CHAPTER XV

TWO SPANISH DRAMATISTS--ECHEGARAY (1904), BENAVENTE (1922)

The prize of 1904 was awarded one half to:

Echegaray, José, member of the Spanish Academy, born 1833, died September 14, 1916: “in appreciation of his comprehensive and intellectual authorship which, in an independent and original way, has brought to life again the great traditions of the Spanish drama.”[147]

Until recent years, Spanish literature has been less accessible by translation than that of many other European countries. Fiction by Galdós, Valera, Valdes, and Ibañez have given to English and American readers somewhat adequate impressions of the realistic power and poetic undertones of some of these latter-day novelists. In drama, three of Galdós’ plays, nine by Martínez-Sierra, a dozen more by Echegaray, and several by Benavente have been rendered into excellent English by such gifted translators as John Garrett Underhill, James Graham, Charles Nirdlinger, Hannah Lynch, Ruth Lansing, and others.[148] In the awards to Spanish dramatists of the Nobel prize in 1904 and 1922, two generations with their differing standards and literary methods, have been represented--Echegaray and Benavente. In German literature, as exampled by Heyse and Hauptmann, and in Polish fiction, with its representatives, Sienkiewicz and Reymont, one finds the same recurrent recognition in successive generations.

José Echegaray, who shared the honor of 1904 with Frédéric Mistral, was born in Madrid in 1833; that city was his home until his death in 1916, except for periods of travel or retirement because of political friction. As Sully-Prudhomme found his first impulse towards science, so Echegaray studied mathematics “ferociously, ravenously.” He made researches, also, in geology and philosophy. Under the republican government he held public offices, like Ministers of Agriculture, Industry, and Commerce, President of the Council of Education, and Senator for Life. After teaching at the National Technical School, where he had been educated, he became identified with the University of Madrid.

At first the writing of plays seems to have been a pastime for this mathematician and politician. _The Wife of the Avenger_, _At the Hilt of the Sword_, and _The Gladiator of Ravenna_, which appeared between 1874 and 1876, were popular in Spain but are little known by English translation. In 1877 he wrote a drama that has been much discussed, since it was translated as _Madman or Saint_ by Ruth Lansing (Poet Lore, Boston, 1912); another translation by Hannah Lynch (Boston, 1895) bore the title, _Folly or Saintliness_. Still another translation by Mary Serrano is used in _Library of the World’s Best Literature_. It is a strong play emotionally, with that touch of idealism and romance which were traits of the author, blended with his keen analysis. Don Lorenzo, a wealthy man of Madrid, finds that he has been deceived regarding his parentage; he is not the son of a rich mother of noble family, as he and the world supposed, but the child of his nurse, Juana, who dies after she tells him the tale. No longer young, with his daughter engaged to a son of the Duchess of Almonte, he is determined to tell the truth and so defy his family. A specialist in mental disease is called with the physician to examine him; at the same time he sends for a notary to record his renunciation of his name and estate. His final monologue is dramatic, beginning with the lines: “What! is a man to be declared mad because he is resolved to do his duty. It cannot be! Humanity is neither so blind nor so bad as that!”

These earlier plays by Echegaray, which called forth such ardent praise from his countrymen, who would rank him with Calderon and Lope de Vega of the past centuries, are trivial in literary value beside two of later years, _The Great Galeoto_ and _The Son of Don Juan_. Eleven years separated these two strong dramas (1881-1892) during which the author continued to write plays, some with historical setting like _Harold the Norman_ and _Lysander the Bandit_; others were of romantic type, some tragedies and more comedies. In general, he sought to revive romantic drama, to proclaim the sharp conflicts in life between passion and duty. His motives were often more pronounced than his characterization; his men and women were sometimes mere mechanisms, fighting their battles for honor and truth. There was a chivalrous note in his lines where domestic fidelity formed the keynote of the emotional struggle. Soliloquy was much used by this dramatist.

When _The Son of Don Juan_ and _Mariana_ were translated, and linked in the memory of English readers with _The Great Galeoto_, world-critics gave study to this forceful Spanish dramatist who had grown in favor during the decade from 1890 to 1900. Two characteristics of _The Great Galeoto_ were noted: the fearless, vigorous portrayal of the evil of gossip and resultant tragedy; the fact that the chief personage in the play exercised occult influence and did not appear on the stage. He is the “busybody,” who creates all the troublesome situations, who directs the characters (or suggests their words) but he is not present. Elizabeth Wallace, in an article of value in the _Atlantic Monthly_, September, 1908, on “The Spanish Drama of Today,” says: “This vanishing hero is the cruel, careless world, hastening eagerly to cast the first stone, and, so soon tired of the sport, hurrying on to find some new excitement, leaving death and destruction in its wake.”[149] This culprit is the city of Madrid (or society anywhere). There are individualized characters like Theodora and Don Julian; Don Severo, the plotter, may well be compared to Iago.

Even more virile than this romantic tragedy is _The Son of Don Juan_; it suggests Ibsen’s _Ghosts_, both in germ-idea and _dénouement_, although it has distinctive merit. Echegaray borrowed the words of the Norwegian dramatist for the lines of Lazarus, “Mother, give me the sun!” In the Prologue the Spanish author expands these symbolic words to “enfold a world of ideas, an ocean of sentiments, a hell of sorrows, a cruel lesson, a supreme warning to society and to the family circle.” Society is, again, at the bar of justice, as in _The Great Galeoto_; the offense this time is lax morality of parent, and the lunacy which falls, in retribution, on the child. The mother of Lazarus is a convincing character. In _Mariana_ are found some of the strongest delineations in Echegaray’s dramas, notably Clara, wife of Don Castulo, the grotesque archeologist, and Mariana, the widow, with riches in America, described by Clara (in a touch of jealousy, yet appreciation) as “a widow who is hardly a widow and is almost a child.” The latter woman is capricious, disdainful, yet passionate in her relations with her lover, Daniel. Melodrama enters somewhat into the closing scenes of intrigue and excitement. James Graham has translated both _Mariana_ and _The Son of Don Juan_.

Echegaray continued to write plays, stimulated by the recognition and the honors of 1904. When the award was made, there was a popular demonstration in Madrid; the king presided and presented the prize, while speeches were made by Galdós, Valera, and Mendenez Palayo, who had once been his bitter critic. On this occasion Palayo said: “For thirty years Echegaray has been the dictator, arbiter and idol of the multitude, a position impossible to attain without the strength of genius, which triumphs in literature as everywhere.”[150] He was much honored in France and called “a second Victor Hugo.” It has not been easy for American students to interpret the plays by Echegaray; they fail to understand fully, especially on the stage, the situations and sentiments of the Spanish dramatist. Many of the keen, brilliant lines, both of analysis and wit, suffer in translation into English. For Drama League readings, or group study and discussion, his plays lend themselves to interpretation and study. This is true, not alone the longer and familiar dramas already noted but such short plays as _Always Ridiculous_, translated by T. W. Gilkyson,[151] and _The Street Singer_, translated by John Garrett Underhill[152] and included in Frank Shay’s _25 Short Plays_ of international selection (New York, 1925). Irony and wistfulness are mingled in this dramatic picture of the little beggar-girl, Suspiros, of Augustias, the street singer, and her lover, Pepe. Suspiros, sixteen and pretty but sickly, speaks to Coleta, a professional beggar of fifty years:[153]

_Coleta._ You don’t know how to beg.

_Suspiros._ Yes, sir, I know how to beg; the trouble is, people don’t know how to give. I say, “A penny for my poor mother who is sick.” And you ought to see how sick she is! She died two years ago. Well, I get nothing. Or else I say, “A penny for God’s sake, for my mother who is in the hospital, in the name of the Blessed Virgin! I have two baby brothers.” No one gives, either.

_Coleta._ They don’t, eh? And how many brothers are you going to have to-night?

_Suspiros._ Ay, Signor Coleta! I had two and nobody gave me anything. Last night I tried four and I got sixpence, so to-night I mean to have five and see what they give me, or whether I just get the cuff from my mother.

_Coleta._ Just in the family, how many brothers have you, really?

_Suspiros._ Really, I had two. But they died, like my mother. Ay! they died because of the way my stepmother treated them--as she does me--and I am dying! Listen! If I can make two or three dollars I am going to run away to Jativa, and live with my aunt.

Echegaray was seventy-two years old when he gained the prize; he was already called by some critics a “representative of the older generation.” Interest in his plays, however, has gained rather than waned, among critical scholars in every country, and his rank is assured among the romantic dramatists of this century. His seriousness, combined with keen wit and insight, has been compared with similar traits of Tolstoy. Both writers have emphasized the “dignity of suffering” for the sake of spiritual freedom. This is exampled in Echegaray’s _Madman or Saint_, already cited. Conscientious and sincere in his work, this Spanish dramatist has left a few plays of strong characterization and potent message to society, a message that has an element of idealism, flashing out amid the grim realities of life.

JACINTO BENAVENTE

The prize of 1922 has been awarded:

Benavente, Jacinto, dramatic writer, Madrid, born 1866: “for the happy way in which he has pursued the honored traditions of the Spanish drama.”[154]

Jacinto Benavente, to whom the Nobel prize was given in 1922, was acclaimed as especially worthy by those who sought for a representative of “the new generation” in Spanish drama--what was known as “the generation of 1898” which decried past methods and urged modern themes and viewpoints. Benavente was born in Madrid in 1866, a generation younger than Echegaray. His father was a prominent physician and the boy had stimulating home environment. He studied law for a brief time but he inclined towards writing and the theatre. He had some actual experiences “on the road” with theatrical troupes and with a circus, thus gaining first-hand information about theatrical devices and the needs of both actors and audiences. His first venture in print was as a poet, in 1893, but the next year he published a play, _Thy Brother’s House_. This and other immature plays received scanty notice until, in 1896, appeared _In Society_. Two years later _The Banquet of Wild Beasts_ focussed attention upon this daring, brilliant playwright. He became a leader among young professional men in Madrid who, following the Spanish-American War, were eager to renounce tradition and to revolutionize society by exposing its vices and weaknesses. They would punctuate “modernism” in thought and expression with ideals of poetry. A summary of this is found in _A Study of the Modern Drama_ by Barrett H. Clark (New York, 1925).

Benavente is less radical than some of his literary associates in Spain, France, and Russia. He does not disdain “traditions,” if they ring true to life and art. He is graceful and versatile, writing plays of manner and characterization, satires on aristocracy and sympathetic scenes of peasant life. He compels his readers or spectators to _think_, if they will get stimulus from his plays like _The Truth_, _Autumnal Roses_, _The Magic of an Hour_, and _Field of Ermine_.

In 1913, Benavente was elected to membership in the Spanish Academy. He is widely quoted on educational and political, as well as literary affairs. He has ideals for a greater freedom than now exists in Spain and other European countries. He has traveled widely, seeing his plays performed and making friends in Russia, England, South America, and the United States. _The Passion Flower_ (_La Malquerida_), the tragedy of peasant life with colorful setting and tense emotion, has been popular in America, as a film, and as a play with Nance O’Neil as actress. The Theatre Guild of New York and the Jewish Art Theatre gave careful study to the interpretation of _The Bonds of Interest_. As in many of his plays the serious lesson is not stressed to interfere with the artistry. One of his best characterizations is Nevé, heroine of _El Hombrecito_, often compared to Ibsen’s Nora of _A Doll’s House_. Benavente believes that the inner meaning of a play must be revealed by the mind or emotions of the spectator or reader. He is deeply indebted--a debt which English and American readers share--for the intuitive, careful translations and editing of several series of his plays by John Garrett Underhill (Scribner’s, New York, 1917-1925). Only in such interpretation can one fully appreciate the strength and fineness of character-drawing, the satirical thesis, the fantasy and poetry blended in such plays as _The Governor’s Wife_, _The Prince Who Learned Everything out of Books_, _Saturday Night_, _The Other Honor_, and _The Necklace of Stars_, with its fanciful charm and sermonic lesson of love to one’s neighbor. In Ernest Boyd’s _Studies from Ten Literatures_ there is a good summary of his life and work which includes 144 plays. Mr. Boyd raises the question, “Has he been overestimated?” Possibly it is an echo of French criticism. Valuable material is found, also, in Storm Jameson’s _Modern Drama in Europe_ and _A Study of the Modern Drama_ by Barrett H. Clark (New York, 1925). A new intensive study is _Jacinto Benavente_ by Walter Starkie (New York, 1925).

[Illustration:

_Copyright by Underwood & Underwood, N. Y._

JACINTO BENAVENTE]

_Expressionism_ classifies the work of dramatists like Benavente, Molnar, and Capek. The methods used by the Spanish playwright to embody this principle are to “generalize” both the action and his characters, so that they become symbols of real life, appealing to the subjective element in readers. He has declared that, henceforth, he intends to write plays for publication and not for the theatre.... “The only way in which a play may be appreciated thoroughly is by being read,” he says. “I have written more than a thousand parts, yet of that number I can recall perhaps five which I have recognized as being truly the characters I had conceived, when they stepped upon the stage. I have not even seen some of my plays.”[155] This stress upon the futility of staging plays that should be interpreted by the reader’s own imagination and mind, is not unlike that by Maeterlinck, already noted in a previous chapter.

Benavente not infrequently uses puppets in place of real characters to convey his inner meanings. Sometimes they are given real names but they are not the _true_ characters he wishes the reader to discover in them, as in the first scenes of _The Bonds of Interest_. In a brief parable-play, _The Magic of an Hour_,[156] he has two symbolic characters, “A Merveilleuse” and “An Incroyable,” two porcelain figures upon columns that converse about life and love, books and flowers, poetry and music. In this adroit, short comedy the author has interwoven some thoughts that express that peculiar idealism which is his, that contrast between weak humanity and the craving “for something which is not ourselves, and yet which is the breath of living.” The nearest approach to this ideal is love, which can transform, “by the magic of an hour,” evil, men-beasts, cowards, “devils in crime,” into “spirits of light, luminous with a divine wisdom through all instincts of the beast.”[157] In sentences of such groping faith, such idealism of the “inner eye,” scattered through the hundred and more plays by Jacinto Benavente, one may establish, in a measure, his right to the Nobel prize. With this is blended what Storm Jameson calls his “divine sanity.” On the score of literary achievement, he is an artist, versatile and sincere, delicate and yet vigorous in his workmanship. His plays vary in value for the student of drama; some of the later titles, like _A Pair of Shoes_ or _Doubtful Virtue_, indicate the types of psychological plays among Continental playwrights. In his finer, more characteristic plays, however, there are vital expressions of idealism. Mr. John Garrett Underhill (in a letter to the author of this book) says, “Benavente is an idealist of the highest type and his philosophy is best and most explicitly stated in _The School of Princesses_ and _Field of Ermine_--service and sacrifice.”

FOOTNOTES:

[147] Inscription with the Nobel Prize Award in Literature, 1904.

[148] See _A Study of Modern Drama_ by Barrett H. Clark, New York, 1925, and _Modern Drama in Europe_ by Storm Jameson, New York, 1920.

[149] By permission of the Atlantic Monthly Company.

[150] _Review of Reviews_, 31: 613.

[151] _Poet Lore_, Boston, 1908.

[152] _Drama_, 25, 62-76.

[153] By permission of John Garrett Underhill.

[154] Inscription with the Nobel Prize Award in Literature, 1922.

[155] _Plays_; fourth series, xix, edited by John Garrett Underhill. By permission of Mr. Underhill and Charles Scribner’s Sons.

[156] _Ibid._

[157] _Ibid._, _Magic of an Hour_, p. 125.

##