Galdós - Amazon Web Services

Anales galdosianos [Publicaciones periódicas]. Año XII, 1977
material, full of potential, that can be misshapen or admirably developed, according to the creative
circumstances. She, too, is estheticized: « la tristeza que despedían sus bonitos ojos, aquella tristeza
que a veces me parecía un efecto estético, producido por la luz y color de la pupila, a veces un resultado
de los fenómenos de la expresión, por donde se nos transparentan los misterios del mundo moral,
quizás revelaba uno de esos engaños cardinales en que vivimos mucho tiempo, o quizás toda la vida,
sin darnos cuenta de ello » (VI, 39). Irene is projected not as a creature of flesh, but as a phenomenon
of esthetic, linguistic expression. The statement also adduces that art, here in the shape of Irene, is
the affirmation of life's mysteries and that arts deceit, its ambiguity, is inherent and sustains us. That
power of art forges the supernatural oneness that exists between creator and creation. « La llevaba
conmigo », writes Manso of Irene in terms even more explicit than his expressions of solidarity
with Manuel. « Era como si la naturaleza de ella hubiera sido inoculada milagrosamente en la mía.
La sentía compenetrada en mi, espíritu con espíritu » (XVII, 104). The long conversation between
Máximo and Irene in which the details of her relationship with Peña are revealed is for all intents
and purposes Irene's confession, but it comes from the mouth of Manso. It is as if he were reciting a
drama whose script he had composed. This retrospective account that abounds in evidence of Manso's
omniscience prompts Irene to exclaim twice: « -Sabe usted... más que Dios... »; « -Usted lo sabe
todo... Parece que adivina... » (XLI, 256, 258). The reader is not so surprised.
The creator's control over his creation, however -whether that creation is a pupil, an ideal, or a
fictional character- is tenuous. Through Manolo, the pupil (the idea) is portrayed as potentially willful
and rebellious, and the teacher (the artist) must conquer and tame in order to shape. In the course
of the educational process, Manso discovers that he needs to adjust to his pupil's innate gifts. He
cannot squeeze polished writing out of oratorical talent, and he cannot fan speculative interests where
pragmatic inclinations persist. Even the name by which Manolo is most frequently called, Peñita, is
given him by someone else and in spite of Manso's distaste for it. Small incidents these, yet proof
that the artistic raw material is refractory from the start and subject to the interference of third parties.
In Irene's case, too, Manso constructs her in a given fashion, as a woman of the North, free of his
society's enervating moral climate: « He aquí la mujer perfecta, la mujer positiva, la mujer razón,
contrapuesta a la mujer frivolidad, a la mujer capricho » (XIII, 77). Yet Manso is prompted to
wonder: « ¿Acaso la conozco bien? No; cada día noto que hay algo en ella que permanece velado a
enthusiasm for the gestures, the flowery phrasing, the empty metaphors that lead him. to ask twice «
¿de qué hablaba? » and that in others he had relentlessly condemned? Only his instinctive recognition
of the symbiotic dependency between creator and creation can serve as an adequate explanation.
101