLO
and INEE declare their love for each other.

The fifth scene is the torture-interrogation scene.
Several miners are seen talking as they await the
interrOgation. They talk about their ability to withstand
the torture. The interrogation room becomes illuminated
as one Of the miners is taken into it. He is beaten and
kicked and finally dragged into another room where a
further beating can be heard. The only confession is
that, "everyone did it." The OLD MAN is brought in. He
also refuses to single out individuals. They beat him to
unconsciousness and drag him out. Another MINER is
brought in. "It was all of us." The CAPTAIN finally
reSponds by sending an order to gun down the whole town.

A POLICEMAN enters and informs the CAPTAIN of the OLD
MAN'S death. The scene ends with firing heard in the
distance as the SERGEANT, holding back his tears, talks Of
the time he Spent Christmas eve with the OLD MAN and Of a
holiday cup of coffee the OLD MAN brewed for him. Music

comes in as the curtain falls. .

151

The first scene of the epilogue takes place on the
tenth wedding anniversary Of PABLO and INES. PABLO is
caught in the cycle Of the mine. They talk of the
uprising and of the massacre of the townspeOple including
PEDRO and TERESA. They mention the birth Of their
daughter TERESA.

The second scene of the epilOgue takes place after
another long passing Of time. It is the day of PABLO'S
retirement and Of his farewell party before vacating the
house. Another YOUNG MAN appears. TERESA invites him in.
The two of them begin to discuss the situation, and he
begins to protest it. When PABLO arrives the YOUNG MAN
tells him of his plan to prevent the eviction. He talks
of comrades who will come to help and tells PABLO that the
other uprising has left its imprint and has had meaning.
The play ends with PABLO declaring: "Tomorrow we do not
leave."29

In Drama and Society Sastre discusses the possibility’

3° The third

of recognizing differing degrees Of tragedy.
degree tragedy would be that which, because Of its
ultimate metaphysical predicament, ends with no hOpe. The
second degree tragedy is that which, within the SCOpe of
its own story, is tragic but Offers hOpe of possible,

eventual rectification Of conditions represented.

 

29Sastre, o. C., p. 411.

30Sastre, D. S., p. 37.

152

Red Earth is a distinct example of this second degree.

 

The moral conflicts which existed in Pathetic Prolggue and

 

Community Bread are almost entirely absent in this work.
The remnants of them exist only as occasional moments Of
doubt in the minds Of the characters. The situation
presented in the work is a closed one for the miners
depicted, but the circle of revolutionary action is Shown
to be expanding and hOpe exists for an eventual triumph.
That Sastre wishes to present the action clearly

without the complication of moral (human-social) conflict
is predicted by the story that PABLO relates to INES in

their first meeting. He tells how he killed a man who

"had abandoned a woman . . . when she most needed him."31
Without any previous involvement or relationship PABLO
acted as a necessary agent of elemental justice. "I'm not

a moralist,"32

he replies when INES asks him if he wanted
to convince the man he was wrong. "I forced my way into
the situation" (literally "I forced my way into the story
[history]), which is precisely what he does in the mine
Situation, without himself fully recognizing the
historical Significance until the YOUNG MAN eXplainS it to
him in the epilogue. PABLO enters the miner's world with
a view from the outside forcing a recognition Of the

injustice and indignity being suffered and forcing an act

of rebellion in response.

 

31Sastre, O. C., p. 358.

.328astre, O. C., p. 358.

153

The real uprising, however, does not come until the
child is killed, and the mother calls for action. At this
point Sastre ties the modern story into the myth Of
Fuenteovejuna. It was the outrage and courage Of the
women which brought the men of Fuenteovejuna to act, and
it is the invocation Of the mother with her dead child
which begins the miner's revolution.

It is precisely by relating his drama to the myth of
Fuenteovejuna that Sastre is able to underline the tragedy
of the modern situation. In LOpe'S tragicomedy (comedia)
the peasant's determined unity leads them through the
interrogation ("Fuenteovejuna did it") to the ultimate
justice indicative of the restoration Of a universal
order. In Sastre's tragedy the myth is twisted at the
critical moment. "We all did it together" brings on a
massacre of the townSpeOple, a distortion Of justice
indicative Of an unjust social system. The contrast
reinforces the truth Of the tragic predicament. But the
tragedy does not achieve its final meaning until it is
interpreted in terms Of the epilogue.

Leonard Pronko finds the ending too weak to rescue
the play from deSpair. "But how much more deSpairing is
this play than Fuenteovejuna [in this sense the play
certainly reflects its society and times as LOpe'S work
did his], in Spite Of the solidarity of the workers. In
LOpe'S drama the villagers are victorious, while in Egg

Earth nothing seems to have been accomplished, and there

154

is not even a moral victory until the arrival of the young
man in the epilOgue--and he is not entirely convincing."33
The scene, however, is much more hOpeful if seen in
relation to the whole work. The YOUNG MAN is not simply a
repetition Of PEDRO and PABLO. The circle Of significance
of revolutionary activity has grown larger with each
uprising. In PEDRO'S day the Spirit did not even carry
the men to burn the mine-owner's house. PABLO'S uprising
brought death hnd destruction. The YOUNG MAN talks in
terms of help from outside, Of sympathetic support from
other workers and from students. What is provided for the
first time is a sense of historical perSpective. Through
a sense of history PABLO is brought to a fuller recogni-
tion of the uprising which he led. The doubt eXpressed in
the first scene of the epilogue is overcome, and his
revolution is given meaning in its historical relationship
with that before it and with that to come. Sastre has
moved the play from mythical to historical significance.
" . . . now everything is different . . . if the blood of
the miners were to flow again, it would be noticed
throughout the country . . . and if this happens . . .
thousands of workers whom you don't even know will leave
the factories . . . and the word will reach the farms and
the farmers will look to us, and the students will take to

the streets to demand justice, face to face with the

 

33Pronko, "The Revolutionary Theatre of Alfonso
saStreI" p. 1190

155

police . . . and a lot of peOple who are comfortable and
satisfied today will turn white with fear."34 This social
and historical significance is a great change from the
total insignificance Of the miner eXpressed by PEDRO in
this party toast: "we poor, we live and die and
disappear."35
In the first two dramas of revolution Sastre could be
seen to Open his plays to the Spectator through a
dialectical process which wanted resolving and which, in
the confines Of the play, did not achieve resolution. .Rgg
Eggth is less complex. Sastre has chosen to minimize what
he terms the metaphysical substance of this tragedy in his
effort to make a clear and strong case for historical
perSpective and social action. The revolutionary action
is not brought into serious conflict with human values.
The possibility of devastating results to individuals and
family are recognized and accepted. The Opposition is not
seen to be human. In fact the Opposition is not seen at

all. Only other Slaves of the mine owners are in evidence

to represent them. The mine OFFICIAL, the SERGEANT, and

 

34Sastre, O. C., p. 408.

35Sastre, O. C., p. 361. Farris Anderson points to
this Speech and comments: "An Oppressive economic system
prevents man's self-realization as a human being; it
reduces him tO insignificance among the creatures and
things of the world. The existential and social evils of
such a system are inseparable." p. 111. In all four Of
these revolutionary plays Sastre insists on this
inseparability Of the existential and social. This is
fundamental to his concept Of tragedy.

156

the CAPTAIN are tragic victims dominated by the same power
as the miners. The uprising is launched against an
abstract power. The question is never whether it is right
or wrong to take this revolutionary action but whether it
will succeed or fail. Its failure and the resultant
destruction of the town and slaughter of the townSpeOple
is the tragedy Of the play. The tragic sense is most
compellingly presented in the SERGEANT'S last Speech,
"(The firing has begun in the distance. EThe massacre of
the townSpeOpleZI) SERGEANT. (He seems to be wiping away
a tear.) [3n reSponse to the CAPTAIN'S question of what's
wrong] Nothing, nothing. It's just . . . the old man,
he . . . Well, he was a friend Of mine . . . like last
year we Spent Christmas eve at his house and the next
morning . . . this is really stupid . . . the next morning
he made me a cup of coffee . . . "36 The abstract power,
which dominates these lives destroys human beings,
destroys human relationships, and does not even permit a
true expression Of human emotion. This sense is
reinforced in the first Scene of the epilogue with PABLO
and INES apparently.trapped in the same dehumanizing cycle
and smothered by doubt. But a point Of true conflict is
not reached and one is not left with the absence Of
resolution. The second scene of the epilogue breaks

through the tragic situation, and, by introducing a sense

 

36Sastre, O. C., p. 398.

157

of historical perSpective, Opens the play to the
Spectators. In a more direct way than before Sastre
brings the possibility Of solution to the real, social
level. The play in its final moments escapes the agony of
man's existence and ends with a call to social action
(praxis).

The focus on group unity and action and the attempt
tO depict change within patterns, historically, in Red
EEEEE resulted in a reduced psychological develOpment of
the characters and in a free (LOpe de Vega influenced?)
non-Aristotelian formal develOpment allowing for temporal
and Spatial movement. Entirely the Opposite situation
exists in the last play Of this revolutionary group: '13
the Net.

In the five years separating the two plays Sastre
experimented both formally and thematically. Aggg
Kleiber, The Blood of God, and The Raven fall into this
period as do A Death in the Neighborhood, a semi-
allegorical revolutionary work, Sad are the Eyes Of
William Tell, a myth-history, and Nocturnal Assault, an
epic eXperiment. In 1959, in addition to writing In the

Net, he also wrote Death Thrust. (Nocturnal Assault was

 

also written in 1959 before In the Net.) Both works are
strong in their psychologically realistic character

develOpment. In the Net is also an eXperiment in pure

 

Aristotelian drama for Sastre.

158

The play was produced in 1961 under the auspices of
the G. T. R. (GrUpO de Teatro Realista: a group which
Sastre helped to found with José Maria de Quinto in
1960.)37 In the program Sastre included three documents
which relate to the work formally and thematically. In
the first he says that, "In the Net is a drama about the
human condition of the 'clandestine man” . . . we are
before a piece which we could call Aristotelian in a
double sense: its conformity with the thesis Of the three
unities and the kind Of dramatic elements put into play:
'reversal,‘ 'recognition,' and 'suffering,‘ which are
precisely the three elements which Aristotle prOposeS as

"38

parts Of the tragic myth [plot] . The second document

is a vivid description Of a torture eXperience quoted from

La question by Henri Alleg. The third is a citing of

 

definitions of reversal, recognition, and suffering from
Aristotle’s Poetics.

The scene of the play is a vacant apartment several
stories up in a partially occupied building in Algiers. A
group of Algerian nationalists are hiding out in an
aattempt to escape a police dragnet. The heat is intense.
'rhe group consists Of PABLO, a young man who has

.apparently worked as a clandestine agent for only a week

 

37See Alfonso Sastre (Madrid: Taurus, 1963), p. 115-
L123 fOr the documents written by Sastre and de Quinto for
the G. T. R.

38Sastre, O. C., p. 796.

159

but who fought for the nationalist army previously, CELIA,
a young woman who was PABLO’s contact to help him into
hiding during the dragnet, and TAYEB, an arab whose long
period of service has won him and his wife, AIESCHA, an
upcoming leave from duty. The doorman of the building,
HANAFI, is also part of the organization and serves to
warn the group with doorbell signals of impending danger.
They have been in the apartment for three days. PABLO is
unknown to the others, and all conversation between them
is restricted by the underlying suSpicion that he could be
a police agent.

As the action begins PABLO is seen standing and
looking out a window. It is nightfall. CELIA enters and
finds out from him that he is thinking of going outside to
escape momentarily the growing sense of being trapped.

She advises him against it. Their cautious conversation
reveals the fact that for three days they have talked very
little with each other. PABLO finds out that the building
is partly occupied and that later that night the porter
will be bringing some neWSpapers from which they will
attempt to decipher some information concerning the police
roundup. He talks of his army eXperience and of how it
differed from the present confinement. They discuss how
each received his information regarding his contact.. For
a moment they turn on the radio to try to get some news
from the nationalist radio. CELIA finally eXpresses her

fears concerning him and the possibility that he might be

160

a police agent who intercepted the contact information,
He attempts to reassure her, but his interest in getting
information concerning the Operation and its leaders
continue to make her suSpicious. The need to communicate
eventually brings her to tell him of her anxiety over
having left a friend in her apartment before the dragnet
began and of being unable to warn the friend because of
precautionary measures. This personal note brings them to
the point of enjoying the small human pleasure of
listening to a few minutes of music on the radio. Their
imprudence, however, immediately brings TAYEB in from
another room where he has been with his wife who is under
a great deal of psychological strain. He points out the
danger of being heard by one of the tenants below. CELIA
leaves to look in on AIESCHA, and PABLO immediately takes
advantage of her absence by pressing TAYEB hard for
information regarding the group and the organizational
leadership. CELIA is apparently the smaller group leader
but TAYEB claims to know nothing of the higher command.
CELIA returns with AIESCHA and shortly after HANAFI
arrives with the neWSpapers. TAYEB asks CELIA for the
papers and she refuses him. Because of this he jumps to a
conclusion that something seriously wrong is happening;
his anxiety breaks forth as he wildly accuses PABLO of
being the police. PABLO strikes him in the face to quiet
him. The silent tension following is suddenly broken by

the sound of the elevator rising. It continues past the

161

lower floors to their vacant floor and stOps. A key is
heard at the door. It Opens and a man enters. CELIA
immediately recognizes him and runs to him embracing him
while the others look on.

The second act begins a short time later, and the man
is identified as LEO, the friend whom CELIA had been
unable to warn. He sits at a table trying to eat
something while CELIA questions him. PABLO is reading the
neWSpapers. TAYEB and AIESCHA have retired. LEO claims
that the police have let him go and that he has
successfully avoided them in coming to the hideout. CELIA
accuses him of poor judgement in coming. He reSponds by
reminding her of her reSponsibility for his capture. Her
harsh questioning and accusations finally cause LEO to
break down. He admits to using the elevator because he
was unable to walk. He collapses in an effort to reach
the bed, and when they take off his shirt they realize for
the first time the extent of his injuries from the
torture. When LEO comes to, PABLO begins to question him
to find out how much and what he has told the police.
CELIA is uncertain still of his motives and warns LEO
against answering. But PABLO finally breaks him down, and
he vividly relives his agony of the torture and confesses
revealing the names of some members of the organization
and the location of the party press, which ironically the
police already knew. After this ordeal CELIA takes LEO to

another room to rest. PABLO is left alone. He lights a

162

lamp and goes outside on to the terrace and appears to
signal with the light. TAYEB comes in and sees him.
PABLO tells him to not mention the incident to anyone.

The third act is very early morning before first
light. PABLO is stretched out on the bed. CELIA comes
into the room, thinking PABLO asleep, and goes to the
window. PABLO startles her by Speaking. They talk of
LEO, of how he was broken by the police, of his being a
writer rather than a fighter. They Speculate on the
possibility of having escaped the dragnet. Then PABLO,
eXpressing a strange need to be admired by CELIA, takes
off his shirt and reveals a huge scar running across his
chest. He tells her of having been tortured with a
burning iron and of his having remained silent. Their
complicated and deSperate state brings them together for a
moment in a kind of pathetic and unsatisfying love
eXpression. The silence following is broken as LEO enters
the room, greatly agitated. He has seen a car stOp below.
Then the bell rings: a signal for someone to go down.
PABLO insists on going. After he leaves TAYEB comes in
and tells the other two about PABLO's signal with the
lamp. CELIA and LEO convince TAYEB that this must have
been done to warn another group in the area. When he goes
out, however, it becomes obvious that they have both
decided that PABLO must be a police agent. They are
uncertain of what to do; neither of them has involved

himself before in direct killing. LEO decides, however,

163

to kill PABLO when he returns. He fixes a silencer to his
pistol. They wait. PABLO returns and tells them that the
car is for TAYEB and AIESCHA. He has their safe-conduct
papers with him. CELIA goes out to get them. PABLO
approaches LEO and asks to see how his wounds are healing.
In a sudden movement he disarms LEO and immediately
regains his composure to face the other three as they come
in. TAYEB and AIESCHA are sent down. CELIA turns to
PABLO and asks if he will let them go. He says he does
not understand. When she accuses him of being an agent of
the police, he begins to Speak with a new authority.
Taking another envelOpe from his pocket he eXplains that
LEO is also to be sent out of the country for a rest.

They both realize that he is something more in the
organization than they had thought. He eXplains that he
had indeed had to signal another group during the night.
LEO eXpresses disturbance over his new orders. He sees in
them implications that he is failing to do a good job.
PABLO tries to reassure him that this is not the case, but
LEO, at the point of nervous exhaustion, begins to tear
the papers to pieces. Suddenly the alarm signal sounds.
PABLO attempts to quiet LEO, but LEO seizes the pistol and
runs out on to the terrace and is immediately cut down by
machine gun fire. He stumbles into the room and dies. In
the next moment the POLICE break in. PABLO and CELIA are
handcuffed together and taken out. The POLICE check the

rooms and go out leaving one man behind. He looks around,

164

yawns, walks out to the terrace and begins to smoke a
cigarette. A silence follows. Then the elevator is heard
coming up. It stOps. The door is Opened and HANAFI
enters. He is looking for LEO. He sees the body on the
floor. He crosses to it, gets down on his knees and takes
LEO's hand in his. "(He looks at us,) [and says]
Murderers . . . (The curtain comes down and so the work
)"39

ends in hOpe and anguish.

Sastre's indication that In the Net exists as an

 

eXperiment in Aristotelian drama makes it imperative to
consider it as tragedy and to discern and study the
functional elements of reversal, recognition and suffering
(pathos). The situation of the "clandestine man," as an
aSpect of modern society in revolution, provides the
almost perfect documentary case of man's tragic condition
as understood by Sastre, and provides it in a manner
psychologically relating to the Aristotelian elements.

A dialectical tension develOps necessarily out of the
situation: the need for confidence (and eventually
compassion) is in conflict with the need for suSpicion.
The necessity for human relationship is constantly coming
into conflict with the requirements of the social,
political relationship. The situation of the play is one
of a continuous and deliberate-effort towards an ‘

Aristotelian recognition which advances by means of the

 

39Sastre, o. C., p. 862.

lt-

ll' I
I I'll 1“ '11 1|]

165

dialectic described. The major develOpment is that
involving PABLO and his relationship with the others.
Because he is unknown and because of the situation, the
dialogue in which he participates is highly complex in
nature: insinuating, suggesting, probing, testing, always
playing at the edges of truth and fact.

PABLO. (Getting out his cigarettes.) Cigarette?
CELIA. No, thank you. (He lights up. She watches
him.) I would like to ask you who you are. (He
starts to tell her. She stOps him with a gesture.)
But I never will. You would probably tell me.

PABLO. Why not?

CELIA. (Watching him.) A person would think you
never worked in the organization.

PABLO. Why?

CELIA. You don't know the rules.

PABLO. (Smiles ingenuously.) That's the truth.
CELIA. The less we know about each other the better.
Are you capable of understanding that?

PABLO. I think so. But . . . (He stOps.)

CELIA. Say it.

PABLO. That seems . . . horrible.

CELIA. No one has said it isn't.

PABLO. I think we are denied too many things.

CELIA. Almost everything . . . now.

PABLO. And until when?

CELIA. Until . . . that happy day. That day we will
all be able to look each other in the eyes.

PABLO. Fortunately, I believe in that day.

CELIA. We all believe in it. Or try to.

PABLO. It's going to be sooner than you think,
believe me. I have reasons for telling you . . .
CELIA. (Interrupting him.) Let it be.

PABLO. (Smiling.) Are you afraid I'll talk too much.
CELIA. Very.

PABLO. Afraid, of what?

CELIA. They've never . . . let's say they've never
hurt me. I'm not sure how much I could stand.

PABLO. I haven't had that eXperience either. But I
think I could take quite a bit.

CELIA. You never know. Others, as strong as you,
have said that, and then given in almost at once.
LPABLO. This talk is getting kind of serious, don't
you think?

CELIA. (Smiling.) It always happens. I'm sorry.
(PABLO is moving around restlessly. She watches him.)
I would like a cigarette now, please. (He stOps.
Goes over and sits beside her. Gives her a cigarette

166

and lights it.) Thank you.

PABLO. You are . . . a very pretty woman. Can you

talk like that in the organization?

CELIA. You can . . . but it's not necessary. Thank
you. (She gets up rather brusquely and goes to the

window.40

 

(PABLO crosses tO the door. He listens, as if fearing
that CELIA might return. Reassured he goes over tO
TAYEB, who, somewhat excited, asks.) Is something
happening?
PABLO. No. Nothing. (Now, he asks quickly and
incisively.) Has it been some time since you came
into the organization?
TAYEB. I shouldn't tell you.
PABLO. I'm a friend. What did Celia tell you?
TAYEB. That you're a friend, yes.
PABLO. Then tell me. Just to talk about something.
TAYEB. Five years . . . a little longer.
PABLO. What group are you with?
TAYEB. Twenty three.
PABLO. How many are in it?
TAYEB. I think . . . about fifteen.
PABLO. Arabs?
TAYEB. (Nods.) Except one. (Smiles.) Not counting
me. I'm one too . . . partly.
PABLO. (Also smiles.) Do you know all of them?
TAYEB. Not personally. ‘
PABLO. How many do you know personally?
TAYEB. About five or six.
PABLO. Try to remember. How many?
TAYEB. Yes . . . more, Of course. But not all.
PABLO. The one in charge? . . . you know, the one who
carries the weight in the organization?
TAYEB. NO, I've never seen him.
PABLO. Who? Who do you mean? The head of the group?
TAYEB. No. Yes, I know him. I mean the head
of.. . . let's say, of the Fifth Column. The High
Command.
PABLO. Right. (Looks at him hard.) You don't know
his name, nothing about‘him.
TAYEB. No, I don't know him. That's right.
PABLO. (Hard.) We'll see about that.
TAYEB. I'm telling you the truth.

PABLO. (Coldly.) Yes, of course. But we'll see.
There are other methods.
TAYEB. Why are you talking to me like this?

PABLO. (Smiling.) Like what?

 

4°5astre, o. C., pp. 802-804.

167

TAYEB. Like . . . Like the police. (PABLO suddenly
grabs him by the lapels. His face is set.)

PABLO. Don't ever say that . . . or I'll kill you!
To anyone! Don't ever say that again!

TAYEB. I didn't mean to offend you. (A silence.
PABLO appears to have calmed down. He smiles again.)
PABLO. I've almost forgotten it already. Cigarette?

41

The contrary elements of hOpe and anguish that Sastre
ends the play with exist throughout the work as part of
the already mentioned dialectic of human and social needs.
The suffering of the play can be seen as that which the
various individuals eXperience through their lack of
knowledge of each other or through the dehumanizing
demands of the situation. Thus CELIA suffers in being
uncertain of PABLO's identity and in being subsequently
unable to relate to him in a truly human way which is
ultimately in contradiction with the whole purpose of the
revolution. She likewise suffers in having to press LEO
towards an admission of his weakness and poor judgement.
TAYEB, already suffering shame from the implications of
his retirement, eXperiences fear and uncertainty as a
result of PABLO's actions. LEO's suffering is most
vividly eXpressed. He is required not only to relive the
physical torture but also to suffer shame and anguish in
having to acknowledge his weakness. His quasi-suicidal
death provides the climactic Aristotelian scene of

suffering.

 

4lSastre, o. C., pp. 8l9-821.

168

PABLO's situation is unique. He is known no more to
the audience than he is to the other characters. His acts
have to be interpreted by the Spectator in the light of
partial knowledge. His anguish, therefore, can only be
understood retrOSpectively from the last moments of the
play. Only then can it be seen that his suffering lay in
his superior knowledge of the situation and in his not
being able to reveal himself earlier, in his not being
able to bring the security and comfort of knowledge and
human relationship to the others earlier, in his having to
force LEO to relive his agony and eXperience the greater
agony in a confession of weakness, in his having
ultimately to destroy LEO with the orders for rest and
recuperation, and in his knowledge of the situation's
probable outcome. These constitute anguish in the tragedy
Of the clandestine man.

But hOpe also exists. The arrival of the police
brings about the dramatic climax of the work. LEO's death
is the apex in the develOpment of suffering (anguish for
CELIA and PABLO). Recognition, in the Aristotelian sense,
occurs as well at this moment, after the long dialectic
leading to it. PABLO is revealed or reveals himself to
CELIA, having determined her to be strong enough to be
worthy Of this knowledge. The moment itself is
realistically understated, and naturally derives from all
the evidence preceding it. LEO has been killed. The

POLICE have broken into the room; one of them has brutally

169

thrown CELIA away from LEO's body. She has run to PABLO,
and he holds her. They are cuffed together. As the

POLICE momentarily leave to check the adjoining rooms, he

speaks to her: "Be strong now. This is your moment.
(She looks at him through her tears.) I . . . am only a
soldier . . . but . . . You understand? (She realizes

what he has said, and overcoming everything firmly nods
agreement. They take each other in an embrace made
pathetic by the handcuffs. The soldiers come back out of
the other rooms.)"42

PABLO has revealed himself to be the organization's
leader. In sudden retrospect his actions are seen as a
testing of his organization. CELIA has been found to be
strong. ThrOugh this recognition of identity and strength
the dialectic between human and social-revolutionary
demands begins to move towards a resolution, out of
anguish towards hOpe; the human relationship now works to
strengthen revolutionary determination.

This reversal, however, exists more in a potential
state than in an actual state as the play draws to its
end. In PABLO's and CELIA's final recognition and
acceptance of each other and of their situation there is
hOpe. But mixed with hOpe there is also fear and pity

(anguish) which inevitably arises out of the condition of

impending suffering, already known through LEO's

 

42Sastre, O. C., p. 861.

170

eXperience. This fear and pity for the Spectator becomes
most effective at the moment of recognition when the most
human qualities of the characters are revealed in their
interdependence.

Sastre has managed to reach this moment of maximum
involvement, this katharsis, in accordance with his own
and Aristotelian principles of tragedy. The characters
and thought can be seen develOping naturally out of the
Situation. The characters exist between anguish and hOpe
in the dialectical progress toward recognition of each
other and of themselves. TAYEB'S and AIESCHA'S discovery
leads (forces) them out of the social conflict and into a
quieter inner world of anguish and hOpe. LEO's discovery
leads to suffering and death. PABLO and CELIA_ultimately
discover hOpe and the possibility of reSolving the human-
social dialectic. The thought of the work comes through
the characters' eXpreSSions and actions in the dialectical
movement towards discovery. The unjust political
establishment of the present is that domineering force
which brings about their condition of suffering, both the
anguish resulting from the Situation of being clandestine,
and the physical suffering in being tortured. The
dehumanization which occurs is part of the tragedy of
revolution, but hOpefully the tragedy of revolution will
lead to the destruction of the unjust social order which

is a more insidious tragedy. This hOpe, and the truth of

171

this hOpe, comes through the reCOgnition scene with PABIO
and CELIA.

Following on the power of this scene of reCOgnition
and reversal, this Aristotelian moment of katharsis,
Sastre uneXpectedly breaks through the perfect, closed
form of the play and places the burden of guilt on the
Spectator. The audience is abruptly brought to a
recognition itself: it is reSponSible for the existence
Of the kind of unjust social orders represented in the
play. In having HANAFI direct his accusation of
"murderers" directly at "us" Sastre again throws the
burden Of a final resolution on the individual and society.

In the four plays discussed in this section Sastre
has attempted to deal directly with the tragedy of
revolution, a tragedy necessitated by the greater tragedy
of an existing unjust social order. The protagonists are
caught in a conflict between human relationships and the
demands of revolutionary activity. In Pathetic Prologue
and Community Bread the very basic questions are dealt
with: the values Of human life and love and blood-bond in
conflict with the necessity for revolutionary activity.
Although entirely satisfactory resolutions are not
achieved, one clear recognition is reached: that any
successful resolution cannot ignore the human aSpect of
man. OSCAR (Pathetic Prologue) can ultimately justify

I

revolutionary activity only when he can relate it to very

172

human eXperience. DAVID (Community Bread) fails to
recognize the human in himself when he acts, and it
returns to destroy him. In In the Net the question is
Similar but perhaps less obvious. In a more subtle way
the protagonists are faced with having to insure security
by dehumanizing relationships and by denying meaning to
human existence, or risk it by confiding in one another.

Only in Red Earth does Sastre relegate this problem to

 

secondary importance in his effort to achieve a social
work with historical perSpective.

All four plays are dramatic with no use of narrative.
The basic Aristotelian elements can be found in all four.
And, with differing degrees Of-Success, they all are
examples of the Sastre-Aristotle Situation—plot (myth)
centered.theatre.-.The elements Of reversal, recognition
and suffering are handled differently in each, but they
are always present.

Pathetic Prologue is episodic beyond Aristotelian
standards; it progresses through a number of scenes of
suffering and recognition climaxing in the surprise
:reundon of OSCAR and JULIO. A major discovery occurs with
“this scene and a reversal in OSCAR's direction and under-
standing Of revolution. The play never leads to the level
(If the Spectator's reality in the manner later described
by Sastre in Drama and Society and used by him in most of
his plays. (The fact that it was part of a series of

plays which was never finished may eXplain this.)

173

In Community Bread Sastre managed to create a tightly
contained Aristotelian drama sandwiched in a prologue and
epilogue both Of which tend to Open the work to the
audience. Using symbolism and a built-in myth
relationship, he brings about a powerful scene of
suffering and recognition with a depth of archetypical
impact. The play is the most negative of the four in its
conclusion and forces the dialectical struggle beyond its
aesthetic boundaries by its lack of resolution.

Red Earth is more hOpeful. In this play there is not

 

the overwhelming sense of Solitude felt by any one
individual as there is in SO many of Sastre's works.
Although the miners are shown to be caught in a tragic
condition, they at least are able to achieve compatible
human and social relationships within their own small
community. They are in fact united by tragedy in both the
human and social sense. More importantly in this play a
real hOpe for social progress and improvement is
exhibited;-through history a whole peOple begins to bring
meaning to its life and actions. Suffering is depicted in
union and overcome by the strength of union. Recognition
is in the gaining of historical perSpective, and through
this the reSponSibility for the ultimate resolution is
implicitly placed with the real society.

In the Net is Sastre's attempt to bring the

 

.Aristotelian elements into their classic relationship

‘vhile dealing with the tragedy of revolution. The

174

Situation of the clandestine man provides the necessary
and probable movement towards recognition and with it
brings a natural reversal. Suffering exists in two ways
and quite naturally: in the anguish brought about by the
necessary solitude and requirements to dehumanize
relationships and in the physical eXperience of being
tortured. Sastre uses both and brings them to a

43 HANAFI'S last line to

conclusion in death on the stage.
the audience brings the question of guilt to the level of
audience reality.

Sastre's concept of katharsis is one of a twofold
eXperience which ultimately goes beyond the theatre and
into the lives of the individual Spectators and their
society. In all four works the Simple fact of a lack of
an entirely satisfactory resolution tends to force the
problem into the mind of the Spectator. Assuming that he
is able to achieve in the Spectator some eXperiencing of
anguish through the depiction of his protagonists caught
in the human-social conflicts, Sastre then compels the
Spectator to carry the problem beyond the theatrical
experience by refusing to do more than to glimpse the
possibility of a solution or to combine some hOpe with the

anguish. In three of these works, as Shown, he uses

specific devices to reinforce this process of extending

 

43"The Scene of Suffering is a destructive or painful
action, such as death on the stage, bodily agony, wounds
and the like." Aristotle, p. 73.

175

katharsis. The final hOpe for the tragedy of revolution
is in the eventual social purification that it might

instigate.

B.

The Garbage Can was begun in 1950 and.finished in
1951.2 It has not been produced in Spain. In a note to
the play Sastre says, "Two ordersaare involved in the
action of The Garbage Can: the personal order and the
Social order. The author of the crime is no more than an
anarchist, produced by our time, indifferent to collective
movements, incredulous of social justice; a man who
believes that one has to take justice into his own hands.

"The social order functions on its own, at the margin
of the personal tragedy which we witness: here is the
tragic inequality of the classes and the dialectic of the

44 This dialectic is never really develOped in

struggle."
the work. The play seems to move on two levels and even
in two directions. In place Of a dramatic tension
existing between the personal action of the hero and the
social action of those around him there exists a kind of
ironic lack of relationship. It is interesting that
Sastre finished this work while he was still struggling

‘with the various revisions Of Pathetic Prologue. The

successful achievement of tragedy through the dialectic of

 

44Sastre, o. C., p. 109.

 

ti
J U
be:

176

personal and social forces in Pathetic Prologue provides a

 

Sharp contrast to the bifurcated develOpment of The
Garbage Can.

The play begins with a Short prologue scene in which
a group of drunken REVELERS from a New Year's Eve party
come upon a young man, GERMAN, Sleeping on a trash pile."
It is early morning. The REVELERS are costumed as death,
a pig, a donkey, and other grotesque figures. They awaken
GERMAN and very quickly instigate a brawl in which he is
knocked unconscious, thrown on the pile, and buried with
trash. AS the drunken group goes Off, a BOY appears,
dressed in rags and cold, picking stuff out of the
garbage. He uncovers GERMAN, and the two talk. A RAGMAN
also appears and mentions to GERMAN that a certain JULIA
has returned to the neighborhood. This news has a
profound effect on GERMAN, and, as the scene ends, he Sits
down on the trash pile and begins to cry.

The next scene takes place in the house of Senor
TOMKS, JULIA'S father. GERMAN arrives to talk to JULIA.
In the course of their conversation it becomes clear that
they had once been lovers but that someone else had won
JULIA away from GERMAN. Now this other man has abandoned
her when She most needs him, in her Sickness. She
eXplains to GERMKN that She has begun to cough blood. She

has had to come home for help and rest. GERMAN tells her

177

before he leaves, "for the first time in my life I feel
that I am about to do something important."45

The following scene is in two parts; the place is
Antonio's Bar. LUIS and JUANITO are talking over drinks.
LUIS is the older man and apparently does little else than
drink. JUANITO is a petty thief. The conversation
centers around the disappearance of GERMAN. No one has
seen him in the neighborhood for seven days. LUIS, his
closest friend, claims not to know his whereabouts but is
certain that he will return. The COLONEL arrives to have
a drink and talk. He tells the other two that a strike is
impending because of the increasingly depressing economic
conditions. JULIA comes into the bar to fill the family
wine jug, and, when she leaves, the talk turns to the
relationship between her and GERMAN. LUIS claims that
GERMAN'S love for JULIA was all that a man's love could
have been and more than She deserved. Eventually JUANITO
and the COLONEL leave LUIS coughing and drunk at the
table.

The second half of the scene is three days later.
LUIS is just coming into the bar. GERMAN has still not
returned. JUANITO arrives and tells LUIS of an upcoming
meeting Of the local political group, an illegal pro-

communist organization, at the house of GERMAN'S MOTHER

(GERMAN'S MOTHER, as his father before his death, is an

 

45Sastre, O. C., p. 126.

178

active member of the political organization.) The COLONEL
stOpS in for a moment, mentions that the strike is
imminent, and leaves. LUIS is eventually left alone again
at the table. He is in a state of great depression.
Suddenly and uneXpectedly GERMAN arrives. He appears
changed. He is happy, pleased with himself. He says he
no longer has to drink to forget, that everything in the
past has been wiped out, does not exist. "I am just
beginning to live . . . there is nothing to forget,

Luis . . . I feel no grief, no remorse, no concern . . .
I've come back to the neighborhood a new person."46
Rather than go home to see his MOTHER he decides to stay
at the bar with LUIS, seeing his-friend's deep state of
deSpair.

The final scene is Of the meeting Of the political
organization at the home Of GERMAN and-his MOTHER. Before
the group's members begin to assemble GERMAN and his
MOTHER talk of his plans. Because of his ten day absence
he has lost his job at the factory. He promises her to
look for work. She tells him that the password for entry
to the meeting is "I've got the garbage can." He eXplainS
that he will find it difficult not to laugh in reSponse to
this curious password. The peOple begin to arrive and.
have little more than settled down to begin talking when a

loud knocking is heard. It is the POLICE. They all begin

 

46Sastre, O. C., p. 143.

179

to play cards as a cover, but, when the POLICE enter, it
is discovered that they have come for GERMAN. He is
charged with killing a man. Before he is taken off, he
eXplainS to JULIA, who is there with her father, that he
has carried out his own justice by killing the man who
left her. After he has been taken out, LUIS, who is in
his usual drunken state, makes a plea for the group to do
something about the arrest. The group, however, led by
GERMAN'S MOTHER divorce themselves from this personal
situation and begin to get on with their business of
planning the workers' strike.

Sastre's statement on the play's concern with the
personal order and the social order has elicited a remark
from Farris Anderson, one of the few critics to mention
this early work. "[It] reveals a clear perception of the
Marxist principles that were to characterize his future
work, but the play itself suggests an immature sense of

their effective dramatic translation."47

Unfortunately he
does not go on to develOp this thought through an analysis
of the play nor does he state exactly which Marxist

principles Sastre Shows such a clear perception of. From

the evidence Of the play and the statement, however, one

 

47Anderson, p. 86. Sastre admits in his preface to
Anatomy of Realism that he was not very familiar with the
total concept of the dialectic when he wrote Drama and
Society which was published in 1956, five years after The
Garbage Can. His tendency in dramatic writing, however,
often leads him toward a dialectical approach even before
his theoretical eXpression of this approach.

 

180

is safe to assume that Anderson is pointing to the problem
Of alienation if to no other. Sastre has described the
protagonist as one who has no sense or concern for the
class struggle: "an example of a perfect anti-Marxist."48
And the social order has been said to "function on its own
at the margin of the personal tragedy."49
Even in this description of the two orders can be
seen the strong possibility of failure in dramatic terms.
The separation, neglect, and lack of concern between two
orders may be real and it may be tragic but it will hardly
be dramatic. And this is precisely where the difficulty
lies in the work. The tragedy-is there, but it is subtle
and-largely based on irony and negative factors producing
irony: inability to see, to understand, and to relate.
The story of GERMAN, taken by itself, is not really a
tragedy. A young man is deeply in love with a girl. She
goes off with another. He jilts her, providing the first
young man with the Opportunity Of.proving both his love
and his heroism through an act of justice based on the Old
codes of honor and blood. He succeeds in carrying out
this act thereby restoring the girl's (and his) honor.
Similar stories exist in classical Spanish theatre.

I
GERMAN expresses himself on two occasions concerning his

personal code and his lack of concern for and resignation

 

48Sastre, O. C., p. 109.

495astre, o. C., p. 109.

181

from society. The first time is in reSponse to JULIA'S
father's request that he interest himself in the worker's
movement. "Politics doesn't interest me . . . I don't
believe in 'social injustice' . . . The only injustice I
believe in is what is done against me. 'And a Union or the
Police can't deal with that. It seems to me that everyone

“50 In the second instance

has to make his own justice.
GERMAN is already vaguely predicting his future action.
He tries to eXplain his attitude to JULIA. She has
referred to resignation as the final step in a person's
decline. And he replies, "No . . . to resign yourself is
something else. To resign yourself is good. . . . A man,
the more resigned he is to not getting anything out of
life, the more he can do . . . things that have nothing to
do with the law, or the police, or the morals of the
peOple . . . things outside of all that, outside of hunger
and misery . . . things that no one in the world can
really understand."51
With this last insight GERMAN comes close to an
awareness of a part of the tragedy of his situation and
the Situation of man in modern society that Sastre
awkwardly seems to be suggesting. The social order is not

able to comprehend and deal with the most essential

aSpects of man's being. In GERMAN'S thinking and in his

 

50Sastre, O. C., p. 120.

51Sastre, O. C., p. 126.

182

subsequent action Sastre is attempting to present man in
his most authentic being, that metaphysical substance of

tragedy which is dealt with in Drama and Society. And he

 

does SO by depicting this man as totally disconnected from
his social context in terms of that aSpect of his being.
Neglect seems the best term to describe the relationship
between the individual and society depicted in this work,
neglect of each for the other. The result Of GERMAN'S
triumph of individual action (justice restored by blood)
is tragedy when the action is placed in the context of
society. The individual's restoration of justice is
ironic in the midst of an unjust society which will
condemn his act while continuing to carry out acts of
injustice affecting millions. GERMAN'S love for JULIA,
which brought him to act, is ironic in the context of a
society (the new revolutionary organization) which fails
to see the individual because of the group. Tragedy
exists in these negative relationships, but tragedy of a
kind that is difficult to eXpreSS dramatically.

Sastre's partial awareness of this problem perhaps
explains the peculiar double focus that occurs in the
play, beginning with the bar scene. LUIS becomes the
center of attention in GERMAN'S absence. (GERMAN'S blood
revenge is carried out, as it were, outside Of the play's
realism.) LUIS appears to be a surrogate for the
protagonist in the latter's absence. While GERMAN is

existing in a world of unreal, anti-societal actiOn, LUIS,

183

representing him, is existing in the-agony of reality.
LUIS also rejects involvement in the upcoming worker's
strike, but his alienation is eXpressed less abstractly
than-was GERMAN'S. "There's nothing to do. At least they
shouldn't count on me. I fought and now I've had enough.
I ended up with a bad leg from being wounded by one Of the
C. N. T. and my one lung will never be any good again. We
lost the war, and then . . . my wife died. I was left
with nothing. And now . . . where am I? . . . In a
garbage can. Just where I Should be. And I Shouldn't try
to get out of the damned place. Everybody has his place,
and only an idiot looks for something better. If you're
born to rot, you rot."52 GERMAN'S personal action tends
to lose meaning beside the agony of LUIS, and his
exhilaration on his return is muted by the irony in the
fact of LUIS' Situation being a prefiguration of his own
to come.

In the final moments of the play the negative
relationship of the two orders is brought to a climax in
the one outstanding dramatic moment. GERMAN has just been
taken off by the POLICE, and LUIS, who has come to the
meeting of the organization drunk, recognizing what no one
else apparently recognizes, struggles in vain to bring the
group to action.

GONZALEZ. [The group leader]. (After a moment of
silence.) Good ... . That's over . . . You see now,

 

52Sastre, O. C., p. 132.

184

there is no danger . . . I am sorry Maria. This has
been very painful for everyone. Now, I repeat to all
of you: the watchword is . . . wait! (But LUIS comes

up to him and grabs him by his coat lapels.)
LUIS, They've taken German! Talk about that!

GONZALEZ. Let gO of me, you idiot.

LUIS. We have to do something! They've taken German!
This’is urgent! It can't wait! Talk about that!
GONZALEZ. You're drunk. (He breaks free pushing LUIS

to the floor.)
LUIS. (Trying to get up.) They've taken him away!
We've got to do something! They've taken German! 3

NO recognition of the relationship of the individual's
Situation and the social cause occurs except for LUIS who
is also rejected by this new society. The play ends with
this final tragic irony.

In subsequent plays Sastre will bring the qualities
Of GERMAN and LUIS into Single, more complex characters.
Alienation will become a characteristic rather than a
character. And the final dramatic scene of LUIS
struggling with the society around him will be seen to
have been a symbolic prototype of entire dramas to come.

In the same month (December 1951) that Sastre
completed this partial failure, The Garbage Can, he began
‘work on what was to be considered one of his most
successful plays, The Condemned Squad. The play was
:Einished in May of 1952 and produced in March of 1953. It
‘wass forced to close by the government after three

Performances. Sastre describes the original conception of

 

53Sastre, O. C., p. 153. The problem of the "talking
revcxlutionary" or social reformer versus the man of action
ésltiaken up in more detail in Sad Are the Eyes of William
e 1-

185

the work to have been limited to the bringing tOgether of
the complex characters in the Opening Situation. From
that point, he claims, the characters and the situation
develOped in ways not originally anticipated. In a note
to the first edition the play is related to the then
existing cold war Situation. "At present international
politics is in a state of tension. The (cold) war (of
nerves) continues. EurOpe, in this panorama, is nothing
more than a land of confusion and a probable field of
battle . . . In The Condemned Squad there are no answers
[to the question of the meaning of life in terms of the
cold war SituationJ, but, at least, it delves to the roots
Of the tragic questions. Drama is required to do no more.
When the curtain comes down, it falls to Sociology and
Metaphysics to do the talking. If the drama is good,
thought--precisely--will come forth purified."54

In a later statement (1962) he describes the play as
a "cry of protest against the menacing prOSpect of a new
world war . . . a negation of heroism and the whole
mystique of death . . . My work is also an examination of
the conscience or, better said, an invitation to examine
the conscience of a generation of leaders who seem

diSposed, in the silent clamor of the cold war, .to lead us

all. to the Slaughter house. For me the Slaughter house

—__

54Sastre, O. C., p. 160.

186

was absurdity. Each of my characters had lived through
it . . . and was interpreting it in a different way."55

The action occurs during the Third World War. It is
a cold, December evening. Six men have been sent, in
punishment, as an advanced warning unit for an eXpected
enemy offensive. They are holed up in a small cabin in
some mountain forest. One of the men, ANDRES, is Off at
the guard post. The other five are seen in the cabin.
LUIS, ADOLFO, and PEDRO are playing dice. JAVIER is
Sleeping. CORPORAL GOBAN is cleaning his rifle. They
have been together three days and are just beginning to
Open themselves up to each other. LUIS is apparently ill
and suffering from a fever. His condition is becoming
worse. PEDRO talks already of the tedium of doing
nothing. At one point GOBAN awakens JAVIER eXplaining
that he doesn't have the right to Sleep in their
Situation. The CORPORAL is a professional soldier with
over twenty years of service. He is running his unit with
an iron hand. After delivering a near eulogy on the
uniform and the military life, he tells the men, "the only
thing left for you is to die like men." He talks of

"approaching death clean, ready for review."56

In Spite
Of LUIS' illness GOBAN insists that he keep his guard

duty. The other men refuse to interfere. ANDRES returns

 

SSSastre, O. C., p. 161.

SGSastre, o. C., p. 172.

187

from his post and eXplainS that LUIS was in bad Shape when
he arrived to relieve him. GOBAN reminds the men of why
they are there. He tells them that he knows each man's
background. PEDRO reminds GOBAN that his past is known as
well. The CORPORAL has killed three men, two for running
away in battle and a young recruit during a bayonet drill,
for which he was broken in rank.

The next morning. PEDRO is sweeping out the cabin.
ANDRES is Shaving. JAVIER sits beside LUIS who is worse.
They discuss GOBAN'S regimentation and exchange blame for
allowing LUIS to be forced to his duty while ill. Their
condemnation to the squad is talked about. LUIS eXplains
that he was put in because he refused to serve on a firing
Squad. The horror of their Situation begins to make
itself felt. When JAVIER says that they are condemned to
die, ANDRES points out the greater horror of their having
to wait for death. PEDRO says that there are many other
Similar squads waiting. ANDRES admits to not having had
any combat experience. He and JAVIER begin to talk about
their past lives and discover the irony in their being
brought together: JAVIER is a professor of PhilOSOphy and
ANDRES is a school drOpout. PEDRO goes out to relieve
ADOLFO on the watch. When the latter comes in he is
furious and eXplains that GOBAN has been Spying on him.

He talks about Shooting the CORPORAL. The others try to

quiet him, and the talk ends when GOBAN comes in.

188

The fifteenth day, late night. JAVIER lS seen
writing in a notebook. He begins to voice his thoughts.
He aSkS that the finder of the note inform his mother of
his death. He admits his past acts of cowardice. GOBAN
begins talking in his sleep: "it was an accident, an

accident."57

JAVIER notes the guilt in everyone. LUIS
awakens with increased pain and JAVIER tries to comfort
him. Then he writes of his guilt feelings brought on by
his self concern in the midst of a global war. PEDRO
returns from the watch cursing the cold.

AS dawn breaks, the men are at various stages of
their early morning rising. ANDRES suddenly launches a
verbal attack at GOBAN on the ridiculousness of his
insisting on a rigid military routine. GOBAN lays him out
with two quick blows, grabs his gear and goes out. The
others help ANDRES up. He reveals to them his problem of
losing his temper and tells them of his having killed a
Sergeant in a drunken fit of anger.

A momentary shift to the guard post finds JAVIER on
duty, watching, seeing things in the moving Shadows. It
is Christmas Eve. He begins to think of his mother, of
home and his childhood. Suddenly he sees his whole

generation as a condemned squad. He is overcome by fear

and loneliness.

 

57Sastre, O. C., p. 184.

189

The following scene is Christmas Eve in the cabin.
The men have put up a tree and are Singing a carol. PEDRO
is reminded of his past and of the horror of losing his
wife and home in Berlin when the town was taken by the
enemy. His hatred for the enemy brought him to kill a
group of prisoners. ANDRES tries to liven up the occasion
by suggesting that the men, in GOBAN'S absence, treat
themselves to some brandy. In the Spirit of the evening
they agree to break the regulations, and in a Short time
they are thoroughly enjoying themselves. In a moment Of
Spontaneous confession ADOLFO admits to having committed
the crime of selling army wheat for personal profit.
PEDRO becomes angry over his confessed profiteering, but
the two are quickly reconciled. The party is abruptly
ended when the CORPORAL enters. The men, somewhat
intoxicated, encourage GOBAN to join in or at least
understand and permit the occasion. When he refuses they
decide to defy his order to stOp. ADOLFO goes for more
brandy. GOBAN knocks him to the floor with his rifle.
PEDRO, ANDRES, and JAVIER Simultaneously grab their
machetes and move against GOBAN cutting him down with
terrible blows.

The second act begins just as the men have finished
filling in GOBAN'S grave. LUIS, who had been on watch
during the killing, asks that they say a prayer for him,
which they do. ANDRES points out that, even if an

Offensive doesn't materialize, there is no escape for them

190

now. PEDRO begins to assume a form of command, but the
others are unwilling to go along with him.

Two weeks later the lack of order has become
apparent. The men are dirty and unshaven. The tedium is
worse than ever. ADOLFO is urging the formation of a
scouting patrol to get them out of the cabin and to
determine the enemy's position. The field phone rings.
PEDRO, at the watch, has Spotted an enemy group. The men
are momentarily Spurred to action. A sense of relief is
felt. Within minutes, however, PEDRO calls again to say
that the danger has passed.

The last week of January. It appears that the
Offensive will not materialize and that the men will be
able to return to their base. PEDRO tells the men that he
intends to reveal the details of the CORPORAL'S death.
ADOLFO attempts to convince him otherwise, and failing

tries to incite the men to a second murder. The men are

unwilling to follow him.

Unable to get SUpport from the men to kill PEDRO,
ADOLFO, a few days later, tries to talk ANDRES into going
into the mountains with him as a guerrilla fighter to
escape the inevitable retribution awaiting them on their
:return. ANDRES argues a preference for the security-
vwithout-freedom of prison over the freedom-without-
Seczurity of guerrilla life, but eventually agrees to
aCczompany ADOLFO part way. He will go into the mountains

but; then separate from ADOLFO and give himself up to the

191

enemy. JAVIER attempts to interpret the existential
difficulty presented for each of them by the death of
GOBAN and the torturous freedom resulting from it.

ADOLFO and ANDRES are next seen as they separate
somewhere in the dark forest. The night is cold and
windy, and their silhouetted figures perhaps presage an
imminent death.

In the cabin LUIS sits by himself. PEDRO comes in
and reports that JAVIER has hanged himself. 'The two talk
of their future. LUIS makes a last plea for PEDRO to tell
the authorities that he also participated in the murder of
GOBAN. PEDRO tells him that he need not bring that pain
upon himself, that he will suffer pain enough just in
living. As they talk PEDRO takes out the last two
cigarettes from the Squad's rations. He offers one to
LUIS who confesses that he has never smoked. But he
accepts the offer and the two Sit smoking and talking as
the curtain comes down.

Critical commentary on The Condemned Squad exceeds in
quantity and probably excels in quality that on any other
of Sastre's works. Some critics tend to emphasize the
[play's social and anti-military aSpectS. One describes
'the characters as, "Six provisional men, produced by this

provisional EurOpe."58 Another calls the play a,

‘

58Juan Emilio Aragonés, "Alfonso Sastre y las tragicas
Prieguntas," Alcala, 28-29 (Mar. 25, 1953), n. p.

192

"59

"dialogue between anarchy and the system. Ignacio

Aldecoa states that "Behind Alfonso Sastre's Condemned

 

Sggad lies the bittersweet fruit of our historical moment.
The tragic sureness of catastrOphe that we try not to
think about, while the world moves ever closer to it; the
uncertainty and deSpair of contemporary man, who at any
moment may be sentenced to fall in and take his place in a
condemned squad."6O Farris Anderson points out, among a
complex of interpretations, a clear analogy with EurOpean
history in the play's plot which poses the question, "What
good did it do EurOpe to defeat Fascism, if the fruit of
its victory was to be only a new and more terrible anxiety
?"61

and enslavement

Anderson and a number of other Critics go beyond this

social and historical reading of The Condemned Squad to

 

find in it more fundamental philOSOphical and religious
themes. Anthony M. Pasquariello concludes: "The real
theme of The Condemned Squad is what Eugene O'Neill called

'not the relation of man to man but the relation of man to

 

59Tecglen, p. 73. DeCoster's comment on these
militarism vs. anarchy critics is apprOpriate: "For some
critics Sastre has written an indictment of militarism;
for others, on the contrary, he has shown that without
discipline, anarchy will result. But neither of these
interpretations is really important or relevant." p. 124.

0Igancio Aldecoa, "Hablando de 'Escuadra hacia la
muerte,'" Revista espafiola, 1 (May-June, 1953), 119.

61Anderson, p. 93.

193

God.‘ It is the dilemma of living and dying . . "62

Leonard Pronko says, "I cannot read this tense, tightly
constructed piece, where every act is prepared, where
every line counts, without feeling that Goban is a god
image, and his soldiers, tiring of his senseless tyranny,
are representative of man striving to free himself from
God, only to find that the death of God does not solve any

"63

problems. GOBAN'S death is seen by another writer as a

more general elimination of that which hinders freedom.64
More than one critic has pointed to the similarities with
Sartre's No Exit.65

Obviously Sastre has produced a work rich in meaning
and capable of being interpreted on a number of levels.
As the cold war period recedes into history, the play‘s
more metaphysical meanings tend to take on greater
importance, exemplifiying Sastre's own theory of tragedy.
And, as the human drama becomes stronger, Sastre's

creative method of allowing the characters to develOp, as

it were, on their own, out of the Situation, can begin to

 

62Anthony M. Pasquariello, "Alfonso Sastre, Dramatist
in Search of.a Stage," The Theatre Annual, XXII (1965-66),
16.23 0

63

 

Pronko, p. 114.

64Juan Villegas, "La sustancia metafisica de la
tragedia y su funcion social: Escuadra hacia la muerte de
lklfonso Sastre," Symposium, 21 (Fall, 1967), 257.
65Pasquariello in "Censorship in the Spanish Theatre
«arni Alfonso Sastre's The Condemned Squad," Theatre Annual
19 (1962), 23. Anderson, p. 93. DeCoster, p. 124.

 

 

 

194

be seen as a good part of the reason for the variety of
interpretations. Some critics tend to take the view of
one character and others of another. JAVIER'S
intellectual stance and ability to articulate has perhaps
influenced more critics than has any other character's
attitude. But if Sastre is to be taken at his word on the
manner Of the play's composition one must accept it as a
kind Of eXperiment or investigation. The author has
attempted to find the results in terms of Aristotelian

thought and action and character of a group of individuals

 

who achieve a state of freedom hitherto unknown to them.
This freedom brings about a recognition or discovery of
the Aristotelian sort in each character. The kind and
degree Of reCOgnition (and reversal) is different in every
case and each has to be considered in some detail.

JAVIER'S last attempt to eXplain to PEDRO his
interpretation of what has happened, while only
representing a single perSpective, provides a major
insight into the structure of Sastre's experiment.

PEDRO. Javier, ever since "the incident" you've been
thinking, cavilling; do you think I haven't noticed?
While the rest of us have been trying to do something
in our own way, you've been watching us . . . I would
say . . . with a kind Of curiosity . . . like a doctor
looking through a micrOSCOpe . . .

JAVIER. (Laughing dryly.) Only I'm one of the
bacteria in the drOp of water . . . in this drOp which
is falling into the void. A bacteria with
consciousness; can you imagine anything more
terrifying? (A silence.) Yes, you're right. All
this time, Since we killed Goban, I've been
investigating . . . trying to answer certain questions
that I've inevitably had to pose.

PEDRO. And?

JAVIER. Now I know . . . I've found out . . . my work

195

is happily concluded. (A small laugh.) I have
achieved success . . . from the scientific point of
View . . . I have reached a conclusion.

PEDRO. What conclusion?

JAVIER. Corporal Goban's death was not fortuitous.
PEDRO. I don‘t understand.

JAVIER. It was part of a vast design of punishment.
PEDRO. You've concluded that?

JAVIER. Yes. While he was living, we led an almost
happy existence. All that was required was Obedience
and suffering. One could hold on to the illusion that
he was purifying himself and that he would be able to
save himself. Everyone was aware Of his Sin, a Sin
with a date and with circumstances.

PEDRO. And then?

JAVIER. Goban was here to punish us and he let
himself be killed.

PEDRO. He let himself be killed? What for?

JAVIER. SO that the torture could continue and grow.
He was here for that. He was here so that we would
kill him. And we fell into the trap.66

While it is possible to interpret GOBAN in any number
Of Specific ways, generally he can be seen to represent
order and authority. The first-act situation is one of
established and accepted knowledge and order. The only
uncertainty is the precise time of the coming Offensive.
Each man knows what he is guilty of and feels that he is
purifying himself and will save himself in death. "You're
going to approach death clean, ready for review. And the
last thing on earth you're going to hear is my word of

d."67

comman This order, whether it symbolizes military

regimentation, dictatorship, Spain, EurOpe, or the
Universe, or a kind of God-centered Eden existing before

the eXperience of the tree of atomic knowledge and the

_____

66Sastre, o. C., p. 216.

67Sastre, O. C., p. 172.

196

death Of GOd, this order is suddenly destroyed, not in any
premeditated way, but in a moment of inSpired (Dionysian)
social, revolutionary action. And the result is an
existential eXperience of freedom which dramatically
correSponds to an Aristotelian eXperience of recognition.

In the second act the individuals become increasingly
conscious of themselves and their tragic situation.
Simple resignation seems no longer possible. The previous
acceptance of guilt is supplanted by an intense investiga—
tion into the question of guilt. All actions are turned
into matters of deliberation. By the end of the act each
character has provided a separate result for the
eXperiment; each represents a Single perSpective of the
tragic situation. They run from the total deSpair of the
solitary individual to a degree of hOpe for future human
and social relationship.

JAVIER is brought to despair by his investigation
into the human predicament. His final view is one of a
negative universe which destines men for suffering and an
ignoble end. Man is the result Of a mad cosmic joke: a
bacteria with consciousness. His nihilism represents the
extreme perSpective of the avant-garde art and its
eXpreSSion of the existential Situation. For Sastre this
is one result of the atomic or cold war age. But this
View of man cannot be accepted ultimately (as in Beckett)
as the only view, and JAVIER'S suicide suggests why. And

this perSpective alone cannot be interpreted as the whole

197

meaning Of the play as Sr. Pasquariello seems to conclude
when he states that it is "bleak, dark, and full of pure,
-inconsolable anguish."68

ANDRES is terrified by the insecurity and risk of
freedom. He prefers life over all else and chooses to
surrender himself to the enemy and to a certain life of
imprisonment rather than risk the uncertainty of the
guerrilla existence held out by ADOLFO. "I want to rest.
In the 'camp' at least I'll be able to go tO‘bed . . . At
night I'll be able to Sleep."69 ANDRES is that weak mass
of humanity which is forever being taken over by one power
or another. He is the multitude whose weakness the Grand
Inquisitor of Dostoevski used in support of his argument
for his church of Miracle, Mystery and Authority. ANDRES
is the man who hates the authority figure most (he has
killed a sergeant and is the first to strike the
CORPORAL), because he needs him most (in bOth cases he has
had to be drunk before he could act.) It is the
recognition Of this need which ANDRES comes to in his
experience of freedom.' It is apprOpriate that ANDRES,
whose concern is for the extension of life under any
conditions, is the one who immediately interprets the
death of GOBAN as "closing off the last exist." The

Offensive and the military tribunal are simply equated by
68"Censorship in etc.," p. 23.

69Sastre, O. C., p. 213.

198

him: they both mean death. ANDRES is tragic in his
weakness if he is tragic at all. For Sastre everyman is
tragic; for others some are perhaps only pathetic.

If ANDRES is a potential detriment to society in his
parasitic nature, ADOLFO is equally a possible danger in
his anarchistic tendency. ADOLFO, early in the play,
suggests Shooting GOBAN. At the party he is the one who
deliberately defies him. When PEDRO attempts to restore
order after the CORPORAL'S death, ADOLFO tells him, "I do

"70 It is ADOLFO

what I want and nobody gives me orders.
who attempts to get the others to kill PEDRO, and this
failing he tries to talk them into becoming a guerrilla
band in the mountains. He is constantly a divisive force
in the microcosmic society of the squad. His final,
inevitable act is his separation from that society. For
ADOLFO freedom is everything and any social restriction Of
it is intolerable. His tragedy is the same as GERMEN'S in
The.Garbage Can.

Only in PEDRO and LUIS is there some degree of hOpe
eXpressed. PEDRO attempts to relate his freedom to a
social context. He represents-the best aSpectS of the old
order. In him there is a sense of reSponSibility to the
social order and a commitment to human values and human

relationships. His compassionate feelings for LUIS and

his predicament are the necessary basis for whatever hOpe

__—

7°Sastre, O. C., p. 200.

199

there may be for man and society however tragic their
Situation. LUIS lacks PEDRO'S strength, but he is not
burdened with PEDRO'S guilt. He has hOpefully reached
some total discovery through the eXperience of freedom and
as an undefiled witness of the others. PEDRO attempts to
prepare him for the agony of life to come. LUIS comes of
age as he smokes his first cigarette with PEDRO.71

With the crisis of freedom resulting from the death
of GOBAN, each character comes to a discovery of himself,
a reCOgnition of the tragic Situation of man. Each
responds with some form of action. The whole process Of
the second act can be described as a complex reversal and
it involves differing degrees Of suffering. JAVIER
carries out the Ultimate, nihilistic act: he commits
suicide; a total rejection of life. ANDRES attempts to
break away from the reSponSibility of society and at the
same time throw himself into the security of it; a total
rejection of freedom. ADOLFO attempts to divorce himself
from any social relationship. His desire is for complete
freedom and responsibility only to himself; a total
rejection Of Society. PEDRO attempts to discover the
prOper reSponse in terms of society and the individual.
His conclusion is to accept the consequences of his act in

terms of the only existing social order. He assumes a

¥

71Sastre eXpressed a desire later to change the ending
of The Condemned Squad to provide LUIS with more of an
eXperience of conscious awakening. O. C., p. 162.

200

reSponSibility for another individual. LUIS exists more
as a witness to the other's experience than as one who
suffers a recognition of himself. As PEDRO tells him, his

"72 The

"sentence which remains to be completed [is] life.
hOpe for LUIS and for those outside the work lies in the
increased consciousness brought about by the eXperience of

the drama, itself.

Some of the questions introduced in The Condemned

 

Squad continue to occupy Alfonso Sastre in The Gag. Again
he focuses on a microcosm of society, and in the manner of

Pathetic Prologpe and Community Bread (the work

 

immediately preceding The Gag) he brings into conflict
family loyalty and social reSponSibility.

The play was outlined in November and December of
1953 just months after Community Bread was completed. It
was written in February of 1954. Sastre described the
play as an effort of, "cautious protest: in appearance a
rural drama but with an underlying message. I would try
to say: We live gagged. We are not happy. This Silence
Oppresses us. And all this may point to a bloody

"73 The fact that the work was immediately

future.
authorized by the authorities and accepted by the public
as a rural drama brought the author to consider it a

failure in terms of its real message.

 

72Sastre, O. C., p. 220.

73Sastre, O. C., p. 283.

201

From the Opening moment of the play with ISAfAS'
wife, ANTONIA, in a trembling voice attempting to make
excuses to her husband for their son's absence from the
dinner table, it is obvious that ISAfAS is a terrifyingly
domineering head of the family. In the conversation that
follows only LUISA, his daughter—in-law, dares to suggest
any feelings other than those in agreement with ISAfAS
KRAPPO. Her husband JUAN is completely brow beaten, and
his father delights in pointing it out. The youngest son,
JANDRO, is obediently silent. When TEO does arrive late
and eXplains that he hasn't intended to Offend his father,
ISAfAS exclaims, "that's the problem! that you didn't
want to Offend us. That's exactly what's wrong. You do
the worst things without wanting to. If you had wanted to
Offend us and you had done it to bother us, so that we
would realize your contempt, it would be another
thing . . . That would be a fight and not a fatherly
reprimand . . . We would know what to depend on . . .
things would be clear . . . But this situation is
ridiculous. Get out of here, go to bed. Leave me in
peace. I don't even want to see you. It disgusts me that
you're the way you are."74 TEO leaves, and ISAfAS is left
alone with LUISA for a moment. He tries to tell her that

he has more feeling for her than he Shows in front of the

 

74Sastre, O. C., p. 295.

202

family, that he has to maintain a role in front of them.
He eXpresseS the feeling that not only the family but
peOple of the town hate him and say things about him. His
only real friends are those who fought with him in the
Resistance. LUISA goes off, and ISAfAS settles down for a
pipe and some brandy. The maid comes in and announces the
arrival of a stranger. He is let in and in a Short time
eXplains to KRAPPO that he has just been released from
prison and that he has come to find the man who was
reSponSible for the brutal death of his wife and daughter
in a raid during the war. The raid, he claims, was led by
ISAfAS KRAPPO. ISAfAs orders him out of the house. On
leaving the man implies that he will kill ISAfAS at some
unSXpected future moment. AS soon as the stranger is out
of the house ISAfAS nervously rushes to a cabinet, takes
out a pistol, and leaves. LUISA appears and moves to a
window to see what is happening. A Shot is heard. ISAfAS
returns and finds LUISA. He threatens to kill her if she
tells anyone about the incident.

The next morning police commissioner ROCH arrives at
the house and talks to ISAIAS. They discover that each
has served with the Resistance forces during the war and
that each had to undergo police interrOgationS. When ROCH
mentions that the victim was a former member of the
military Opposition, ISAfAS eXpreSSes surprise at the need
for further investigation. He claims that no one in the

house heard a Shot during the night. But when LUISA

203

appears a few moments later, in her nervousness She admits
to having heard one. When ROCH leaves, ISAfAS pressures
her to say nothing else.

A few days later LUISA and JUAN are discussing the
neWSpaper reports of the crime when LUISA breaks down and
admits to having seen ISAfAS commit the murder. JUAN is
completely confused by this truth and insists that LUISA
tell TEO as well. She goes out, gets him, and brings him
back to tell him. On hearing her story he Shows little
surprise and admits to having suspected the same. He
tells JUAN and LUISA that he has heard some of KRAPPO'S
Old Resistance friends talk of the case in a local tavern,
and that they intended to protect therold man with their
Silence. For himself his fear of his father has overcome
his hatred of him (brought on earlier, one is told, by
KRAPPO'S having destroyed his engagement with the girl he
loved) and is keeping him silent. He tells the others of
the story told him by the father's friends of how ISAfAS
killed the victim's wife and daughter in a drunken rage
the night Of the raid.

The fourth scene Opens with JANDRO (the son who loves
his father) ironically suggesting the harshest retribution
for the crime: hanging the murderer in the public square
and throwing his dead body on some road. ANTONIA weakly
suggests a sort of Christian forgiveness and a winning of
the criminal's soul through love. ISAfAS jovially Sides

with his son's strong line. AS they prepare for dinner a

204

summer thunder storm is heard approaching. Through the
meal the growing tension and eventual eXplosion of
emotions of the family are reflected by the fury of the
storm outside. LUISA confesses to having told JUAN and
TEO and finally mentions the fact by name before them all.
JANDRO breaks into tears. ANTONIA seems bewildered. TEO
Openly declares his hatred for his father. ISAfAS in a
rage strikes LUISA but then goes into a kind of psycho-
logical collapse of strength. By the end of this scene of
family katharsis KRAPPO has turned into a lonely Old man.
Some weeks later.. JUAN and LUISA are discussing the
old man's condition. He has been ill for some time and is
running a high fever. LUISA talks somewhat understandingly
about his intense fear of death which correSpondS to his
intense love of life and belief only in life. TEO comes
in, and the three begin to talk of their situation. Each
has some reason for not revealing the crime, and their
Silence is beginning to Oppress them. "We're more
wretched every day . . . quiet and sad . . . because we
can't live. . . . This gag is choking us and some day
we're going to have to talk, to Shout . . . if we have any
strength left by then . . . And that day is going to be a
day Of rage and blood . . . "75 ISAIAS, in a greatly
weakened condition, is helped in for a few moments by

JANDRO and ANTONIA. He can still be seen holding on to

 

75Sastre, O. C., p. 326.

205

his domination of the others, but now the threats are of
guilt instead of punishment for those who might betray
him. "If any one of you ever talks you will be sorry. I
swear it. And the others will never be able to forgive
him for it. None of you will ever be able to be happy. I
swear that too."76

In the following scene LUISA informs ROCH of the
murder. The commissioner has made it his habit to visit
the house often; he explains that he has suspected ISAfAS
and was waiting until someone finally had to betray him.
ISAfAS comes in on their conversation and immediately
perceives what has happened. He and ROCH talk of the
irony involved in the fact that just a few years earlier
the same murder would have been agreed upon by both and
would have made of one a hero. In a last confused
expression of revenge and sexual desire ISAfAS struggles
to embrace LUISA. An armed police AGENT prevents him
from harming her.

The epilOgue Opens with ANTONIA, TEO, JANDRO, and
LUISA seated at the table and eating in silence.
Conversation begins slowly and is forced. Eventually they
discuss the father. JANDRO eXpresses concern for his
welfare in prison and a desire to visit him. ANTONIA
feels guilty about feeling a sense of peace in his

absence. TEO attempts to justify his lack of grief over

 

768astre' O. C., p. 3280

206

his father. When JANDRO confesses to LUISA that he tan
never forgive her, she reveals to him that his father use
made love to her. The consternation over this revelatiga
is never-realized because JUAN enters with news of ISAiAS‘
death. Apparently he was Shot to death by the guards
while attempting to escape prison. TEO insists that this
was a deliberate suicide by his father to punish the
family with guilt. JUAN sees that TEO'S interpretation is
only an easy rationalization for a Situation that can
never truly be resolved and which therefore will always
haunt them. In a paradoxical way their new anguish is
accompanied by a heretofore unfelt sense Of calm.

A number of critics have pointed out Similarities

between The Gag and The Condemned Squad, but in rather

 

general terms. GOBAN and ISAfAS are mentioned as
Similarly Oppressive forces and the former's squad and the
latter's family as the Oppressed. The revolt is looked at
as the critical action. The concluding implication is
that both plays are allegories of the same real social
situation. Without denying the existence of Similar
problems in both works and likeness in structures and
patterns, one can be blinded to significant differences by
forcing the Similarities. When Farris Anderson states
that, "the family's revolt is anaIOgouS to that of the

Corporal's soldiers . . . "77 he misses an important

 

77Anderson, p. 96.

207

difference in the two plays: the revolt in The Condemned

 

Sggad was a Spontaneous, united act of physical violence
(killing by the sword one who had lived by the sword); the
revolt (the word itself is perhaps wrong; "release" might
be better) in The Gag iS the difficult and deliberate
process of an individual, without group support and is
eXpressed verbally. In addition the "Oppressor" in one
case iS a relatively undevelOped personage functioning
symbolically and in the other case is a highly complex
psycholOgical character. The total resultant dramatic
difference is far greater than any symbolically thematic
similarity.

A. C. Van Der Naald's statement-that, "with The Gag
Sastre again dramatizes the theme of.tyranny and

78

subsequent revolt," (relating the play to The Condemned

 

Sgggd) disregards the fundamental structural and dramatic
differences between the two works. The revolt in the
earlier play occurs at the end of the first part thrusting
the characters into a state Of freedom which brings with
it their subsequent develOpment. In The Gag LUISA informs
the COMMISSIONER near the end of the play; the characters
have suffered ISAfAS"domination throughout and continue
to feel his power even in his absence. What is more, the
complex human relationships which exist between ISAfAS and

each Of the others bring about a dramatic Situation far

 

78Van Der Naald, p. 85.

208

different from that representing the corporal—squad

relationship of The Condemned Squad. To equate them as a

 

dramatization of tyranny" is to simplify to the point of
meaninglessness.

Leonard Pronko has done his Share to add to this
detrimental generalizing when he describes "both Krappo
and Goban [aS] cold and impersonal. Their inhumanity is a
result of a fundamental fear:. a fear of being found
weak . . . these two men represent the tyranny from which
man seeks to escape . . . "79 The complexity of the
character of ISAIAS refutes any such simplification.

In addition to the damage caused by any attempt tO
thematically summarize a work of dramatic art there seems
to be Operating here the compulsion to Show Sastre's plays
to be a clear manifestation of his stated political views.
However, Sastre's integrity as an artist and his commit-
tment to the view Of man as a tragic figure have never
permitted him to reach the levels Of simplistic eXpression
SO Obviously favored by his critics. The Gag, in fact, is,
a particularly good example of his insistence on investi-

gating the multiple aSpects of man‘s tragic Situation. In

Community Bread, Red Earth, and In the Net, to

 

 

 

 

79Pronko, p. 115. Anderson points out two other
interpretations of The Gag which are unnecessarily narrow:
José Maria Garcia Escudero in "Tiempo" sees Isaias as a
symbol of capitalism and his family as Oppressed humanity.
Jose Maria de Quinto, who directed the Madrid production,
sees the play as a symbol of Franco Spain which suppresses
free eXpreSSion (not including this play apparently.)
p. 97. ’

209

name three, criticism could be leveled at the author for
not representing in any human fashion the Oppressive
element. The degree of moral or ethical conflict was
perhaps lessened by the abstract nature of the Oppressor.
But in The Gag Sastre has chosen to imbue his Oppressor
with Very human qualities. The social tragedy of the play
may be symbolically contained in the experience of the
Oppressed members of the family, but KRAPPO is also a
tragic figure, and one of almost classic stature, a man
who has lived beyond his prOper time and context.
Whatever Sastre's original intention in the way of a
social message for the play, it cannot be interpreted to
lessen the achievement of this major tragic figure. The
work is not a Simple allegory of Oppression overcome, and
KRAPPO is not GOBAN in mufti.

On one level Sastre's play moves in the manner of
Greek tragedy. ISAfAS KRAPPO is a tragic figure who, like
Ajax, attempts to act in the present by the standards of
the past. He tries to Operate in terms of violence, fear,

group loyalty, and élan vital: attributes of the

 

Resistance. The problem of guilt has long ago been
rejected. To kill a threatening stranger and eXpect the
silence of his family group are entirely in keeping with
his code. (His Old friends from the Resistance movement
will keep Silent about the incident forever as TEO
reports.) But in the climactic fourth scene ISAfAS is

brought to a full recognition of his true Situation: all

210

those about him represent a different age and different
standards, guilt is a major factor in determining
individual actions, legal justice is a commitment of
society; in terms of the new order his act is a crime
which pollutes the family and society. ISAIAS is
psychologically and physically broken. He never fully
recOvers. His last effort to act is his confused attempt
to love and destroy LUISA, and he is pathetic in his
defeat. His suicide is a precise realization of the old
order brought to its end by the new.

If KRAPPO represents the forces of Oppression by one
interpretation, he then must also be seen as a solitary
tragic figure who is himself a victim of circumstances
beyond his control. His flaw is his inability to change.
In his last free moments he comments on the irony brought
on by the passing of time. "It makes me laugh to
think. . . . that if I had killed this man four years ago,
you [ROCH] would have been very happy. And I, for
precisely what makes me a criminal now, would have been a
hero then. (He laughs.) Doesn't that strike you as
funny? A man is a hero or a criminal according to his
circumstances, even though the dead person is the same.

)"80 He is a strong man in a society of

(He laughs again.
weak peOple. He almost begs TEO to Openly defy him and

enter into a struggle Of character with him. He is

 

80Sastre, O. C., p. 335.

211

thrilled by JANDRO'S harsh prOposals of judgement on the
then unknown murderer. In his final encounter with ROCH
he puts the commissioner on the defensive by making him
admit tO his weakness and squeamishness while a Resistance
fighter. Surrounded by these figures he finds no
possibility Of the extremely vital human relationships his
soul and body require. His attitude toward the struggle
is clear evidence of his unique mode of existence. What
for the others has been an agonizing eXperience, for him
has been vitalizing. "I've always enjoyed the struggle.
I've never considered myself defeated . . . and during
this fight I've enjoyed life terribly. I've lived every
day as if each moment were the last. It's been
marvelous."81
The quasi-mythical prOportions of ISAI’AS'I character
may have been a develOpment beyond Sastre's original
intention, and the result is a shift of focus from the
other tragic situation existing in the play. The two are,
of course, inseparable, but the strength of the greek-
tragic elements in ISAIAS tends to diminish the impact of
the human-social tragedy of the family. ISAfAS' action
and suffering exist on the scale of the Greek tragic hero,
in this case lost in the modern context. Even his final
suffering and death is, in the Greek manner, Off-stage and

brought to the audience by the usual messenger. His

 

81Sastre, O. C., p. 334.

212

presence is ultimately felt in his absence. The others,
by contrast, are the "everymen" of present day society.

In typical Sastrean fashion they are caught in a dialectic
of human and social responsibilities. They, like a group
of Hamlets, Spend their time agonizing over a decision
which they cannot bring themselves to make. In their loss
of freedom they are brought to discoveries about
themselves and their relationships. In the end only LUISA
acts.

That which most differentiates the tragedy of ISAfAS
from the tragedy of the individuals (and society) of his
family iS the dilemma of guilt which exists for the latter
and not for the former. Underlying all other relationships
recognized by the family members to exist between them-
selves and the father is a sense Of guilt: guilt in
having failed the father in the past and guilt in the
contemplation of a betrayal of the father. This stands in
conflict with the socio-legal concept of guilt which will
inevitably be applied to the father for his action. TEO
submerges this guilt in his eXpressed feelings of hate and
fear, JUAN in a sense of loyalty, JANDRO in love, LUISA in
fear of ISAfAS and love of JUAN, and ANTONIA in Christian
charity. As the tension of the conflicting forces
increases, the hesitation to act brings with it greater
degrees of anguish. Finally LUISA, who is not blood
related, rebels against the family bond. But the release

from Oppression brings an unsatisfactory calm. And ISAIAS

213

by his last act throws the family into an endless, tragic
uncertainty. The vigor of his final action, as described
by JUAN, stands in sharp contrast to the last moments of
aimless conversation by the completely debilitated family.

If Sastre's drama is to be read in terms of its
social symbolism, which he himself hOped for, the results
are not what the above-mentioned critics tend to make
them. Certainly Oppression and revolt can be seen in the
play, but the larger message would seem to read that if
society suffers under the Oppressor, it falters in his
absence. This aSpect of the tragedy should not be
overlooked. With this conclusion The Gag stands as a
harshly realistic View of the problems of a self-governing
society. Just as he refused to depict freedom as anything
but problematic in The Condemned Squad, so too he rejects
here any Simple Optimism concerning the human—social
condition.

The next play of this group, A Death in the

 

Neighborhood (1955), is also a work which incorporates the

 

complexity of the human Situation in a manner which defies
simplistic message summarizing. Falling in a period of
very active writing, the play, completed less than a year
and a half after The Gag, is separated from the earlier

work by Red Earth, Anna Kleiber, and The Blood of God. It

 

 

was refused production and, for a period, even publication

in Spain.

214

AS usual Sastre attached some notes of eXplanation.
In these he points to his concern for the lack of human
consideration in the doctor-patient relationship.
"Doctors are ignorant of what surrounds the.wound, that
is: a man."82 He sees a growing dehumanization in
Medicine which is in conflict with human needs. " . . .
the depths of this conflict is what is revealed suddenly
and brutally in A Death in the Neighborhood . . . this
'case' objectifies all the contained rage, the unconscious
fury of the neighborhood. And the important thing in this
drama is not the 'case' but the fury and the conditions of
the fury which end with the brutal death of a man."83

A Death in the Neighborhood begins with a prologue
scene in the Bar Moderno. The police COMMISSIONER is
trying to get the details surrounding a killing which took
place a few days earlier in the same bar. PEDRO, the
bartender, briefly describes the incident: the local
clinic doctor, an older man with a drinking problem, had
been absent from his post when a child injured by an
automobile had been brought in; as a result the child
died; two days later the doctor was attacked and killed by
a group of neighbors who happened to be in the bar when he

came in. AS PEDRO begins to fill in the details of the

story, it is dramatized in five flashback scenes.

 

82Sastre, o. C., p. 529.

83Sastre, O. C., p. 530.

215

In the first of these PACO, the local newsvendor, who
has been chosen for the purpose by lot from among ARTURO'S
Old friends, meets ARTURO to tell him of the death of his
child. ARTURO is something of a dandy who was JUANA‘S
(the child's mother) lover previously. He left her before
their child was born and is now living in another
neighborhood. His "social success" is demonstrated by his
carrying two kinds of cigarettes and a lighter. After a
great deal of hesitation PACO tells him of the accident in
which the child was injured and of their taking the child
to the clinic and finding no doctor. The news of his
child's death breaks away ARTURO'S dandyish facade and
leaves him in anger and tears. He decides to go back to
the neighborhood to see JUANA.

In the second scene ARTURO arrives at JUANA'S home.
MARfA and TOBIAS, her mother and father, are discussing
her condition. TOBfAS insists on Speaking to ARTURO while
MARfA goes off to see if JUANA will see him. ARTURO asks
forgiveness of TOBfAS. The two are reconciled. They talk
of the doctor SANJO who had been absent from the clinic.
ARTURO expresses a desire to carry out some personal
punishment. TOBIAS tells him that justice is a matter for
society not for the individual. MARfA returns and says
that JUANA does not wish to see anyone. ARTURO leaves
eXplaining that he will return everyday until she will see
him. TOBIAS is soon called off to play dominos at the bar

with his friend RAMON. Before he leaves JUANA appears and

216

asks him to send ARTURO back. While waiting for him she
and her mother talk about the little boy. ARTURO returns
to Share with JUANA the grief over their lost child.

Scene three occurs in the poorly furnished house of a
certain SEEORA SOFfA. A friend and neighbor of MARIA, She
is a somewhat eccentric, heavy smoking, novel-reading lady
who is about to receive an injection from the local
clinic's nurse, GENOVEVA. SRA. SOFIA insists that
GENOVEVA remain after giving the injection to enjoy some
of her Special lemonade "with a few drOpS of liqueur."
They talk about DR. SANJO and the incident of the child.
SANJO has on occasion been very rude in his treatment of
GENOVEVA. After the nurse leaves MARfA arrives to ask
SRA. SOFfA to accompany her in trying to convince JUANA to
take a paseo. SRA. SOFfA agrees to go but only after
MARTA tries some of her lemonade.

The next scene takes place in GENOVEVA'S apartment.
LUIS, her boyfriend, arrives. He is a pale, thin, young
man who apparently has tuberculosis. As a result of his
illness he has lost his job and has Spent some time in a
sanatorium. The eXperience there was quite dehumanizing
as he describes it. GENOVEVA tells him that he can be
cured, but that he must not allow his physical illness to
take over his Spirit. He attempts to eXplain to her his
difficulty in being rejected and treated as something
unclean and to be avoided. He tries to describe the

horror of being constantly sick. "The worst thing that

217

can happen to a poor person, Genoveva, is to get sick; to
get sick, that's the worst thing in the world that can

happen."84

She asks him to go with her to the Bar Moderno
to meet a young medical student, PABLO, who might be able
to help him. As they leave the apartment she insists that
he kiss her.

The fifth scene brings all the characters tOgether in
the Bar Moderno. A group of medical students are
discussing the possibility of getting the medical_college
and association to revoke SANJO'S license to practice.
PABLO arrives and gets the group to agree to a more
immediate retribution: going to the doctor's house and
beating him. PACO comes in with JUANITO to drink a beer.
He is complaining about not selling any papers because of
everyone being at a soccer game. TOBfAS and his friend
RAMON arrive and begin a game of dominos with PACO and
JUANITO. At this point a MAN IN RAGS with a guitar comes
in and asks PEDRO'S permission to play. This given, he
sings a short song and collects enough money to buy
himself a beer. ARTURO'S arrival at the bar stirs a
little excitement momentarily, but everyone eventually
goes back to his conversation or game, and he is left
talking to PEDRO at the bar. He tries to eXplain his new
awareness of things and people in the neighborhood, how

everything is somehow the same yet different. He talks

 

84Sastre, O. C., p. 568.

218

about earlier days and even mentions his parent's death
which occurred in a bomb eXplosion during the war. The
GUITARIST finishes his beer and leaves. The only sounds
for a few moments are those of the dominos clicking.
TOBIAS ends the game with a lOud blow to the table.
GENOVEVA and LUIS come in and She introduces him to PABLO.
They begin to talk; a record is playing. Suddenly all the
talking stOpS and only the music is heard. DR. SANJO
enters and as he does the record finishes playing and the
room is in total Silence. He crosses to the bar and
orders a double brandy. The remainder of the Scene is one
of Sastre's best dramatic moments.

SANJO. A double brandy.

PEDRO. Yes Sir. (Pours a single.)

SANJO. I said a double.

PEDRO. Excuse me, Dr. Sanjo. (ARTURO turns.)

ARTURO. (To PEDRO.) What you say?

PEDRO. What?

ARTURO. What did you just call this man?

PEDRO. He . . . is Dr. Sanjo.

ARTURO. (Blanching.) Thanks. (He Slaps the doctor
on the back.) Listen.

SANJO. (Turns, out of humor.) What do you want?
ARTURO. You're Dr. Sanjo, right?

SANJO. Yes, what do you want?

ARTURO. Nothing. Just to look at you close up. (He
looks at him insolently. The doctor, uncomfortable,
_drinks a little brandy. He looks around. Everyone is
looking at him. He clears his throat nervously.)
SANJO. Would you please leave me alone?

ARTURO. (Continues staring at him.) So this is you.
SANJO. (Grimacing.) Me? Who?

ARTURO. You say who . . . (With a twisted eXpression.
SANJO wipes his brow with a handkerchief.) In the
neighborhood you're very well known. Everybody knows
you. I just arrived and I've already heard peOple
talking about you . . . and you just walk around . . .
as if nothing happened. (SANJO takes a swallow of
brandy.) I'm going to give you a little piece of news
doctor . . . just to see if it interests you. Last
Friday, in this neighborhood, there was an accident.
.A truck.- . . hit a little boy . . . in the street.

219

Last Friday, in this neighborhood, a very unfortunate
thing happened doctor. What do you have to say about
it? What's your Opinion on the matter? Do you have
anything to say . . . you? (Shouting harshly.)
Murderer! Do you know what I'm talking about?

SANJO. (Nervously looking around.) I suppose . . . I
suppose you're talking about the dead boy they brought
to the clinic. He was attended to, but . . . there
was nothing to be done. He was brought in dead.
ARTURO. (Shaking his head.) He wasn't brought in
dead. The fact is nobody knew what to do for him,
doctor . . . The fact is that nobody was there who
could help him . . .

SANJO. NO . . . You've been misinformed . . . I saw
the report . . . A fracture at the base of the
cranium . . . There was . . . nothing that could be
done.

ARTURO. It's the same thing, doctor . . . if there
wasn't anyone there to do it.

SANJO. I'm sorry. No one could have done anything.
Pedro, here. (He leaves some money and tries to start
out. ARTURO stOps him.) Please, let me by.

ARTURO. No. You're not going anywhere.

SANJO. (Remaining quiet. He turns and looks one by
one at those watching him.) What do you want? (NO
one says anything. He cries out nervously.) Well,
what do you want?

PABLO. (Steps forward.) Nothing, doctor.

SANJO. Tell this man to let me go. I don't know
what's wrong with him.

PABLO. I don't think I'll tell him anything, doctor.
(SANJO wipes sweat with his handkerchief.)

LUIS. Hot, isn't it?

SANJO. Pedro, what is this? What are you going to do
to me?

PEDRO. Do, doctor? Nothing.

SANJO. Tell them to let me leave.

PEDRO. Me? I don't think they'd pay any attention,
doctor. ‘

SANJO. Call the police.

PEDRO. (Picks up the telephone.) Yes, Sir.

(Listens.) Funny . . . it doesn't seem to be working.
(Hangs up.)

SANJO. Pedro!

PEDRO. What, doctor?

SANJO. Help me get out.

PEDRO. Me . . . not me, doctor.

SANJO. (He turns to the others.) Let me go! Let me
leave! (The circle of peOple tightens. SANJO looks
around, terrified.) Let me go . . . maybe I did do
something wrong. I don't know! Turn me in . . . I'll
give my reasons, my . . . my excuses. Sometimes I get
Sick . . . And I have to . . . get out Of the

clinic . . . The halls close in on me . . . I'm not

220

very well . . . I'm . . . I'm not happy . . . I'm
afraid! . . . It makes me Sick waiting there, all
closed in . . . waiting there, for what? Anything can
come in! A man with a fractured Skull . . . all

Open . . . blood . . . ! I never wanted to work in a
clinic . . . I wanted to do research . . . but I
needed the money . . . to live . . . I ended up in the
hOSpital . . . I started to drink . . . (Screaming.)

I beg you . . . let me go! Let me leave! Please . .
I beg you . . . please! (He starts toward the door.

In the doorway, dressed in black, still and rigid
stand JUANA, MARIA, and SOFIA. They are silent.
Almost unwillingly they cut Off his path. He turns.)
Someone has to help me! (he sees GENOVEVA.) You!

You know me, we've worked together! Tell them to let
me go!

GENOVEVA. (Simply.) NO. NO. (The doctor screams
and throws himself at ARTURO. But he is sharply
stOpped. ARTURO is holding a knife. The doctor grabs
a bottle, breaks it and tries to Slash ARTURO. PABLO
grabs him from behind. ARTURO stabs him deep with the
knife. The rest have tightened the circle. SANJO
falls. He painfully pulls himself up and again tries
to escape, but PACO grabs him and throws him down. A
mirror falls. They all begin tearing-at him. He
continues to struggle. Tables are knocked over,
glasses and bottles broken. Suddenly everything goes
silent. SANJO'S body is a ragged heap on the floor.
They all stand almost perfectly still, looking.)35

The epilogue brings one back to the present with the

COMMISSIONER and PEDRO talking. The COMMISSIONER thanks

PEDRO for telling him the whole story. They comment on

the heat and the possible effect it had on the peOple.

Outside it has darkened and a fast summer storm is coming

The rain begins to fall, some relief from the heat.

In emphasizing the social, revolutionary aspects Of

A Death in the Neighborhood, where Similarities can easily

be drawn with other works, critics have again tended to

overlook the unique nature of the play as a tragedy in

 

85Sastre, O. C., p. 581.

221

Sastre's body of tragic theatre. The usual dialectic,
however, is not the process used in develOping the
characters here. Their suffering, for the most part, is
that constant condition resulting from a life of
deprivation. It does not come as the anguish-of decision
between conflicting demands or as the agony of eXpanded
consciousness in the moment Of some Aristoelian recogni-
tion as in most of Sastre's tragedies.’ While the
characters (including SANJO)are the tragic victims of a
dehumanizing social system and ultimately act against it,
there is almost no sense of tragic awareness develOped.
Only PEDRO and the COMMISSIONER, in the prologue and
epilogue, achieve any degree Of moral perSpective.

Using these two characters to tell the whole story in
the prologue and then following with a detailed dramatiza-
tion, Sastre manages to cast a sense of Greek, tragic
inevitability over the action. In addition he generates
in his audience enough anticipation to carry it through a
series of realistic vignettes which serve more toward
character creation than plot develOpment. The success Of
the tragedy largely rests on the late climax, which occurs
less as the probable outcome of a carefully constructed
plot than as a ritual demonstration Of basic human impulse
and social purification.

If Sastre's purpose iS,-as Anderson puts it, an

"86

"investigation of social injustice in A Death in the

 

 

86Anderson, p. 100.

222

Neighborhood, his method emphasizes the depiction of the

 

very human attributes and foibles of society's members.
The ironic discovery of the COMMISSIONER'S personal
investigation is that the guilt lay in the dehumanization
of individuals by the social order rather than in the
ultimate, exaggerated human reSponse to this.. The target
in this case is the medical profession which, by ignoring
the human nature of man, brings about an extreme demonstra-
tion of that nature.

~In four scenes Sastre attemptSetordramatize different
eXpressiOns of human need met with human relationship,
compassion and understanding. PACO tries in his awkward
way to sympathize with ARTURO in his loss. TOBfAS and
MARfA relate in their suffering, and MARIA and her
daughter attempt to comfort each other in their inability
to comprehend the death of the child. ARTURO and JUANA
are brought together in grief and forgiveness. On a
different level GENOVEVA and SOFfA are seen to be related
by human kindness and LUIS and GENOVEVA by understanding
and love. Even in the bar the medical students are Shown
to be held together by a group jpie de vivre and by their
reaction of anger over the malpractice in their anticipated
(profession.

If theSe dramatizations are not tightly woven in a

plot develOpment toward the climax they serve to prepare
for it as demonstrations of the very most human moments of

existence which are ignored or disregarded by the social

223

order (as represented Specifically here by its medical
branch). But Sastre has gone beyond the Simple contrast
between the humanizing relationships-in these scenes and
the dehumanizing eXperience of the empty clinic,
unreSponSive to human need. He has complicated the tragic
situation, as he did in The Gag, by revealing the human
nature of SANJO in the climactic scene. The Oppressive,
dehumanizing force of the social order works through
individuals like SANJO who themselves are victims of the
same process. Sastre's constant awareness of the
individual's tragic Situation again causes him to reject
the simplicity of a single level interpretation.

Without denying the symbolism of a human victory over
a dehumanizing social order that exists in the play, one
can argue that the real dramatic strength of the work
rests in the surge of primordial tragic action (fear, pity,
suffering), partially ritualized, which constitutes the
‘climax. Having already eXperimented with the modern
reenactment of a Dionysian moment of madness and slaughter

as a type of social purge in The Condemned Squad, Sastre

 

now recreates the eXperience in fuller dramatic form and
with greater depth of meaning. The event is already known
to the audience before it occurs which tends to raise it
in one way to a level of ritual reenactment. The sense of
fate and the inevitability of things which arises with
this foreknowledge granted the audience, in the manner Of

Greek tragic theatre, is here tied to the unchanging

224

nature of man as demonstrated in his moments of extreme
eXpreSSion. The community's violent Slaughter of SANJO in
the Bar Moderno iS inextricably linked to the actions of
primitive tribes at the dawn of man's social existence.
Theatrically Sastre has in this moment added to the
dimension of psychological realism the dimension of
archetypical action which in this case is that "extreme
action" of Artaud's theatre, approaching his "agitation

of . . . masses, convulsed and hurled against each

"87

other. With the help of brandy and the otherwise

meaningless GUITARIST,88

the event achieves a mythical
dimension of meaning, one of Dionysian madness, when SANJO
is torn apart by the crowd. With the dramatization of~
this purging of society Sastre is attempting to bring
about in his audience a katharsis involving pity and fear.

The effectiveness of this experience, however,

depends on SANJO'S being depicted as a real and suffering

 

87Antonin Artuaud, "The Theatre and Cruelty," in
Barrett H. Clark, European Theories of the Drama (New York:
Crown, 1965), p. 398.

88Van Der Naald (p. 169) states that "the third and
fourth scenes have little relation to the rest of the
work," and She sees no possible relationship to the work in
the GUITARIST and in ARTURO'S conversation with PEDRO in
the bar scene. The third and fourth scenes are part of
Sastre's effort to build up a community of human individu-
als shown in various human relationships one with another.
ARTURO'S conversation with PEDRO also serves to strengthen
his relationship with the neighborhood. The GUITARIST can
be interpreted in a number of-ways: he is unrelated to the
action as realistically one could easily be in a public
place; he is related symbolically, as Lorca might have used
him, and can be seen as foreshadowing death; he is a
symbolic Dionysian figure.

225

human being. At this critical moment in the play Sastre
insists on effecting the Aristotelian kathartic eXperience
at the possible eXpense of the social message. SANJO
could have been a cardboard figure or a brutally inhuman
type, and the Social message of the play would have been
clear. But to depict him as a pathetic individual caught
between a dehumanizing bureaucracy and its irate human
victims is to intensify the human tragedy at the moment of
its climax, to make the violence and death meaningful to
the depths of man's conscious and unconscious being, while
recognizing the impossibility of a simple solution. The
audience must be able to recognize themselves both in
SANJO and in the violent crowd. Fear is both the fear of
the victim and the fear in discovering the primitive
impulse (the Dionysian madness) in oneself. And pity
comes through the recognition that everyone is a victim in
the situation. The play proves to be not only an
investigation of social injustice but an investigation "of
the darkest zones of human reality [and] of human
existence."89

In A Death in the Neighborhood Sastre has attempted

 

to probe the tragedy of human existence and social
injustice by beginning with a kind of documentary
Situation (the death of the child and the death of SANJO)

which could possibly have been drawn from his contemporary

 

89SaStre, D. S., p. 107. Sastre uses this phrase to
describe Sartre's tragedy. See chapter I.

226

society. In Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell he begins
with a myth (as he did in a less develOped way with

Community Bread and Red Earth) which successfully reflects

 

the social conditions and the human condition in present
day reality that he wishes to investigate. But in
relating reality and the myth Sastre forces a change in
the story which gives it a new tragic existence. "Tell
ceases to be the protagonist of great feats and becomes
the subject of a tragedy. He acquires the greatness of a
redeemer by whose sacrifice the salvation of others is
made possible. He is destroyed so that others may
live."90

Sastre wrote his "William Tell" in November of 1955
in reSponse to a request for a modern version of the myth
by José Tamayo, director of the Teatro ESpafiol. Tamayo
received the script enthusiastically, but was prevented
from producing it by the Ministry of Information.

The script calls for present day costumes and
abstract sets. The first scene is the Plaza of Altdorf at
the far end of which a gigantic edifice is in construction
with scaffolding rising out of Sight and MASONS moving
about constantly at different levels. Two BEGGARS Sit in
the foreground discussing the hard times that have come on
themselves and the country. The FOREMAN of the work crew

at the building, which the BEGGARS have identified as a

 

90Sastre, O. C., p. 587.

227

new prison, rings the lunch bell, and as the men begin to
come off the scaffold and find places to Sit and eat, a
BLIND MAN is led on by a BOY with a guitar. The BLIND MAN
Sings a ballad of the crimes of the governor, GESSLER.91
The FOREMAN attempts to drive the BLIND MAN away fearing
that the authorities might interpret his staying as an
indication of a seditious attitude on the part of himself
and his workers. When the BLIND MAN refuses, the FOREMAN
goes Off and returns soon after with a SERGEANT and some
GUARDS-- AS they attempt.to remove-the BLIND.MAN, WILLIAM
TELL appears on-the far Side of the plaza and stands
watching the Situation. The BLIND MAN delivers a long
harrangue at the SERGEANT and finally begins Shouting for
the death of the governor. The GUARDS Shoot him down.
TELL comes over to the SERGEANT and threatens to kill him
at some future time. The SERGEANT in a panic orders the
GUARDS to shoot, but as they do TELL pulls the SERGEANT
around to Shield himself, and the SERGEANT is killed. The
GUARDS take TELL prisoner and go off with him. The
FOREMAN orders the workers to cover the bodies and go back
to the scaffolding. The two BEGGARS sit talking, one, of
the possible fate of WILLIAM TELL, the other, of the

weather.

 

91An example of ridiculous criticism is Luis Garcia-
Abrines, "La poesia accidental en el teatro de Sastre,"
Dquesne HiSpanic Review, I, No. l (1962), 47. In this
article Sr. Garcia-Abrines criticizes Sastre for his poor
rime scheme in the BLIND MAN'S ballad.

228

The second scene is seven days after TELL'S arrest.
The SEATED BEGGAR is in a tavern talking to the TAVERN
KEEPER. An OLD WOMAN comes in and informs them of TELL‘S
release. Moments later WALTER FURST, TELL'S father-in-law
comes in and indicates that his son—in-law was to meet him
there. On hearing this the TAVERN KEEPER immediately
begins to eXpress concern for himself. Just as the
FOREMAN in the earlier scene, he eXplains that he has a
wife and children and doesn't want to get into trouble
even though he admires TELL. The BEGGAR engages FURST in
conversation and discovers in him a man of theory who is
unwilling to act. FURST tells him that others must be the
ones to carry out his theories. Finally TELL arrives and
talks about his imprisonment and torture. He eXpresses a
strange sense of tranquility and a lack of desire to
involve himself in political matters. He is amused at
FURST'S anger eSpecially when the old man eXplains his
intention of publishing an article and holding a meeting.
TELL'S only interest at the moment iS in his family. He
informs FURST that he will not attend the planned meeting
of the resistance leaders.

The scene following is that of the meeting. FURST
and five others are assembled in his house awaiting the
rest of the leaders. Eventually the representatives of
the other cantons arrive and the meeting gets underway.
They are in the process of selecting by vote someone to

head up the entire resistance movement when TELL arrives.

229

He refuses to participate in the vote but stays to listen
to the discussion which follows, led by the newly elected
FURST. The group becomes embroiled in argument over
abstract plans and semantic differences, and TELL gets Up
to leave using his son's fever as an excuse. But
pressured by FURST he finally tells them his real reason.
"I listen to you and I'm left cold. I listen to you and
it seems like there isn't any injustice and misery in the
country. As if everything were a lie. AS if you were
telling stories. Or as if you were about to undertake
some business project. As if this were a university
seminar. No. I'm going. There's nothing for me to do
here. I search through all those words your saying, and I
don't see any children begging for bread. When someone
makes a child suffer, I'll kill him. In the meantime I'm
going home. I'm sorry I interrupted you."92

The fourth scene, back again in the Plaza of Altdorf,
is a depiction of the tragic-comic absurdity of existence
under GESSLER'S rule. Two GUARDS are in the process of
erecting a pike with a hat on it in the center of the
square.

FIRST GUARD. (Brushing off his hands.) Looks O. K.

huh?

SECOND GUARD. Looks O. K.

FIRST GUARD. Strong enough?

SECOND GUARD. (Moves the pike.) It won't fall.

FIRST GUARD. The hat won't blow away will it?

SECOND GUARD. Hey, that's right.
FIRST GUARD. Should we tie it?

 

928astre, o. C., p. 626.

230

SECOND GUARD. The orders don't say so.

FIRST GUARD. It might blow away . . .

SECOND GUARD. The orders don't say so.

FIRST GUARD. Better not then.

SECOND GUARD. Now what do we do?

FIRST GUARD. Stay here.

SECOND GUARD. DO the orders say SO?

FIRST GUARD. Of course.

SECOND GUARD. Well, here we are.

FIRST GUARD. Here we are.

SECOND GUARD. Should we stand at attention?
FIRST GUARD. The orders don't say SO.

SECOND GUARD. Then how Should we stand?
FIRST GUARD. I don't know!

SECOND GUARD. I'm going to ask the corporal.
FIRST GUARD. Let's stand at ease. O. K.?
SECOND GUARD. I don't know . . .

FIRST GUARD. Come on. Look. (He stands at ease.)
You see? Nothing happened.

SECOND GUARD. Well, since you're older, if you give
the order . . .

FIRST GUARD. Don't be afraid.

SECOND GUARD. GO on!93

The comic routine is continued with a DRUMMER and
TOWN CRIER who arrive and read a proclamation. The
message proclaimed, however, is far from comic. GESSLER
is insisting that everyone who passes the square bow down
to the hat and Shout out, "long live the governor," on
pain of torture or death. The OLD WOMAN and one of the
BEGGARS have been watching the entire spectacle. As she
leaves She very ostentatiously pays homage as demanded
leaving the GUARDS confused as to whether She has made
fools of them or not. The GUARDS begin to talk of their
family problems, Sick children, wives, and insufficient
pay. While they talk, FURST comes by and fails to stOp at

the hat not knowing why it is there. Suddenly the GUARDS

 

93Sastre, O. C., pp. 628, 629.

231

become two brutally inhuman creatures. They beat SbhéT :3
the ground kicking him and jabbing him with their pike;
until he cries out, "long live the governor," in iconic
contrast with his call for the death of the governor which
ended the previous scene.

The fifth scene occurs in TELL'S cottage. He and his
wife HEDWIG are talking about WALTY their son as they wait
for him to come home for supper. When WALTY arrives he
tells them about FURST'S eXperience in the town square.
TELL decides that he must act, but before he can leave, a
citizen comes by and informs them of the suicide of FURST.
TELL takes down his crossbow and starts off. He stOpS at
the door and aSkS WALTY to go with him, eXplaining that he
doesn't know why he wants him to go, but that he feels he
should. The two go off leaving HEDWIG mourning for her
father.

The sixth scene is back at the town square. Dusk is
coming on. The two GUARDS are still on duty by the hat
discussing their day's events. TELL and WALTY appear at
the far end of the Square. TELL aims his crossbow and
shoots the hat Off the pike. The GUARDS are thrown into
confusion. Suddenly the sounds of the governor's
approaching hunting party are heard. The stage fills up
with peOple carrying torches. GESSLER comes on. He is
drunk. The GUARDS throw themselves down in front of him
eXplaining the incident with the hat. TELL approaches and

admits to having Shot it down. GESSLER questions him on

232

his marksmanship and comments on his sad countenance.

Then he insists that TELL shoot an apple off Of WALTY'S
head. When TELL refuses GESSLER threatens to have them
both shot. TELL requests a last talk with his son.
GESSLER permits him this but insists that everyone Observe
the scene as if it were a theatrical performance. TELL
and WALTY play out their last moments together in the full
awareness of an audience. Then TELL prepares to shoot, he
falters, GESSLER brings his guns to the mark; TELL shoots
and shatters his son's head. The death of WALTY and
TELL'S piercing animal cry set Off the revolution. TELL
kills GESSLER, and all the tOwnSpeOple who have gathered
around eXplode in a fury of killing. Fires are set on all
the mountains to announce GESSLER'S death.

In the final scene, at TELL'S cottage, the citizens
are trying to convince him of his heroism and of the
significance of his act. But for him the loss of his son
has taken the meaning from everything. He eXpresses
bitterness-towards-the-citizens-for not.acting before the
tragic death of WALTY and for allowing themselves to
remain an audience to the tragedy. He articulates his
dream of a happier ending, the traditional ending of the
legend, which is now forever impossible.

Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell has been called by
one critic the best tragedy of the contemporary Spanish

94

theatre. Of Sastre's published plays it is certainly

 

94Tecgien, p. 73.

233

without equal in its SCOpe of theatrical and dramatic
variety. If, however, the tragic dilemma of TELL,
himself, seems less intense and less compelling in a
realistic, psycholOgical way than that of the characters

in some of the other works (The Condemned Squad, In the

 

Net, Death Thrust), the cause may lie in the sense of

 

theatrical self-consciousness the play possesses.
Anderson sees an imbalance caused by an insufficiently
develOped individual Character and a rather well develOped

social context.95

He eXpresseS doubt, "that Tell's
eXposure prior to the play's climactic scene has been
sufficient to arouse the audience's empathy," but is
willing to admit that, "a skillful production could
compensate for the play's uneven dramatic quality."96
This production requirement, unfortunately still unmet in
.Spain, provides a hint to an understanding of the play's
unique nature: its almost Brechtian theatricality (to be
somewhat free with terms recognizing Sastre's almost total
unfamiliarity with Brecht at the time and the play's
dramatic, i.e., not epic, form). This is evident in a
number of ways and is highly relevant to a correct
interpretation of the work.

In the first place it is important to recognize that

Sastre has chosen to use a piece of theatre, or theatrical

 

95Anderson, p. 87.

96Anderson, p. 89.

234

myth, as the basis for his investigation of the tragic
condition rather than the usual Situation ostensibly drawn
from life. And while his Characters obviously reflect
individuals in modern society, they display an unusual
degree of consciousness of their roles, and they very
Often find themselves in "staged" situations.

Life, as depicted in the play, frequently seems to
imitate theatre. The two BEGGARS, as Pérez Minik points
out,97 act as a chorus, commenting on the actions of the
protagonist and others and interpreting situations and
conditions. The BLIND MAN makes his life a public
demonstration of the results of GESSLER'S Oppressive rule
and forces a suicidal death in the town square as a Climax
to his demonstration. The square in fact becomes a stage
for a number of "theatrical" events. The hat on the pike
forces the citizens, Specifically the OLD WOMAN and FURST,
to perform before the GUARDS and the TOWNSPEOPLE. The OLD
WOMAN'S comic performance is seemingly set up to intensify
by contrast the tragic sense of FURST'S diSplay.

GESSLER'S sense of theatre is exhibited in the square and
results in the play's climactic scene, as he insists on a
dramatic demonstration of TELL'S marksmanship and on a

theatricalization of the father and son's parting moment.

This scene, with TELL and WALTY entirely conscious of

 

97Domingo Pérez Minik, "Se trata de Alfonso Sastre,
dramaturgo melancdlico de la revolutciOn." Alfonso Sastre
(Madrid: Taurus, 1964), p. 25.

 

235

themselves as actors, under a dictator's direction,
playing out the most desperate moments of their tragic
situation before an audience of passive Spectators, is the
ultimate eXpression of Sastre's eXperiment in self-
conscious theatricality and reveals its purpose.

As the scene begins the drama eXpands to incorporate
the audience's reality into itself. By forcing a complete
identification of the real audience with the passive
Spectators of Altdorf, Sastre brings his audience to a new
consciousness of its own role in the eXpanded drama.

TELL. You see, Walty. It's like a theatre. All
those indifferent eyes on us.

WALTY. Yes, father.

TELL. (Indicating the audience.) A lot of peOple are
watching us.

WALTY. Yes.

TELL. Sitting there digesting a good meal, it doesn't
matter to them what happens to us.

WALTY. That's right, father.

TELL. Or they've had a few glasses of wine and
they're just feeling mellow, watching us through a
soft filter of alcohol.

WALTY. They can hardly see us, father.

TELL. You see that? We're just a spectacle, Walty.

A show . . . and their part is to applaud or whistle.
WALTY. Yes, father.

TELL. And our part is to be hurt . . . or killed.
WALTY. Don't be sad, father. I'm not sad.

TELL. Nor I. The only thing that hurts me is that no
one tries to help us.9

With the audience clearly established in its role of
a society unwilling to reSpond to the individual's need,
willing to permit his suffering, the climactic moment is
played out. The myth of the self—reliant hero, which

relieves society of reSponSibility, is shattered by the

 

98Sastre, O. C., p. 648.

236

misdirected bolt. TELL is discovered to be an ordinary
human being, and society is forced to reCOgnize its
necessary modern role. The revolution begins, and the
passive audience becomes an active force destroying
GESSLER who ironically becomes a victim in the drama which
he initiated. The tragedy of TELL cannot be undone,
however, and his withdrawal from the new society and his
dreaming of the impossible mythical ending reveal Sastre's
insistence on recognizing the inescapable existential
tragedy which no amount of social progress can eliminate.

The entire process of the play can be seen as a
dialectical one in which the truth of a tragic situation
is made more compelling by its being held in a tension
against the theatricality or theatrical self-consciousness
inherent in its presentation. To describe the effect
metaphorically: the theatrical manner tends to pull the
Spectator toward the situation in an unsuSpecting way to a
point where he suddenly discovers an uneXpected reality
beneath the playing, a sadness in the eyes behind the
mask, a horror in the silence between the lines. The
reality revealed and the theatrical presentation of it
seem at the point Of discovery to be both pulling apart
and yet moving together. The tension sharpens the
eXperience of discovery.

AS a Specific example, the two GUARDS perform an
almost traditional comic routine as they go about putting

up the pike with the hat on it. They are Clowns and as

237

clowns they become the butt of comedy for the OLD WOMAN.
She makes fools of them by overplaying the role of the
Citizen rendering homage to the governor. In their
confusion over her action they even begin to slowly appear
pathetic. AS they begin to talk about their family
problems they become sympathetic. And just as one begins
to think he understands these characters who are growing
human, FURST comes through the square, and they begin to
act another role. Suddenly they are recognized to be
fools with power. Sympathy turns to antipathy. They are
no longer pathetic; they are brutal. Pathos is superseded
by terror.

(FURST looks curiously at the hat, Shrugs his
shoulders and starts to go by. He is stOpped by a
voice.)

FIRST GUARD. Heh, you.

FURST. (Turning, surprised.) Yes, what is it?
FIRST GUARD. Don't you know your duty?

FURST. What duty?

FIRST GUARD. (To the second.) Get a load of this
guy. (To FURST.) Are you trying to make fun of us,
or what?

FURST. Make fun of you? . . . No . . . certainly not.
FIRST GUARD. Yes. Are you laughing at us?

FURST. NO, I'm not laughing at you.

FURST. I say . . .

SECOND GUARD. (Furiously.) Do you want to shut up or
not?

FURST. I haven't broken any law. I have nothing to
fear.

SECOND GUARD. Do you know whose hat this is?

FURST. No. I don't.

SECOND GUARD. It's the governor's.

FURST. What's it doing here?

FIRST GUARD. It's here so you can get down on your
knees in front of it and say, "Long live the
governor."

FURST. That's absurd. (The FIRST GUARD strikes him
in the face.)

FIRST GUARD. Say that it's absurd again.

FURST. It's absurd . . . ! (They beat him down

238

brutally. The SECOND GUARD kicks him. FURST starts

moaning.)

FIRST GUARD. And now you say, "Long live the

governor," or we'll kill you right here.

FURST. (Looking around for help. There is no one to

help him. The STONE MASONS are working all the way at

the tOp of the scaffold.) Citizens of Altdorf, help

me! Citizens of Altdorf . . . ! (No one reSponds.)

FIRST GUARD. "Long live the governor." (FURST feels

the pikes of the GUARDS on his chest. He is

terrified. Trembling he Shouts.)

FURST. Long live the governor!

SECOND GUARD. Again.

'FURST. (Shouting.) Long live the governor!

SECOND GUARD. vCome on. Again.

FURST; Long live . . . (He can't finish. He is

sobbing convulsively.)99
The inhuman brutality of these men, themselves brutalized
by an Oppressive system, comes as an unanticipated
discovery and is the more compelling as it exists in a
tenSion with the seemingly innocuous fool's play earlier
in the scene. FURST is correct in pointing out the
absurdity of the situation, but the absurd is the real;
reality has become absurd.

In another example and on a different comic.level,
the fools of intellect and theory playout a parody of
democracy in action as FURST and the resistance leaders of
the other towns secretly meet and concentrate their
efforts on determining parliamentary procedure. FURST'S
later encounter with the GUARDS and his subsequent suicide
stand incontrast with the actions of FURST, the
theoretical fool, and the human and social tragedy of the

man is sharpened by the contrast.

 

99Sastre, O. C., pp. 632-633.

239

It is, however the action and Character of TELL,
himself, which provides the best example of this dialectic
of the real and the theatrical. He is a character who
acts in terms of a conscious awareness of his own heroic
and legendary stature. For the audience he is a figure
whose actions and success are mythically determined.
Paradoxically the most intimate scene of the play, between
TELL and WALTY, is the most consciously theatrical, but in
the paradoxical tension the tragic condition of the
individual, TELL, is even more sharply revealed.

Following this is TELL'S moment of public (theatrical)
triumph as a mythical hero which Sastre turns into a
moment of existential gpggt, a tragic Climax. The
mythical mask is shattered and behind it is revealed the
face of a man whose sad eyes eXpress the discovery of his
true tragic condition. Finally, in the last scene the
myth of the hero has become for TELL an inaccessible dream
which continues to occupy his thoughts as an ironic
contrast to his real and tragic existence. In all three
cases the dialectic of the theatrical (mythical) and the
real (existential) brings about an intensified revelation
of the tragic condition.

Outside of this relationship of the theatrical and
the real there is another relationship, more regularly
found in Sastre's works, of society and the individual.
The conflict Of reSponSibilitieS toward family and toward

society at large is established with the Speeches of

240

excuse by the FOREMAN of the masons and by the TAVERN
KEEPER. TELL prefers the quiet of family life and Chooses
not to participate in the activities of FURST and his
resistance group. His acts of rebellion against the
Oppressive government are both somewhat Spontaneous,
Spurred by a general belief in the rights of man, and not,
at the moment of actiOn, considered in relation to the
family reSponSibility. It is only after WALTY'S death
that TELL fully recognizes this relationship and reacts by
refusing to participate in the new revolutionary state.
TELL'S experience is only one more example of the tragic
dilemma in which men are caught during periods of
revolution. But the tragedy of revolution, TELL'S
tragedy, is placed against the greater tragedy of the
existing social order, FURST'S tragedy, and the message of
society's reSponSibility is clear even while the
individual's dilemma continues to exist.

Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell is unique among
Sastre's plays in its manner of utilizing the element of
theatrical self-conSCiousness to intensify one's awareness
of the tragic situatiOn. 'In this manner he also Opens the
play and the play's problem to the real world of the
audience. The deliberate engagement of the audience
‘ through the theatrical device in the TELL—WALTY Scene
prevents any esCape from recognition of responsibility and

guilt through identification, and the Shattering of the

241

myth in the famous apple scene attempts to emphasize the
position of man in a real and unheroic century.

The next work to deal directly with the indiVidual
and society and their tragic relationship is also
something of a theatrical eXperiment but of a quite

different sort from Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell.

 

Nocturnal Assault was written between September of 1958

 

and February of 1959. It follows the writing of The
Reyeg, and a translation of Euripides' Medgg, and in its
unusual handling of the time element it relates closely
with the first of these works. Sastre's notes for
mounting the work suggest the use of simple stylized
scenery and lighting to facilitate the required fluidity
of movement through Space and time. He further suggests
an accentuation of the play's Spectacular dimension and
gives the director a free hand to do what he will using
the script only as a guide. The use of period music is
essential to the production. Sastre recommends Rock and
Roll, Tango music and the Can-Can for the three periods.
The seven scenes of the play carry titles which are to be
printed in the program.

I. Shots in the Night. It is evening. PROFESSOR
GRAFFI is just entering his darkened home somewhere in New
York City. He appears nervous, and while pouring himself
a drink, drOps the glass. The maid, MARGARITA, comes in
to help him clean up the broken glass. In their

conversation it is learned that his wife and son are

242

returning home the next day from a vacation in Florida.
GRAFFI indicates to MARGARITA that she Should prepare to
meet their train if he is unable to do so. He then begins
to hint at the possibility of something happening which
might prevent him from meeting it. Eventually he tells
her that he has encountered a man that day who has
threatened to kill him. She attempts to convince him that
the incident was probably a prank, but he implies that he
has reasons to believe otherwise. After more conversation
She retires leaving GRAFFI at his desk where he proceeds
to record a lecture on tape concerning the bombings of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the innumerable deaths
resulting from them. A knock is heard at the door.

GRAFFI Opens it to find THE MAN he has previously
described, standing outside.* He invites him in, but THE
MAN pulls a submachine gun from under his coat and murders
the Old PROFESSOR.

II. Criminal Investigation. A police office. The
murderer, MULLER, apparently a hired professional, is
being rather crudely interrogated by detective ASHLEY.
Another detective brings in MR. O'CONNOR who relates how
he heard the shooting and followed MULLER and managed to
disarm and capture him using his old WW II Marine
training. O'CONNOR'S fascination with weapons and killing
techniques disturbs even the detectives. After O'CONNOR
finishes, ASHLEY again attempts to get something out of

MULLER by using brute force. Inspector ORKIN's arrival

243

stOps the interrogation. He causes MULLER to immediately
break down by telling him that his wife is on her way to
see him. She obviously is unaware of his profession.
MULLER is taken out, and MARY GRAFFI is shown in. ORKIN
asks her to listen to her husbands last words on the tape.
Just as he is about to turn on the machine, the lights
change, and he walks out of the scene, lights a cigarette
and begins to talk to the audience. He eXplains how his
interest in the case brought him to a more complete
investigation than that required for the usual social
justice. He then begins to describe the broader
historical context in which the drama takes place, a
narrative of newsworthy events.

To tell the truth, these are had years. You remember,
for example, the Rosenbergs had just been executed
shortly before.

The war of nerves and the Anglofrench landing in Suez.
The bombing of Port Said.

Blood 1 being spilled in Hungary. And the communist
party is living through the aftermath of Stalin's
death and the Twentieth Congress.

There will be racial disturbances in Little Rock.

It's three years since
men climbed Mount Everest. In the movies we see:

Brigitte Bardott, nude. James Dean's accidental death
causes great consternation.

Elvis Presley and Bill Haley launch
"rock and roll."
Listen.100
And loud rock and roll music begins and is used as a

transition from this to the next scene.

 

100Sastre, O. C., p. 745.

244

III. Crime Syndicate. Two weeks earlier in MULLER’S
house in Tampa, Florida. MULLER and his wife, ANNA, are
in their living room. The rock and roll transitional
music is blaring. He goes to the record player and cuts
it Off. Their conversation reveals something of her past
as a nightclub Singer, his desire to make enough money to
enjoy some luxuries, their eXpected Child, and his
nervousness over his job about which she knows nothing.
The doorbell rings and ANNA answers it. She shows in UGO
BOSCO, a man unknown to both of them. MULLER and UGO are
left alone to talk, and the contract to kill GRAFFI is
made.

IV. Vengeance. ORKIN continues to talk to the
audience, telling them about the organization for which
MULLER works and of the little MULLER knows about either
the individuals who contract with him or those who are his
victims. Another narrative moves the context from the
fifties to the post-war forties. The lights come up on
GRAFFI'S house some ten years_earlier. GRAFFI and MARY
are talking. A man comes to the door. When Shown in he
asks for GRAFFI and identifies himself as ANGELO BOSCO.

He indicates that he is being pursued by the GRAFFI family
for some crime apparently committed against them by his
family years earlier. He begs MARCELLO GRAFFI to call off
his pursuers and end the feud between families. MARCELLO,
who is no longer a part of the family organization,

appears willing to help, but his brother TONIO arrives

245

home and finding out who BOSCO is, takes him into the next
room and kills him. TONIO flees and when BOSCO'S wife and
son, UGO, come into the house in search of ANGELO, they 9
find MARCELLO with the dead man. FLAVIA calls on her son
to avenge the murder.

V. The Tyrant's Death. ORKIN again appears and
pushes the play back to the period of the late twenties
and early thirties and to an island off of Italy. A
gramaphone is playing an Old tango. Suddenly the music
stOps and is replaced by the wailing of women in mourning.
Amid the wailing the declarations screamed out by the
women make it clear that the dead man, CARLO GRAFFI, has
been something of the sexual and political strong man of
the island. As the lights come up the women are dismissed
and thanked by SOFfA, the dead man's daughter-in-law,
married to SANDRO GRAFFI. She turns to leave the rOOm and
is surprised to find MARGA, a fifty year old woman, who,
has entered unnoticed. In the ensuing conversation it is
learned that the dead man had been generally hated.by’
those on the island not of the family and that MARGA'S
life had in some way been destroyed by him. SOFfA finally
leaves MARGA alone in the room not wishing to talk with
her any longer. MARGA goes to a door and signals for
someone outside to come in. ANGELO BOSCO, her younger
brother, now forty five, comes in. They have planned to
kill SANDRO to avenge the crime committed by the old man

against MARGA many years before. ANGELO tells her that

246

his family is waiting in a boat which will take them to
Africa. She leaves, and moments later SANDRO comes in.
The two men engage in a knife fight which ANGELO wins
leaving SANDRO dead on the floor. His sons, TONIO and
MARCELLO, find the body as they come into the house and
vow to carry out a vengeance.

VI. The Stronger. ORKIN continues his narration by
filling in some of the details in the peregrinations of
the GRAFFI and BOSCO families between the murder of SANDRO
and the murder of MARCELLO. He then moves backward again
in time to 1890 and sets the scene with some general
historical background for the initial incident between the
two families. Can-Can music provides the transition from
the narration to the Opening of the scene. The house is
the same as in the previous scene. Two young peOple,
SANDRO and SOFIA, are dividing their time between kissing
and conversing. MARCO, a man of humble appearance, forty
five, enters and asks if his daughter is there. SANDRO
deals with him disdainfully, and it becomes apparent that
the daughter, MARGA, is upstairs with the father, CARLO.

A moment later she is seen at the stairs; her appearance
makes clear that she has been violated. She asks her
father to avenge her by killing the drunken CARLO in his
bedroom. MARCO is unable to act. As they leave they
discover the young ANGELO who has been observing the
entire scene. AS the lights lower a blaring rock and roll

music swells up.

247

VII. Professor Graffi's Testament. ORKIN and MARY
GRAFFI are again at the point of playing the tape with
MARCELLO'S last words. He turns it on, and the lecture is
repeated. As they listen, the fifteen year Old son enters
the room unnoticed. The knock on the door is heard on the
tape, and GRAFFI'S voice Speaks to his wife: "Mary,
they're at the door . . . It may be nothing, but I'm
afraid . . . In case something happens to me, don't ever
tell our son . . . SO that this thing will end for
good . . . If something happens to me . . . continue
teaching him to love peace . . . to struggle for peace the
way his father has done . . . "101 The remainder of the
death scene is heard on the tape. ORKIN then realizes
that the son has heard everything. The lights fade out
leaving the inSpector again talking with the audience. He
fills in the final details concerning MULLER and his wife,
UGO BOSCO, and GRAFFI'S son who is growing older. To end
he makes one last sweep of the broader world context and
eXpresses the common fear of the ever possible atomic
nocturnal assault which would turn the world into a
flaming holocaust.

Of all Sastre's works Nocturnal Assault is the most

 

Obvious manifestation of his conception of "tragedy as a

"102

form of criminal investigation. In an interview with

 

101Sastre, O. C., p. 788.

102Sastre, El teatro de Alfonso Sastre visto por
Alfonso Sastre," Primer acto, NO. 5 (Nov.-Dec., 1957), 7.

248

Ricardo Doménech in 1958, eight months before beginning

Nocturnal Assault, Sastre outlined in greater detail his

 

idea of investigation in a manner that predicts the
attempted SCOpe of the play. "I am trying to realize a
massive investigation of culpability: Who is guilty? Who
is reSponSible for all this? 'All this' would be terror,
persecutions, exoduses, military occupations, war,
concentration camps, the destruction of cities, suburbia,
hunger, cold and misery . . . 'All this,‘ in a word, is

"103

suffering. As with other works the investigation in

Nocturnal Assault works in terms of relationships between

 

individuals and society. In this case, however, in place
of the more usual conflict or dialectic of Opposing
responsibilities or bonds which constitute the tragic
condition, a structure of parallel or analogous
develOpment is discovered which relates the tragedy of the
individual to that of society for the purpose of the
investigation.

The structure of parallel develOpment or the formal
aspect of the play obviously cannot be dealt with
separately. It functions organically as part of the total
meaning of the work and is particularly important as an
experiment relating to Sastre's concept of the social

function of tragedy. Unfortunately the critical writing

 

103Stated in an interview with Ricardo Doméhech,
"Alfonso Sastre, un dramaturgo en marcha," La estafeta
literaria, NO. 113 (Jan. 1958), 4.

 

249

on Nocturnal Assault has been satisfied to mention

Brecht,104 "105

 

or "epic theatre, or even avant—gardeloc to
describe the formal aSpect of the work (failing at this
level even to point out the existence in the play of the
strictly Aristotelian-dramatic scenes), and then to go on
with a discussion of the meaning or message or "what
happens" as if they had no relationship with the formal
aSpect. For Sastre the combination of strictly dramatic,
psychological realism with elements of the epic theatre
(narrative, commentary, theatrical Spectacle) represents
one more attempt to relate the truth of the theatrical
eXperience with the facts of everyday life, to bring
together the meaning of social, historical reality and the
meaning of tragic theatre. In Drama and Society he

suggested the possibility of the Aristotelian kathartic

eXperience bringing about such a relationship by carrying

 

104"Nocturnal Assault is a work very much in the
Brechtian style, or perhaps, better said, a Splendid
continuation of it." Ricardo Doménech, "Tres Obras de un
autor revolucionario," Alfonso Sastre (Madrid: Taurus,
1964), p. 47. It must be noted that Sastre stated in his
notes to Nocturnal Assault, written later, that at the
time he "was ignorant of the theory of distanciation of
Bertolt Brecht, although I have had some contact with his
theatrical work. " Sastre, O. C., p. 722.

105Anderson calls Nocturnal Assault, "Sastre's earliest
epic experiment." p. 119. One could point td earlier
plays if one is using a broad definition of the epic
theatre. Certainly Anna Kleiber might qualify. Van Der
Naald says, "Nocturnal Assault is an excellent example of
epic theatre." p. 178.

 

 

 

 

 

 

106Van Der Naald. "Technically Nocturnal Assault is
Sastre's most avant-garde work." p. 176.

 

250

the individual out of the theatre and into society
inSpired to seek a resolution to the problems the play had
forced upon him, a second katharsis, a social purification,
analOgous to the personal eXperience of the theatre. By
the time of Anatomy of Realism he will have made a
theoretical move away from his wholly neo—Aristotelian
concept to one involving a dialectic of Aristotelian-

dramatic and Brechtian-epic principles. Nocturnal Assault

 

stands between these two works as something of a
theatrical eXperiment moving instinctively and artistically
towards a position that will be later theoretically
defined and historically related to Brecht. And its
dramatic-epic structure is but one aSpect of the work
organically related to the whole.

As ORKIN's two-fold investigation proceeds in the
reverse chronological manner of crime-solvers Since
Oedipus, the recognition of human suffering and guilt, of
the tragic condition, occurs in terms of the individual,
through drama, and in terms of the society, through
narrative. And just as the anxiety and violence in the
life Of the individual (MARCELLO) can be found to be
rooted in the acts of an earlier generation (the sins of
the father?) so too is the anxiety of a society living in
the shadow of the weapons of its own scientific
develOpment (potential for the ultimate violence) found to
be rooted in the attitudes and achievements of an earlier

historical period. Thus the Curie's discovery of radium

251

is viewed as ironically as the young ANGELO BOSCO'S
accidental witnessing of his violated Sister's pleading
for vengeance. On the microcosmic level of the two
families a kind of Greek tragedy is carried out which
begins in the traditional sense Of a fatal mistake and
develOps into an internecine struggle lasting for
generations.

In a Euripidean way (Sastre had just translated
Medeg) suffering tends to brutalize the victim, leading
him to acts of violence hitherto beyond his capabilities
for realization. This is reflected (Aeschylean?) in the
historical narrative as society develOps its capabilities
through wars to the point of possessing the weapon of
ultimate destruction.

Beyond the tragedy of brutalized man, however, an
even more devastating Situation is suggested: .the tragedy
of dehumanized man. MULLER, like the bomb, is a
mechanized instrument who acts, not out of human passion
or hatred as do the GRAFFI and BOSCO, but in an entirely
dehumanized manner. -The violence of sexual assault, the
furious hatred which drives in the knife, the anger in the
strangling, tightening hands, none of these is so
terrifying as the calculated act of the hired killer who
politely refuses entry to the house before he cuts down
MARCELLO with a machine gun burst. MARCELLO is the victim

of his family quarrel and of his age.

252

As the investigation is concluded a number of ironic
relationships are seen to exist, all of which enrich the
total tragic meaning of the work, and which would have
been impossible without the unusual dramatic-epic
structure. The end point of ORKIN‘s investigation is, on
one level, the incident of sexual assault, and, on the
other,.the depiction of an age of blind Optimism in the
unlimited ability of rational man through his scientific
knowledge. CARLO GRAFFI'S act, evidence of the beast
within, is something of an ironic comment on his age. At
the other end Of the investigation CARLO GRAFFI'S sexual
eXploit has led to the violent death of MARCELLO GRAFFI,
and scientific knowledge has brought violent death to
hundreds of thousands of Japanese and a sense of impending
doom to the rest of mankind. MULLER, as.dehumanized a
killer as the bomb, brings death to MARCELLO while the
professor prepares a lecture on the-horror of atomic war
and the need for peace.- GRAFFI dies hOping for peace, but
modern technolOgy, in the instrument of his recorder,
brings both his request and the sounds of his violent
death to his son, whose future action is as unpredictable
as the fate of society.

Sastre's experiment in combining the dramatic and
epic elements of theatre using ORKIN as a pivotal
character is certainly not unique, and it is perhaps not

entirely successful. There is major disagreement

253

7
10' due in part, no doubt, to ;

regarding this among critics
the fact that the work has never been produced. Sastre's
_ Specific notes concerning the elements of Spectacle'are
Clear evidence that he considers the work unfinished if
unproduced. In production ORKIN's narrative of context
and commentary would be mixed with music, sound and
visuals, all of which would provide the work with an
uninterrupted, fluid movement while at the same time
establishing a sense of history, the tragic flow of forces
in the real world. The investigation, through incidents
of relationship, attempts to bring the audience to a
recognition of man as a creature inextricably.bound up
with society and history; from the extreme sexual act of
the primitive individual in CARLO GRAFFI to the cry for a
social and historical consciousness by MARCELLO, each
action is shown to be tied in to a larger fabric of
occurrences. ORKIN attempts to follow back the threads of
one pattern and at the same time to describe the larger
design surrounding it.

Sastre has created a tragedy with very little hOpe.

By having ORKIN discover parallel designs of microcosmic

 

107AS cited above Van Der Naald considers Nocturnal
Assault an "excellent example" of epic theatre. Ricardo
Domenech calls it "one of {Sastre'SJ best works, and
perhaps, the most timely factual Spanish work of those I
have encountered in recenE'years." "Tres Obras . . . "
p. 45. Anderson calls the play "a relatively unimportant
piece of work, suffering from the same imbalance
characteristic of the less successful dramas of social
realism." p. 119.

 

 

254

and macrocosmic prOportions moving towards conditions of
anxiety or dehumanization or self-annihilation, he almost
eliminates in advance any hOpe that might exist with
MARCELLO'S final plea for peace, which, heard on the tape,
is followed by the rattling sound of machine gun fire; a
devastating bit of symbolism to finish the play. The

parallel develOpment of Nocturnal Assault is a recognition

 

of a unique historical situation which equates the
metaphysical tragedy of man with the tragedy of society.

For the first time in history the whole of society,
‘like man, is faced with the problem of death. Man's
Social and existential selves are, therefore, brought
tOgether in a new tragic eXperience of ggggt. The play
ends with ORKIN buying a newSpaper to see if the world
will be Spared for one day more. Itwill, and man will
live through one more day of anxiety as the possibility of
a nocturnal assault continues to exist.

The attempt to carry on in the investigation of
tragedy by a parallel process to probe both the individual
and his socio-historical context by means of dramatic and
epic techniques makes Nocturnal Assault an interesting
eXperimental piece in that part of Sastre's work which can
be described as socially conscious theatre. The play is
an instinctive reaching towards a more complete theatrical
experience for the audience, an effort to bring about an
emotional and intellectual understanding of the tragic

predicament of man and society. The Aristotelian-

255

dramatic process works to bring about something of a
kathartic eXperience through the actions leading to the
murder of MARCELLO GRAFFI. The methodical stOpping of the
action, the reverse ChronolOgical movement, the objective
commentary and narrative building of social and historical
context, all part of ORKIN's investigation, bring the
Spectator to intellectually and objectively relate the
tragic situation of the individual and that of society,
and that of himself as an individual in society and
affected by history. To climax this complex process of
Aristotelian and epic reSponse the murder of MARCELLO is
replayed on the tape recorder, and the action is
eXperienced by the Spectator in a manner characteristic of
both dramatic and epic theatre, a dialectic of responses.

This eXperiment is only one in a year of unusual
output for Sastre. Following it by a few months, In the
-Net~is-an~effort-to discover the maximum capabilities of
Aristotelian theatre to represent the tragic condition of
modern man. In retrOSpect Sastre sees the two works as
parts of a growing dialectical process between the
Opposing dramatic and epic conceptions of theatre.108
Death Thrust, the third play written in 1959, is also a
part of that process.

The first production attempt for the play was aborted

because of Sastre's Opposition to the traditionalist

 

108Sastre, O. C., p. 795. Sastre places In the Net as
a dramatic piece against Nocturnal Assault, an epic piece.

 

 

256

approach taken by the director. It was produced
immediately thereafter using a number of distancing
devices (absence of color, concrete music) which were in
agreement with the play's intention but which met with
little public success.109 The difficulty with the work
arises from the fact that Sastre has used metaphorically a
world which in previous Spanish literature has only been
'dealt with realistically. The world of the bullfighter is
used dramatically to represent the whole of society. In
an autocriticism of his work Sastre eXplains his
intentions. "I have the impression of having written a
drama of an almost anthrOpOphagic relationship: something
resembling a certain treatment of the myth of Cronus-
Saturn; a myth which, unfortunately, I find alive in this
«110

society.

The prologue scene of Death Thrust takes place in a

 

small room which is part of the infirmary of the Plaza de
Toros of a large city. From outside the sounds of wind,
rain and thunder are heard mixed with the music and noise
of the bull ring. Sastre indicates in a note to the text
that these sounds ought to be considered as almost the
central "personage" in the prologue. DOCTOR SANCHEZ and
his assistant JIMENEZ Spend their duty time playing chess

and talking of the inclement weather, the general

 

109Sastre, O. C., p. 866.

110Sastre, O. C., p. 868.

257

stupidity of bullfights and the particular idiocy of the
one going on outside: a one man fight (six bulls) under
the worst of weather conditions. SANCHEZ brings into the
discussion some background information on JOSE ALBA, the
day's matador and his manager, MARCOS. He likens the
latter to Goya's painting of Saturn eating his children
and tells of some of the poor young men MARCOS has
destroyed by driving them towards fame. .JIMENEZ steps out
to watch the fight for a moment. The doctor moves a
chessman to Checkmate position just as a great sound of
collective anguish comes from the crowd outside. JIMENEZ
runs in with the news of a goring. They prepare
themselves for the emergency. In a few moments ALBA is
carried through the ante-room to an Operating room which
adjoins it where the doctors await him. Soon after
JIMENEZ appears and sends someone for the POLICE
COMMISSIONER, who, when he arrives, is told that ALBA has
died, not from the minor goring but from a knife wound
apparently suffered before the fight. At this point
MARCOS enters and is told the news. From outside the
sounds of the crowd can be heard again; the substitute
matador is having a good fight. The COMMISSIONER takes
MARCOS Off to question him about ALBA'S fatal wound.
SANCHEZ clears the chessboard as the lights come down.

In the first act ALBA and MARCOS are seen earlier the
same day in the bullfighter's hotel suite. The same grim

weather that was in evidence during the fight can be felt

258

already; heard in the intermittent rain and wind, seen in
the changes of light through the Window, and sensed
psychologically in the concern of the two men. MARCOS
talks of the enviable season that he has scheduled for
ALBA and what it will mean for the fighter. ALBA
complains of being exhausted. The conversation turns to
his physical and psychological condition. He has been
suffering minor lapses of memory, black outs. The doctors
have advised him to stOp fighting. MARCOS insists that
the occurrences are unimportant and warns him of the risk
to his growing reputation that a public disclosure of his
condition would be. ALBA also attempts to eXpress to
MARCOS his gradually increasing sense of fear. They talk
of MARCO'S previous fighters Specifically of one PLATERO
whose career was destroyed by fear after a goring in the
face. They talk about ALBA'S wife and the growing
estrangement that his career is causing. MARCOS obviously
sees the wife to be a threat to the fighter's success.
ALBA goes off to Shower and change and MARCOS is left
alone. He contemplates the weather. He pours himself a
brandy. With the bullfighter out of the room MARCOS seems
to metapmorphose into a deSperate old man, the strength
and confidence disappearing from his face like a mask.
While he awaits ALBA'S return, GABRIELA, the bullfighter's
wife, arrives. MARCOS lies to her, telling her that ALBA
is not in. In their conversation it becomes known that

MARCOS has destroyed their marriage, but that GABRIELA

259

intends to try to return to ALBA. MARCOS asks that She
wait until after the fight to see him, eXplaining that his
psychOlOgical condition is precarious. She leaves. When
ALBA returns, MARCOS does not tell him of his wife's I
visit. They are surprised when the young understudy
fighter for the day, RAFAEL PASTOR, comes to talk with
ALBA. MARCOS leaves them. The young man in an awkward
way attempts to eXpreSS his almost.deSperate desire to get
an Opportunity to perform in a major ring. After the two
men talk PASTOR leaves. GABRIELA returns and finds ALBA.
Their love and need for each other are immediately
apparent. As they embrace MARCOS is seen getting Off the
elevator in the hall outside. ~He hesitates at the door to
the suite sensing what has happened. He lights a
cigarette. He turns to the door, his back to the
audience. The smoke curls up around him as he drags
heavily on his cigarette. He turns from the door to the
audience, and his face can be seen to be grotesquely
twisted.

Act two is a short time later. MARCOS enters the
suite and is met by ALBA who comes from the bedroom.
Their short exchange is strained. GABRIELA appears and
informs MARCOS that ALBA is coming back to live with her.
She is, however, insecure in her-triumph, and although
MARCOS appears to agree to a temporary truce with her, it
is obvious that he is not yet ready to surrender his power

over ALBA. The matador's SECOND arrives and proceeds to

260

dress him while MARCOS and GABRIELA continue their verbal
struggle. When ALBA comes into the room again fully
dressed for the bull ring he appears to be in an almost
trance-like state of terror. MARCOS orders the SECOND to
take GABRIELA from the suite. ALBA claims to be ill and
asks MARCOS to call a doctor. He refuses, telling him
that he will be all right. It becomes clear as they talk
that ALBA is totally dependent on MARCOS for his whole
being before he goes into the bullring, and MARCOS, in
resenting the intrusion of the wife's love, refuses to
provide the usual encouragement. Instead he fills the
conversation with fearsome descriptions of anticipated
complications in the weather and the bulls and of death in
the ring. "You'll be fighting in the mud . . . and the

bulls as big as all hell."111

ALBA in a panic grabs a
knife from a table and lunges at MARCOS insisting that he
won't leave the room. Suddenly the wind is heard
screaming outside the windows. "ALBA. (deathly pale,
looks upward--at what?--terror overwhelming him.) Now?
(With a sudden movement he sinks the knife into his
belly.) Now? I'd . . . rather not leave . . . now."112
MARCOS goes to the phone and calls for a doctor, a young
woman-friend of ALBA'S who had called and talked to him

earlier. She arrives almost immediately and, dressing the

 

111Sastre, O. C., p. 928.

112Sastre, O. C., p. 928.

261

wound, informs them that it is not extremely serious but
that ALBA should be taken to the hospital. MARCOS
promises to do this and dismisses her. As he and ALBA
start out, he eXplains that they must go by the bullring
and hOpe for a weather-cancellation, thereby avoiding any
scandal. In the hall they meet GABRIELA who is returning
to the suite to await ALBA after the fight. Unaware of
his condition she wishes him off with the usual word to
take care.

The epilogue takes place in a dimly lighted bar some
undetermined time later (months?). On one wall, just
visible, is a poster announcing ALBA'S fatal fight.
MARCOS enters and sits at a table. The tavern keeper
approaches him. It is PASTOR, the understudy matador.
His youthful determination eXpressed earlier is no longer
apparent in his manner. MARCOS asks to talk to him, In
the dialogue which follows MARCOS tries to pull PASTOR
away from his life as a tavern keeper and back to that of
a matador, offering to manage him. He paints a vivid
picture of the imaginary career that awaits the young man,
with a public image that MARCOS will fashion by
deceptively using the ills of the society. "If you let
me, I'll surround you with the typical Spanish story. You
will have grown up playing with hunger, even though you,
yourself have never known it . . . Hunger and death! The

horns of hunger;zthat's what the tourists go for!"113

 

1138astre, o. C., p. 938.

262

But PASTOR rejects the temptation. He reminds MARCOS of
the destroyed lives of PLATERO and ALBA; he begins to see
in MARCOS the embodiment of an inhumanely destructive
force in the Society. Against the imaginings of the
manager he tries to articulate a conception of a simple
but socially reSponsible existence. MARCOS in disgust
gets up and goes out on the way brushing past a BEGGAR who
has come in without noticing his extended hand. As the
BEGGAR moves into the light a large disfiguring scar
across his face is seen. "He didn't recognize you,"114
PASTOR says to him. The BEGGAR, PLATERO, turns to the

audience and stands dumb, his hand reaching out to them.

The production of Death Thrust was something unique

 

for the Spanish theatre as it entered the sixties. Adolfo
Marsillach, working closely with Alfonso Sastre, attempted
to combine a Stanislavskian approach to character

develOpment with a rigidly geometrical patterning of stage

movement.115

The sets were simple, clean lined, only
suggesting realism, and very deliberately mood provoking.
Rising high over the interiors and constantly present,

though subdued (In the manner of Meilziner's tree and

building scrims for Death of a Salesman), was a scrim

 

cyclorama of the almost endless tiers of the bullring,

 

114Sastre, o. C., p. 942.

115Adolfo Marsillach, "Cuaderno de direccidn de 'La
Cornada' de Adolfo Marsillach," Primer acto, No. 12 (Jan.-
Feb., 1960), 17-26. This notebook is an account of the
rehearsal period.

 

263

looking up from the bullfighter's point of view, with

116 Sets and costumes were in

heavy clouded sky above it.
the blacks, whites and greys of photOgraphs. The sound
was an orchestration of concrete music by Cristdbal
Halffter: a music "found between music itself and pure
sound Ewhich attempted tog situate the Spectator as much
psychically as realistically before the dramatic

Situation."117

All this in an attempt to discover a new
potential in the relationship of Aristotelian, dramatic
theatre and the epic theatre of Brecht, and through this
relationship (dialectic) to effect an eXperience of
tragedy.

The critical reaction was mixed, but public reSponse
was generally negative resulting in almost empty houses
within a week of the play's Opening and in a number of
angry statements directed at Spain's unthinking theatre
audience. Only an unsolicited neWSpaper article praising
the play and its writer by José Maria Peman, one of the
country's leading, older generation critics, kept the work

on the boards.forran additional week;-a three week run in

all.

 

116The drawings of Emilio Burgos appear on page 27 of
Primer acto, NO. 12 (Jan.-Feb., 1960).

117CristObal Halffter, "La mfisica de 'La Cornada,'"
Primer acto, No. 12 (Jan.-Feb., 1960), 26.

264

A great part of the difficulty with the work,
reflected even in some of the more serious critical
discussions,118 is the problem of interpreting the
Situation of the bullfighter. Most of Sastre's plays
which deal with social predicamentS-through the symbolism
of a microcosm of society (the family, a military unit, a
Swiss canton) place the action of the play outside of
Spain and the Specific Spanish circumstance.v (Sastre has,
in fact, received criticism for his apparent lack of
interest in the Specific problems of his own country,
criticism the absurdity of which he has been quick to

point out.) Death Thrust does just the Opposite in using

 

what is probably the most Spanish of subjects, but not in
the traditional way or with the usual purpose.

Pérez Minik has suggested that Sastre would have had
little difficulty had he treated the myth of Saturn
through the dramatic relationship of a dictator and his
subjects (which in a sense he did with The Gag), a
capitalist and his workers, a professor and his students

(Ionesce's The Lesson), or a lady and her maids (Genet's

 

The Maids).119 But recognizing the problem he tends to

 

118The reviews: V. Fernandez Asis, "Review of La
cornada," Pueblo (Jan. 15, 1960), 20; Pablillos, "EBrro de
especEadores en el Teatro Lara," Pueblo, (Jan. 15, 1960),
20; Paul Werrie, "Oh en est le theatre eSpagnol?" its
de Paris, 182 (May, 1960), 118. “Van Der Naald also slips
into seeing the play as a criticism of the "degeneration
of the fiesta de toros." Page 193.

 

119Pérez Minik, "Se trata de Alfonso Sastre . . . ,'
p. 28. No one seems to have pointed out the probable
influence of Strindberg relating to the theme of

265

move too far in the direction of a-limited economic
interpretation which excludes the fuller meaning of the
tragedy. The play is read as a depiction of the evils of
capitalism, with peOple being converted into Objects of
the market place, and ALBA and MARCOS both victims of a
system which is entirely commodity oriented.

Others have interpreted the work as representing

120‘ Jose Maria Peman

eXplOitation in a more general sense.
more accurately states that, "in a broader sense it is a
drama of men set loose from values and principles climbing
over each other to establish a hierarchy on the pure law
of animal density and the strength of daring, like Oil on

water."121

Sastre himself has likened the relationship of
ALBA and MARCOS in his play with those of Pozzo and Lucky,

and Estragon and Vladimir in Beckett's.Waiting for

 

Godot,122 emphasizing apparently the human aSpect rather
than the larger social meaning. He has also related his

work to a line of verse from Garcia Lorca's Lament for

 

anthrOpOphagy. Sastre has had an interest in the plays of
Strindberg, and within a year of writing Death Thrust he
translated Creditors into Spanish. In an essay on
Strindberg in Anatomy of Realism, pp. 70-74, Sastre,
himself, points out the theme of anthrOpOphagy in that
very play. - ‘

 

 

 

120Anderson, p. 102.

121José Maria Peman, "El articulo de Jose Maria Peman,"
Primer acto, No. 12 (Jan.-Feb., 1960) l3-15. This article
first appeared in the Spanish daily, ABC on January 28,
19600 ‘

122Sastre, O. C., p. 867.

266

Ignacio Sanchez Mejias. The line reads, "The rest was

 

death and only death/ at five in the afternoon." But this
aSpect of the work, which seems to be so central to an
understanding Of Sastre's use of the bullfighter situation,
has been largely ignored by both those who interpret the
play strictly on its first level of meaning, criticizing
its technical errors in the details of bullfighting, and
those who eXplain the work primarily in terms of its
broadest social meaning.

In Death Thrust Sastre is looking at the seamy side

 

of the tauromachian tapestry of Spain. From that side he
discovers the grotesque in man that Goya discovered in the
institutions of Spanish society a hundred and fifty years
earlier. Behind the dazzling weave of success, fame and
glory he reveals the tangled web of the tragic condition
of the individual and the anthrOpOphagiC nature of a
society which devours the idols of its own creation
driving them to a public diSplay of death.

The festival of the corrida at its religious
beginnings may have been something of an attempt by man to
demonstrate his overwhelming longing for immortality by
virtually facing and defeating the black bull of death.
For Garcia Lorca with the fatal goring of Ignacio Sanchez
Mejias the ring momentarily becomes the center of the
universe and overflows with death, and the uniqueness of
the individual is discovered in this most personal of

experiences. For Sastre the fact that the event brings

267

together the individual and the society in the experience
of death makes it a viable subject of modern tragedy.
This seemingly anachronistic festival is found to reflect
the modern predicament with uneXpected accuracy. But the
primordial symbolism of transcendence and the sense of
poetic discovery are gone. In place of the triumph over
death or the affirmation of individual uniqueness are the
tragic dissolution and mortal defeat of the individual.
The bullfighter is modern man caught in the conflict of
his private and public beings and brought to a recognition
Of this conflict and a discovery of the alienated self.
Part of ALBA'S being is wholly determined by social
forces. Beginning as a victim of poverty he grows to
become a victim of ambition, having been caught in the
value-system of a capitalistic society, and ends up the
victim of his own public image. (The society which has
determined this develOpment of the dehumanized and
alienated figure is symbolized in its most extreme form,
the goyesque grotesque, by MARCOS, a Pygmalion who
metaphorically devours his creations.) In Opposition to
this public self is the anguished being who discovers
himself to be alone and, in the midst of a growing fear,
desperately in need of a human relationship. The arena
becomes a metaphor of the human condition: the individual

before the whole society yet totally alone;123 and the

 

123In his second work, Cargo of Dreams Sastre placed
his character in a similar situation. See Chapter III.

 

268

death thrust is the perfect climax for the modern social~
existential tragedy: the public exploitation of the
ultimate personal eXperience.

Sastre's handling of the Climax is a demonstration of
his theatrical dexterity. Beginning, as he does in a
number of works, with a late point of attack, he brings
about the climactic death scene almost immediately. The
disembodied sounds of the crowd produce the realistic
presence of the bullring but can also be heard
metaphorically as the ravings of the monstrous titan
devouring his children (sounds to correspond with Goya's
painting). ALBA‘S death is symbolically represented by
the Checkmate move of DOCTOR SANCHEZ at the chessboard.
And the hero is seen for the first time, mud covered,
bloody and broken, already dead as he is carried into the
Operating room of the bullring. What is usually the final
image of the classic tragedy here is the first and remains
with one through the rest of the play as one witnesses the
character moving towards it again. In addition the climax
of the death thrust in the arena is discovered to have
been ironically played out previously in the privacy of
ALBA'S hotel suite. The death thrust by ALBA'S own hand
provides a Climax in its traditional location in the
structure of the play, and it represents the final,
pathetically ineffectual effort of the inner self to over-
power the alienated, public self. He fails and is forced

to enter the arena to play out the last tragic scene.

269

In the three works written in 1959 Sastre can be seen
to be eXploring the tragic condition of man caught in an
unusually violent world. In all three the existential
condition of the individual is directly related to, and
brought on at times by, the social circumstance. The
relationship in each case is welded by a dramatic climax

involving violent death.124 In Nocturnal Assault the

 

internecine struggle between two families is related by
formal parallel structuring (dramatic-epic) to the
slaughter between nations culminating in the atomic attack

on Japan. The audience watching In the Net discovers

 

itself to be responsible as the status quo society for the
death of LEO and those he represents when HANAFI
uneXpectedly breaks the classic structure of the play and
Speaks his last accusing line directly to it. And in

Death Thrust ALBA brings together in the arena of death

 

the self of existential anguish and the person that
society has formed. The audience is again indicted at the
end of the work when the indigent former bullfighter
reaches out for help. But as symbolized here, the
indictment is also a plea, in each of the works, a plea
for society to begin to humanize itself, to regain the
prOper relationship between itself and its individual
members. MARCELLO GRAFFI'S last request, PABLO and

CELIA's mutual trust, and PASTOR'S understanding of the

 

124Violence is prominent in a number of Sastre's plays
but usually exists as an aspect of the tragedy of
revolution; here it is part of the tragedy of establish-
ment society.

270

human condition are all directed toward the audience as
eXpressions of some hOpe which grows out of the tragic
struggle, hOpe set in a realistically grim context, but
hOpe nevertheless.

Sastre's next and last published tragedy (a

children's play, The Little Chalk Circle, was published,

 

and a number of later works remain unpublished and
generally uncirculated)125 is devoid of this hOpe. The
work was begun in 1960 but not completed until 1962. (TWO

translations were also done in 1960, Ibsen's The Lady of

 

the Sea and Strindberg's Creditors.) The play went

 

through a series of titles until 1967 when it was produced

in Madrid as The Tenebrae.126

 

As this title suggests the
action occurs during Holy Week. The setting is a chalet
in the mountains near Madrid.

The play Opens with darkness and the sound of the
noisemakers which are used to represent the earthquake in
the Service of the Tenebrae on Good Friday in Spain. The
sound grows to a deafening pitch and then stOps suddenly
as the curtain goes up revealing a dirty and disordered

room, the obvious morning after a night of heavy drinking.

 

125An Italian version of a later play has been
published in Milan. Il sangue e la cenere, Maria Luisa
Aguirre and Dario Puccini, trans. (Milano: Feltrinelli,
1967).

 

126Oficio de tinieblas, translated here as The
Tenebrae, has been called Office of Darkness by Farris
Anderson. This title does not carry with it the
liturgical meaning of the original, and thus the change
here.

 

 

271

A woman, ISMENE, who has apparently Slept the night on the
sofa, covered with a trenchcoat, is getting Up. She
begins Shouting in French to someone who can be heard
showering and Shouting back from a nearby bath. The noise
awakens a figure, unseen previously, curled up in a chair
across the room. This is MIGUEL, a young man who is
obviously suffering a bad hangover. After a few false
starts ISMENE and he begin to engage in some dialogue
which little by little grows into conversation. Through
the talk one learns that MIGUEL remembers almost nothing
of the night before but has eXperienced a dream in which
he has cut a girl's throat with a broken bottle. ISMENE
reassures him that from the time She joined the group he
has done nothing unusual. (The group consists of VANEL, a
former friend of ISMENE whom she knew in Algeria, a pTee
heTE, hiding out in Spain; NIC, a young man of a wealthy
Spanish family, owner of the chalet; ARTURO, an Older man
and something of a guardian to MIGUEL; and LOLA, a girl
who was picked up at a nightclub the previous evening.)
MIGUEL'S innocence, as demonstrated by his inability to
COpe with his first hangover, warms ISMENE up to talking a
great deal about herself and the situations which forced
her from all innocence. She tells of her rise from
poverty, through prostitution, to dance-hall stripper, all
of which took place in the context of terrifying guerrilla
war in Algeria. (There are a few moments of pathetic

humor, uncommon in Sastre's work, such as a description of

272

a burial in the nude, according to the last request, of a
stripper who was killed by a bomb eXplosion.) At one
point MIGUEL notices blood on the sleeve of his jacket
which brings him around again to his homicidal nightmare.
VANEL and ARTURO come in with a paper which reports the
murder of a girl in the club they had visited the night
before. Through the conversation which follows it appears
that ARTURO, VANEL, and NIC are attempting to convince
MIGUEL that he has committed the crime while drunk, and
that he should leave the country temporarily in order to
protect himself and the others. MIGUEL, who would prefer
to turn himself in, leaves the room and attempts to hang
himself in the bathroom. ISMENE finds him and calls for
help. Everyone rushes off to cut him down as the act ends.

The second act finds ARTURO, VANEL, and NIC in the
same room half an hour later. They are discussing the
best time to leave the chalet and drive to Madrid to get
MIGUEL on a plane to Paris. There is also some enigmatic
mention of the girl from the nightclub and of how she will
be dealt with. ISMENE comes in to report that MIGUEL is
resting well. They discuss her returning to the club for
a rehearsal. There is a general sense of relief that
momentarily is felt as ARTURO tells some stories of other
all night drinking eXperiences, and the group begins to
partake of NIC's vintage stock of wine. MIGUEL comes in,
somewhat pale, but appearing quite calm. Almost

immediately ARTURO begins to talk of the advantage of

273

MIGUEL's going to Paris until things quiet down. He also
attempts to casually suggest that MIGUEL not implicate the
others if he later decides to turn himself over to the
authorities. MIGUEL by his silence appears to accept
ARTURO's suggestions. VANEL tries to Speak to MIGUEL‘s
guilt feelings by citing some of his attitudes formed
during his activities in Algeria. "It's either kill or be
killed. If I had worried about feelings of remorse for
every hard thing I've had to do, my life would be a
complete madness. Look mon gars, I have nothing against
these inferior peOple, the moslems, negroes, prostitutes,
and all the rest . . . nothing; but at the same time I'm
not going to get myself all upset when they die, because
they're not good for anything and they don't hold any
ideals like we do. . . . You fight for something
beautiful and enjoy it; there isn't anything else; believe
me."127MIGUEL expresses concern that he committed the
crime without motive. The gratuitous frightens him by its
lack of reason. As the others describe for him the
details of the incident, he is reminded of an earlier
eXperience as an amateur actor playing the role of LUIS,
the innocent one, in Sastre's The Condemned Squad. He
comments on the ironic twist that has cast him as the
guilty one in real life. He sardonically describes

himself to ISMENE as "the product of the petty middle

 

127Sastre, O. C., p. 981.

274

class . . . intellectual and nihilist."128

Finally he
decides that he wants to be taken back to Madrid and turn
himself in. He goes off to shower and get himself ready.
NIC goes with him to prevent any recurrence of the suicide
incident. ARTURO and VANEL go off apparently disturbed by
MIGUEL's decision. They have no sooner left when LOLA,
the young girl from the nightclub, appears. She eXplains
to ISMENE her fear that the men will kill her. When
ISMENE asks the reason for her fear, LOLA tells her that
she was with MIGUEL the night before when her friend was
killed and knows that he did not kill her. VANEL enters
uneXpectedly, and the act ends as he, feigning
nonchalance, attempts to determine how much LOLA has told
ISMENE.

The third act Opens with loud "twist" music and the
same room in extreme disarray about two hours later.
ISMENE, LOLA, VANEL and NIC are dancing. When they finish
ISMENE and LOLA ask to go outside. VANEL says that he
will go with LOLA. At this she grabs hold of ISMENE and
begins to scream that the others want to kill her. She
begins to talk about the dead girl and of how the three
men killed her and then led MIGUEL through a ghastly
enactment of murder with the girl's body. As a counter—
point to LOLA's description of the incident, ARTURO begins

to babble about the waste his life has become and of the

 

128Sastre, O. C., p. 987.

275

difference between his inescapable middle class morality
and the amoral nature of VANEL. He confesses to MIGUEL
his part in the attempt to divert the guilt from NIC.
NIC, at the same time, begins to break down and pleads
with ARTURO to help him, offering to pay him any amount.
VANEL is the only person who remains cool. Realizing
their desperate situation ISMENE and MIGUEL attempt to
divert the attention of the others, with the revived
"twist" music to which she does a striptease, while he
calls the police. VANEL, however, notices MIGUEL at the
phone and engages him in a struggle. MIGUEL after almost
beating himself to death against the more eXperienced
VANEL, is finally thrown backwards, hits his head and is
killed. The play ends with ARTURO sitting over the body
of MIGUEL, sobbing and turning half-consciously one of the
rattles.used in the service of The Tenebrae.

There is little question that The Tenebrae exists as

 

Sastre's most negative depiction of the middle class.
Florencio Martinez Ruiz finds it a nihilistic absurdity
rather than a tragedy, a "'dolce vita' madrilefia,"129 with
no real sense of tragic suffering. Farris Anderson, with
only a short paragraph of discussion, dismisses the work
by stating that it "suffers from a weak relation between

the plot and its broader social implications."130

 

129Florencio Martinez Ruiz, "El ultimo teatro realista
eSpafiol," Papeles de sons Armadans, No. 45 (1967), 189.

 

13°Anderson, p. 86.

276

Both Opinions could be obViously argued against, but
the aspects of the play from which they stem ought to be
recognized and dealt with. The play does appear to be
nihilistic in its conclusion, and, unlike Sastre‘s other
works, it fails to Open itself to the audience in the
search of a solution. There is also less than the usual
relationship between the particular problem of the work
and a broader social predicament. It is, nevertheless,
not devoid of social significance or tragic content.

The play progresses on a number of levels. It
follows the procedure of an investigation, as do many of
Sastre's works, with the difference being that here the
investigator, MIGUEL, considers himself to be the guilty
party. At the same time the plot follows an archetypical
ritual pattern with MIGUEL as the central figure. On this
level are found the elements of classic tragedy (ritual
and Aristotelian): agon, reCOgnition, reversal and
pathos. The symbolism of Christianity and the Christian
calendar are used with relation to this ritual pattern.

In the combination of these levels is found a meaning
which, although negative, relates to the social reality of
the day, and which is tragic by nature.

As an investigation the play ostensibly deals with a
Specific incident, but the discoveries made concern the
whole problem of man as a tragic figure and social being.
MIGUEL is motivated by guilt to question his own existence

and actions. He recognizes himself to be, "the product of

277

the petty middle class . . . intellectual and nihilist."
The discovery of his innocence in the Specific incident of
IRENE'S death ironically underlines this greater discovery
of the guilt of the individual and the class who lack a
social consciousness and who degenerate into nihilism.

For MIGUEL the investigation leads to a recognition of
self and of the society around him as represented by those
at the chalet. This microcosm is a devastating depiction
of the middle class in full decline. ARTURO symbolizes
the Spent morality of the class, a morality unable to
sustain the individual against the demands of the
money-system. NIC is an effete second generational
representative of this system which converts everything
and everyone into items for the ledger. VANEL is the
terrifyingly amoral creature of political eXpediency and
policy through military force. ISMENE and LOLA are the
victims of the society, helpless and degraded. With this
group surrounding him MIGUEL struggles to an awakening of
social consciousness only to discover the helplessness of
the individual in such a context. His death must be read
as a condemnation of the middle class, capitalist
societies of the world.

As a ritual movement the play focuses on the
eXperience of MIGUEL, the tragic individual. His
awakening to the pain of his first hangover is the
beginning of a kind of "coming of age" process. With the

initial "discovery" of "guilt" he assumes a purpose (to

278

use Kenneth Burke‘s terms) which has already been
described as investigatory. This leads to passion or the
suffering he eXperiences as an existential man. In
deSpair out of believing himself to have acted without
motive he first attempts suicide. This failing, he takes
on a more active struggle with the amoral and immoral
forces around him (ARTURO, VANEL, and NIC). This
constitutes the classic agon of the tragic figure. This
struggle is continued even after his innocence is
established in the Specific murder case, the larger
concept of guilt having been recognized. This recognition
(Aristotle) or perception (Burke) is also the ritual
recognition of the destroyed Daimon (in this case MIGUEL,
himself, who is first seen to be destroyed in social terms
by the lack of social consciousness, and then physically
destroyed by the brute force of the middle class society,
i.e., VANEL).

At this point, however, the tragedy ceases to follow
the traditional ritual pattern and the ritual pattern as
performed according to the Christian tradition, this
pattern having been introduced through the chronological
Situating of the play. The human Spirit has suffered, but
everything has ended after the period of suffering. There
is no rebirth. In terms of the Christian liturgy Sastre
has chosen to end the eXperience with the Tenebrae, the
darkest'moment, the moment of Christ's death on the cross.

In terms of the classic ritual which relates to tragedy

279

the work ends with the threnos, the lamentation. In
Aristotelian terms recognition has taken place, but
without reversal, the latter having been prevented or cut
off by the most negative force of the society depicted
(VANEL). There is no Easter, no rebirth, no apotheosis
and no possibility of social reform or new social
consciousness from within.

From the point of view of the middle class the play,
without question, appears to be entirely negative. From a
different point of view (marxist-existentialist) outside
of the middle class it can be described as a negative
statement specifically aimed at that class or an attempt
to accurately depict the hOpelessness of its situation.

In The Tenebrae Sastre has made a clear judgement of the

 

middle class: it is depleted of moral and social values,
and it brings about the eventual degeneration of man as an
individual and as a social creature.

This judgement is not unique to this work, but the
truth of it is depicted in a more totally closed way than
is the case in Sastre‘s-other socially oriented plays.
Usually some positive factor survives the tragedy of the
individual (the Swiss revolution, GRAFFI's tape, PASTOR'S
refusal of MARCOS) or some direction towards a solution is
suggested by formally "Opening" the play to the real world
of the audience, some hOpe of a rebirth of social
consciousness and new regard for the human attributes of

the individual. Neither is the case with The Tenebrae.

 

280

The world of Sastre's audience is precisely that of
the middle class which is here depicted as depleted. By

the terms of The Tenebrae no Opening exists to this

 

audience and no Opening for it. The rattles sounded in
the office of the Tenebrae have become the death rattle
for the whole middle class. Unlike the other, earlier
works there is no katharsis which attempts to carry
through toward a real individual and social purification.

The katharsis of The Tenebrae is one of defeat and hOpe-

 

lessness, brought on by the inevitable triumph of sense-
lessly brutal forces Spawned by one's own society. The
audience is asked to witness its own last tragic moment
wrapped in the symbolism of recognizable ritual.

The Tenebrae is a dark concluding statement in

 

Sastre's public dramatic work. With it the possibility of
any real homeOpathic effect resulting from a tragic
katharsis is abandoned. With it the generative process of
dialectic between individual and society is symbolically
rendered meaningless by the inevitable forces of inhuman
and asocial eXpediency. In this final work Sastre appears
to have brought together the ritual rhythm and Aristotelian
form of tragedy in order to ultimately divulge its social

impotence.

CONCLUSION

From Alfonso Sastre's many separate theoretical and
dramatic eXpressions of tragic theatre over a period of

twenty years (from Uranium 235 to Anatomy of Realism)

 

 

certain conclusions can be drawn. While his concept of
tragedy is continually changing and while his theatre is
continually eXperimenting in its search for tragic
eXpression, there are some constants or parameters
generally undergirding the process. One of these is a
view of man as both an existential, individual being who
will die (always tragic) and a social, historical being
who should reSponSibly participate in his context. The
other is a poetics, ever develOping, which is
fundamentally though not entirely Aristotelian and which
appears to provide the playwright the best possibility for
artistically dealing with the situation of man's existence.
This situation, while first Specifically defined in

Drama and Society (1956), exists as the underlying concept

 

of the plays from the earliest to the latest, but not
without changes in emphasis and a certain refinement of
eXpression. Some works, as this study indicates,
emphasize the closed, existential condition of man, that

"l

"ultimately . . . tragic situation, as Sastre calls it.

 

1Sastre, D. s., p. 24.
281

282'

The others attempt to eXpreSs both the existential and
social nature of man and the dialectic that exists
,between them. This dialectical relationship intuitively
develops in the dramatic works before it is clearly

. defined as a concept theOretically. .The dialectical
mechanism already exists in a crude way in Uranium 235

(1946) but without the prOper Opposites. It is somewhat.

 

lost in Cargo of Dreams (also 1946), but rediscovered and
Iwith the prOper elements in Pathetic PrOlogue (1950), and-
from that point On remains a basic part of almost all the
wOrkS, the emphasis Shifting between that dialectic of the
individual and the tragic revolutionary situation
(CommunityrBread, Red Earth, In the Net) and that of the
.individual and the tragedy of an OppreSSive social status
quo (The Gag, A Death In the Neighborhood, Nocturnal
Assault, Death Thrust, The Tenebrae). (A few works fit
into.both situations: ‘The Garbage Can [being the least
suqcessfugl, The CondemnedSquad, Sad Are the Eyes Of 2

William Tell.) .In theory, the essays in Anatomy of.

 

‘Realism (1965), working from certain seminal impressiOns.
‘ in Drama and Society and frOm the eXperience of the plays,~
develOp highly sophisticated constructs dealing with this -
dialectic of human existence. I _ > - 7 .

”Sastre sees the Aristotelian, dramatic, mimetic mode
generally capable of meaningfully. recreating this tragic,
i dialectical existence of modern man. -In a purposefully

experimental manner his theatre has explored the mimetic

283

possibilities from the heavily symbolic, avant-garde drama
attempting to eXpress the EEHEE of twentieth century man
(Cargo of Dreams) through the theatre of Marxist realism,

a la Georg Lukacs (The Condemned Sguad, Red Earth, In the

 

 

Net), to that of a dialectic between dramatic realism and

 

epic theatricalism (Sgd_§£ethe Eyes of William Tell,

Nocturnal Assault). In spite of this eXperimentation,

 

 

however, Sastre has tended to defend the merits of a
basically Aristotelian-dramatic, Marxist—realistic, tragic
theatre as that most capable of reflecting and, more
importantly, interrelating with pre-revolutionary, middle
class man and society. He has in his theoretical writings
defended this theatre on both aesthetic and historical
grounds,2 and in so doing has placed himself with writers
such as Miller and Sartre while declaring the avant-garde
theatre (he lists Beckett, Dfirrenmatt, and Frisch) and the
epic theatre (Brecht) deficient in their views of man, and
somewhat irrelevant socially and historically to the

present.3

 

2See chapter II.

3Sastre's relationship to other playwrights is not a
consideration of this study, but certain names come
naturally to mind. He has been most often compared to
Sartre, and he places himself with Sartre and Miller. He
has called O'Neill "the most important of the dramatists
who have made contemporary tragedy possible." (D. S.,

p. 202.) His work, The Gag has been compared to some of
O'Neill's plays. Sastre has eXpressed admiration of Ugo
Betti, and certainly Betti's pursuit of justice has
similarities with Sastre's investigations into the
question of guilt.

284

For Sastre man's situational predicament is best
recreated in a drama which is plot dominated. He sees
modern psycholOgical drama and thesis (i.e.,
unidirectional or one dimensional prOpaganda) drama as
manifestations of inverted orders of value assignation to
the Aristotelian parts, placing character or thought above
plot and thereby deforming the mimetic process. His
position here is quite clear. "In the beginning is the
plot with its temporal unfolding of situations of which
Aristotle studies three: reversal, recognition and pathos
or pathetic occurrence, and out of this comes everything.
In the plot characters reveal themselves and out of the
4

plot ideas arise. At least that is how it should happen."

This statement from Drama and Society is well supported by

 

the plays as the situational conditions described above
indicate. Myth and Situations evoking mythical or

archetypical patterns are quite common (The Blood of God:

 

Abraham and Isaac, Job; Red Earth: Fuenteovejuna; The

 

Condemned Squad: Eden; Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell:

 

 

William Tell; A Death in the Neighborhood: Dionysus,

 

Fuenteovejuna; Death Thrust: Cronus; The Tenebrae:

 

 

Dionysus, Christ).5 Action often takes the form of

 

4Sastre, D. S., p. 123.

5Except for Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell, Sastre
stands with those who keep the mythical movement
considerably beneath the surface of contemporary events
rather than with those who contemporize the minds, manner
and dress of the original mythical figures (e.g., Anouilh).

 

285

investigation, personal or official, into the cause of
man's predicament. Recognition, reversal and suffering,
Often coincidental in occurrence, are always major
elements of plot develOpment.

Recognition in Sastre's theatre is an awakening by
the character or characters to a consciousness of one's
existential and/or social situation, or to the dialectical

struggle between the two. Thus IVAN (Uranium 235) is

 

shaken into an awareness of the life and death forces of
the Spiritual and material worlds represented by their

verbal manifestations in Uranium 235 and The Bible. MAN

 

 

(Cargo of Dreams) is brought to recognize his helplessness
and the significance of even a momentary compassion. In

Anna Kleiber, The Blood of God, and The Raven characters

 

 

 

are forced into a consciousness of a closed existential
condition: man is denied happiness and man dies. Against
this the efforts of love, faith, and intellect
(prescience) fail. In the plays of social revolution

(Pathetic Prologue, Community Bread, Red Earth, and In the

 

 

Net) there develOps a painful awareness in the involved
individual of the dialectic between one's existing as a
separate human being and one's functioning as a social,

historical being. With the exception of The Garbage Can

 

the remaining works (The Condemned Squad, The Gag, Sad Are

 

 

the Eyes of William Tell, A Death in the Neighborhood,

 

 

Nocturnal Assault, Death Thrust, and The Tenebrae) all

 

 

 

involve a dramatic recognition of the dialectical nature

286

of man's existence while some deal more Specifically with
the increase in the dialectical tension that the evolution
of capitalism produces (Nocturnal Assault, Death Thrust,

The Tenebrae).

 

Reversal in Sastre's tragedies is most often an
ironic occurrence related to, or coincident with,
recognition and dramatically reinforcing the truth
discovered. Thus the last reunion between ANNA KLEIBER
and ALFREDO, the result of her anxious efforts, the only

one she cannot escape, is at her grave. In Community

 

EEEEQ DAVID attempts the purification of man in his social
(political) existence and consequently pollutes him in his
human existence. When the "gag" is removed, the KRAPPO
family discovers itself to be incapable of meaningful
verbal expression. The tape with GRAFFI's message of
nonviolence is punctuated with the deafening burst of
machinegun fire which is heard by his son, and a new link
in civilization's homicidal chain is forged. The death
thrust to ALBA is dealt by man who is shown to be the real
beast of the bullring.

In some works the reversal relates to a myth from

which the plot derives. In The Blood of God the first

 

ending violently wrenches the movement away from the
Abraham and Isaac myth and throws it into that of Job.
Red Earth reverses the myth of Fuenteovejuna to reveal the

injustice in a modern capitalistic society. And WILLIAM

287

TELL'S bolt kills his son thereby destroying the romantic
unreality in that myth of revolution.
In one work the absence of a reversal is Significant.

The Raven manipulates time only to exaggerate man's sense

 

of helplessness in his recognition of the irreversible
nature of his tragic movement towards death.

The Tenebrae is a work whose complex meaning involves

 

both reversal and its absence. MIGUEL's recognition or
awakening (both to consciousness and of conscience) leads
not to new life and hOpe but to death and deSpair. In
this ironic course of events an Aristotelian reversal does
indeed occur. Growing out of this, however, is an
ultimate sense of the irreversible in the pattern of
society's movement discerned in the play's microcosmic
depiction of society. The ritual arrangement reinforces
this sense. In fact middle class society is shown to have
reached or be very near the terminus of its evolution
where meanings begin to fall away, where things become the
reverse of what they once were, or ought to be or are
thought to be, where finally the innocent (MIGUEL) is
executed by the guilty.

Suffering is in evidence in all of Sastre's plays.
It is sometimes angst, that, "consciousness of objective
nothingness, verifiable at the level of individual

existence: of the being-towards-death"6 (Cargo of Dreams,

 

 

6Sastre, A. R., p. 126.

288

Anna Kleiber, Thgwgaven). It is sometimes enduring, "the
7

 

tragedy of an unjust social order" Red Earth, A Death in

 

 

the Neighborhood, Death Thrust) or suffering the

 

 

excruciation of choice between the individual and the

society in revolution (Pathetic Prologue, Community Bread,

 

 

In the Net). And it is sometimes that, "destructive or

 

painful action, such as death on the stage, bodily agony,

wounds and the like"8 (Sad Are the Eyes of William Tell,

 

Nocturnal Assault, The Tenebrae, etc.). But whatever the

 

principle form it takes, Sastre insists on eventually
relating it to the ultimate eXperience of death. The
Unamunian "tragic sense of life" is to some degree a part
of all suffering, and death is a constituent of every
play.

In the earliest works (Uranium 235 and Cargo of

 

Dreams) death is presented symbolically. In a number of
plays it occurs offstage but, in the Greek tragic manner,
remains a major organic element of the plot. This is the

case with The Gag, Anna Kleiber, and Death Thrust. (In

 

 

 

the first a hero of classic prOportions is dealt with and
the messenger is used; in the last the mutilated body is
brought onstage.) More common is a violent onstage death

of the kind enacted in Pathetic Prologue, The Blood of

 

God, The Condemned Squad, Sad Are theVEyes of William

 

 

 

 

7Sastre, O. C., p. 226.

8Aristotle, p. 73.

289

Tell, A Death in the Neighborhood, Nocturnal Assault, In

 

 

 

the Net, and The_Ien§b£g§. Occasionally death Will occur
early in the work and be followed by a flashback sequence
which moves the story inevitably towards the death again,
underlining that inescapable metaphysical tragedy which
Sastre sees human existence to be. This device is used in

Anna Kleiber, A Death in the Neighborhood, Nocturnal

 

 

Assault, Death Thrust, and with a variation in The Raven.

 

 

In a few plays death is a climactic intersecting of the
lines of existential, social, Aristotelian and ritual
meaning. These lines converge in the slaying of GOBAN in

The Condemned Squad, of DOCTOR SANJO in A Death in the

 

 

Neighborhood, and of MIGUEL in The Tenebrae.

 

 

The dramatic mimesis Operating through its principle
elements of recognition, reversal and suffering reaches
its ultimate meaning and purpose in Sastre's tragic
theatre in the eXperience of katharsis. In the avant-
garde theatre, as Sastre sees it, this eXperience becomes
gngst-ridden, is entirely individual and fails to relate
to society. And in the epic theatre, while a directive
for social purification exists, there is a deliberate
working against any individual katharsis. But just as it
mimetically provided the best possibility for reflecting
the whole of man's condition, the Aristotelian, dramatic
theatre, broadly interpreted, carries the best potential
for interrelating with and effecting that condition by

accomplishing both an individual and a social katharsis or

290

purification. The two are Seen by Sastre to be
necessarily related. Added to Aristotle‘s consummatory

purpose is an instrumental purpose. Sastre in Anatomy of

 

Regligmg eXplains this relationship in terms of a
dialectic of Aristotelian and Brechtian effects.
According to this eXplanation in the theatre and later in
real life experiences which reflect Situations
theatrically presented, the Spectator tends to both
distance himself from the tragic figure and uneXpectedly
reCOgnize himself in him, sees him alternately as "the
other" and as ”the self." As "the other," guilt is easily
attributed to him; in the uneXpected recognition of "the
self" one is forced to accept it and act. This act is
hOpefully one of self and societal purification.

This complicated theoretical concept, published in
1965, must be recognized as a pOSition that was reached
throuqh a great deal of practical eXperimentation. His
plays are in one sense a series of eXperiments, some
crude, some refined, working towards a practical
realization of the concept of katharSis as it develOps.

One method of stimulating the indiVidual toward
eventual actiVity in society is that of bringing plays to
an obviously unresolved ending, With the implication that
the only resolution lies outSide the theatre. For Sastre

this lack of resolution is necessarily a feature of

 

9See Chapter II.

29L

tragedy: in the case of man s existential predicament
there is no resolution, only an increased awareness; and
in the case of man 5 social predicament, a true resolution
must take place in the reality of soc1ety. By
aesthetically exaggerating this sense of the unresolved he
accomplishes a state of tension in his Spectator
(certainly in his critics) which can only be reduced by
action outside of the play and on the part of the
Spectator. In this procedure Sastre obviously breaks
through Aristotelian limits=

This situation without resolution is not often left
to Operate alone however. Other devices function to Open
the work to the reality of the audience thus preventing
any final consideration of the mimetic world as entirely
separate from the real world. And whether these devices
be seen as original with Sastre or borrowed, consciously
or unconsciously, from other playwrights is less
significant than that they be seen as an integral part of
his eXperiment with the effectiveness of tragic theatre.

Thus the writer-as-narrator in Anna Kleiber should be seen

 

in his function of the tragic chorus, the ideal Spectator
who not only comes to reCOgnize the tragedy of the common
man, but who probes it, investigates it, involves himself

in it. The double ending of The Blood of God, is an

 

attempt to force the perplex existential predicament of
the play on to the Spectator, making him recognize the

inevitable fact of it in his own existence. In Red Earth

 

r
[~._‘o

Sastre has created a cyclic diama of ever eXpdnd:nq
revolutions which hepefully break throuqh mimetic
boundaries by the end of the play into the real historical
context of the audience. More direct is HANAFI 3 Single
word accusation of the audience a: the end of an otherwise
aesthetically closed work lln_the get), or the ruined
bullfighter s mute petition to the Spectators in Death
Thrust- These unanticipated actions throw the question of
guilt directly on to the observer but in a manner not so
heavy as to founder in its purpose.

KatharSis therefore, by Sastre's understanding of it,
climaxes the theatrical process and initiates a new
process in reality. It is the last of a number of factors
which make tragic theatre a Viable theatre for modern
society, factors which Sastre sees as prerequiSite to
achieving effective theatre, existential or social. By
katharsis tragedy reaches effectively back into the
reality from which, through mimeSis, it drew its being.
And it is only in its being tragic theatre that Sastre”s

theatre can eXpress the dialectic of man’s existence,lo

 

10"Tragedy prOposes a difficult tension between the
two poles of a double seizure of conSCiousness
(conscience): of our situation as existing beings and of
our historic situation; between the immersion in the very
anguish of a being-towards-death and the collective
activity in the sense of progress; between ethical purity
and SOCial efficacy; between private anguish and public
action, as far from a diSintegrated eXistential nihilism
as from an imperturbable political actiVism." A. R.,
p. 66.

293

and only in its being tragic theatre that it can ultimately

effect changes in that existence.ll

 

11"The Spectator through katharsijl may be moved to
revise his view of the world and the a umptions of his
life. He may be moved to make meaningful social decisions,
ranging from individual assistance to revolution. When
this happens, the tragedy has achieved its supreme end:
purification (katharsis). Understood thus, purification
consists of two stages: immediate or ersonal,
purification, and social purification.' See Chapter I.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alfonso Sastre. Ed. José Monleén. Madrid: Taurus, 1964.

Anderson, Farris. Alfonso Sastre. New York: Twayne,

 

 

1971.

Aragonés, Juan E. "Alfonso Sastre y el 'realismo
profundizado.'" Punta EurOpa, NO. 83 (March, 1963),
24-35. .

. "Alfonso Sastre y las tragicas preguntas."

Alcala, 28-29 (March, 1953), n. p.

Aristotle. Poetics. trans. S. H. Butcher. New York:
Hill and Wang, 1961.

Beckett, Samuel. Waiting For Godot. New York: Grove
Press, 1958.

 

Borel, Jean-Paul. "Teatro de lo imposible." Insula, XVI,
No. 179 (October, 1961), 15.

Brereton, Geoffrey. Principles of Tragedy. Coral Gables:
Univ. of Miami Press, 1968.

 

Buero Vallejo, Antonio. "Obligada precisiOn acerca del
IMPOSIBILISMO." Primer acto, No. 15 (July-August,
1960), 1-6.

'Chantraine de van Praag, Jacqueline. "Alfonso Sastre: La
eSperanza del joven teatro eSpafiol." Torre, X, No.
40 (October-December, 1962),"111-119.

"Coloquios sobre problemas actuales del teatro en ESpaha."
Alfonso Sastre. Madrid: Taurus, 1964, 101-106.

DeCoster, Cyrus C. "Alfonso Sastre." Tulane Drama
Review, vol. 5, no. 2 (December 1960), 121-132.

 

. "Two recent plays by Alfonso Sastre."
HisEania, XLIV, No. 44 (December, 1961), 758.

Doménech, Ricardo. "Alfonso Sastre, un dramaturgo en
marcha." La Estafeta Literaria, No. 113 (January,
1958), 4.

 

294

 

295

 

"EntreVista con Alfonso Sastre,’
Sastre.

 

' Alfonso
i Madrid: Taurus, 1964, 56~62.
. "Tres cbres de un autor revoluCionario.“
Alfonso Sastre. Madrid: Taurus, 1964, 37-47.
Garcia—AbrineS. Luis.

"La poeSia aCCidental en el teatro
de Sastre." Duqugsne Hispinic ReView, I, No.
(Spring, 1962), 41—50.

 

l
Garcia Escudero, Jose Maria. ”Tiempo." Alfonso Sastre.
Madrid: Aguilar, 1964, 65—69.
Garcia Pavon: FranCISCO- El Es§3£9_§23islis2.§sss§so
Madrid: Taurus, 1962.
Garzo, Eugenio. "El teatro de Alfonso Sastre." Cuadernos
HiSpanoamericanos, 59 (November, 1954), 213—215.
Goldman, Luc1en. "The Theatre of Sartre." TDR, T49
(Fall, 1970), 102—119.
Gonzalez, Emilio.

 

"La obra dramatica de Alfonso Sastre."
Revista HiSpanica Moderna, XXVII, Nos. 3-4
1961), 333.

(October,
Halffter, Cristobal. "La mGSica de 'La cornada.'" Primer
acto, NO- 12 (January-February, 1960), 26.
Haro Tecglen, Eduardo.

Alfonso Sastre.

 

"IntroducciOn a Alfonso Sastre."
Madrid: Taurus, 1964, 70—76.

Fear and Trembling.
New York: Doubleday, 1954.

Studies in European Realism.
Grosset and Dunlap, 1964.

Kierkegaard, Soren.
Lowrie.

trans. Walter
Lukécs,

Georg.

New York:

The Meaning of Contemporary Realism.
Merlin, 1962.

London:
Marsillach, Adolfo.

"Cuaderno de direcciOn de
cornada.'"
1960),

~~La
Primer acto, No. 12 (January—February,
Martinez Ruiz, Florencio.

eSpanol."

“El ultimo teatro realista
177-192.

Papeles de Sons Armadans, No.

45 (1967),
Miller, Arthur.

"Tragedy and the Common Man." Tragedy
Vision and Form, ed. Robert Corrigan, Scranton:
Chandler, 1965, 148-151.

7‘s)
\f:‘
ON

Pasquariello, Anthony M- 'Alfonso Sastre, Dramatist in
Search of a Stage ‘ The_Th§§££g_§hhhgl, 22 (1965~
66), 16-23.

"Alfonso Sastre y Escuadra haCia la muerte."

-..—'w- ;

Hishhhg, v, No. 3 (May, 1952?, 57-63.

 

"Censorship in the Spanish Theatre and Alfonso
Sastre S The Condemned_§quad.“ Theatre Annual, XIX
(1962), 19—26.

 

Peman, Jose Maria. "E1 articulo de José Maria Peman."
Primerwgcto, No. 12 (January—February, 1960), 12-15.

Perez Minik, Domingo. “Se trata de Alfonso Sastre,
dramaturgo melancOlico de la revoluciOn." Alfonso
Sastre. Madrid: Taurus, 1964, 11—36.

Pronko, Leonard C. "The 'Revolutionary Theatre' of
Alfonso Sastre." Tulane Drama ReView, V, NO. 2
(December, 1960), 111-120.

Quinto, Jose Maria de. "Breve historia de una lucha."
Alfonso Saghgg. Madrid: Aguilar, 1964, 48~55.

. "Un articulo y una carta en torno a “La
cornada. " Primer acto, No. 12 (January-February,
1960), 12-15.

. Un nuevo sentido de la Katharsis." Primer acto,

 

Rodriguez Puértolas, J. "Tres aspectos de una misma
realidad en el teatro espanol contemporaneo: Buero,
Sastre, Olmo." Hispanofila, No. 31 (September,

 

1967), 43-58.

Sastre, Alfonso. "A modo de respuesta." Primer acto,
No. 16 (September—October, 1960), l-2.

 

. Ana Klgiber. Obras completas. Madrid:
Aguilar, 1967, 413-475.

. Anatomia del realismo. Barcelona: Editorial
Seix Barral, 1965.

. Anna Kleiber. trans. Leonard Pronko, The New
Theatre of EurOpe. Ed. Robert Corrigan. New York:

. "Arte como construcciOn.” Alfonso Sastre.
Madrid: Taurus, 1964, 107—114.

 

to
\O
~J

 

 

ASE lto norturno. Obras completes Madrid:
Aguilar, 1967, 91.
. Cargamenro de CnePOC. Obras: completas.

 

Madrid. Aguilar, 1967, 31- 5?.

. ”Catorce anos." Primer acto, No. ll (November~

 

 

December, 1959), 1-2.

 

. "Cinco cartas de feliCi tacion £95339
litergrio, V, No. 89 (Feb., 195 4), 10.

 

. Drama v SOCiedad. Madrid: Taurus, 1956.

——--‘_n—‘ M— ”H—

. E1 Circulito Be-£lEE' Obras comp}etas.
Madrid: Aguilar, 1967, 1007-1052.

 

 

 

 

. E1 cubo de la basura. Obras completas.

 

 

 

Madrid: Aguilar, 1967, 107-153.

El cuervo. Obras completas. Madrid: Aguilar,

 

 

 

1967, 659:715.

. "E1 drama y las ideas." Correo literario, IV,

 

 

No. 77 (August, 1953), 10.

E1 pan de todos. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

 

Aguilar, 19677 223-279.

. "El T. A. S. por ultima vez." Alfonso Sastre.

 

 

Madrid: Aguilar, 1964, 81-87.

. En la red. Obras completas. Madrid: Aguilar,

 

 

 

1967, 793-862.

. Escuadra hacia la muerte. Obras completas.

 

 

 

Madrid: Aguilar, I967, 155-221.

. "ESpacio—Tiempo y Drama." Primer acto, No. 6

 

 

(January-February, 1958), 13-16.

. "G. T. R. primera temporada." Primer acto,

 

 

NO. 23, (May, 1961), 12-18.

 

 

. Guillermo Tell tiene 108 0395 tristes. Obras
completgg. Madrid: Aguilar, 1967, 585-657.

. La cornada. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

 

Aguilar, 1967, 863-942.

. "La 'katharsis' trégica." Correo literario, V,

 

 

No. 90 (Feb., 1954), 10.

298

. La mordaza. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

Aguilar, 1967, 281-343.

. La revolucién y la critica de la cultura.
Barcelona: Grijalbo, 1970.

. La sangre de Dios. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

“—‘—A§Eiiar, 1967, 477-525.

. "La tragedia y el tiempo." Correo literario,

 

V, No. 92 (March, 1954), 10.

. "Le theatre eSpagnol contemporain." Preuves,

 

No. 8 (May—June, 1959), 11.

No. 123 (May, 1961), 25—28.

. "Los eSpectaculos terribles." Primer acto,

 

. Muerte en el barrio. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

 

Aguilar, 1967, 527-584.

. Obras completas. Madrid: Aguilar, 1967.

 

. Oficio de tinieblas. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

 

Aguilar, 1967, 943-1006.

. PrOlogo patético. Obras completas. Madrid:

 

 

Aguilar, 1967, 55-106.

. "Sobre las formas 'sociales' del drama."

 

Alfonso Sastre. Madrid: Aguilar, 1964, 88-94.

. "Sobre lo ethico del drama." Primer acto,

 

No. 7 (March-April, 1959), 50-52.

. "Subvenciones." Alfonso Sastre. Madrid:

 

 

Aguilar, 1964, 79-80.

. "Teatro de la Realidad." Primer acto, No. 18

 

(December, 1960), 1-2.

. "Teatro de vanguardia, regreSo a1 realismo y

 

eXperiencia épica." Alfonso Sastre. Madrid:
Taurus, 1964, 137-140.

. "Teatro imposible y pacto social." Primer

 

acto, No. 14 (May-June, 1960), 1-2.

. "Teatro para el afio nuevo." Primer acto, Nos.

 

29-30 (December, 1961-January 1962), 26-27.

. "Tempestad sobre los teatros nacionales."
Correo literario, III, No. 56 (September, 1952), l,
10.

299

”Teologia del drama." ghrreo literario, IV,
No. 85 (December, 1953), 10.

 

 

....- 2123211351 . 9912.118 “>123... I“: ddr ~i=
. "Tragedia." Corre9_llt§§ario, 70 (April 15,
1953), 10.
. "Tragedia “antigua‘ y tragedia ‘moderna.'"

Correo literario, IV, No. 86 (Dec., 1953), 12.

 

‘1

. Uranio_235. Obras Shmplehgg. Madrid:
Aguilar, 1967, 5-30.

 

 

, and Jose Maria de Quinto. "DeclaraCiOn del
G, T. R." Alfonso Sastre. Madrid: Aguilar, 1964,
115-116.

 

, and Jose Maria de Quinto. "Documento sobre el
teatro eSpahol." Alfonso Sastre. Madrid: Aguilar,
1964, 117-123. '

 

, and Jose Maria de Quinto. "Manifiesto del
T. A. S." Alfonso Sastre. Madrid: Aguilar, 1964,
97-100.

 

Schwartz, Kessel. "Tragedy and the Criticism of Alfonso
Sastre." Symposium, Winter, 1967, 338-346.

 

Steiner, George. Language and Silence. New York:
Atheneum, 1967.

 

. The Death of Tragedy. New York: Hill and
Wang, 1961.

 

 

Unamuno, Miguel de. The Tragic Sense of Life. trans.
J. E. Crawford Flitch. New York: Dover, 1954.

 

Van Der Naald, A. C. "E1 teatro social de Alfonso
Sastre." Diss. Un. of IllinOis, 1967.

Vazquez Zamora, Rafael. "Alfonso Sastre no acepta e1
'posibilismo.'" Insula, XV, Nos. 164-165 (July-
August, 1960), 27.

. "Autores de hoy y mafiana: Alfonso Sastre."
Insula, XII, No. 130 (September, 1957), 10.

 

. "”En la red' de Alfonso Sastre." Insula, XVI,
No. 173 (April, 1961), 15.

 

300

Villa Pastur, J. "Teatro." Archivum, VI (Sept.—Dec.,
1956), 393-395.

Villegas, Juan. "La sustancia metafisica de la tragedia y
su funciOn social: Escuadra hacia la Muerte de
Alfonso Sastre." Symposium, XXI (Fall, 1967), 255-
263.