91
MS 21787 contains 256 pages of which 219 have writing on the back. It also features some of Galdós's better art work. Sketched in the margins we find: a man on a cross (f. 3b); more crosses with bodies on them (f. 11, Act III); profile of a man with a conspicuous moustache and beard (f. 32, Act III); a mask-like profile of a man (f. 40, Act III); a detailed profile of a woman with long, flowing hair (f. 40, Act III); an impressive profile of a man with curly hair (f. 37, Act III). In all quotations the accentuation, punctuation, and spelling are those of the manuscript.
92
In a letter to Federico Oliver dated March 22, 1909, Galdós states that the theatrical version of Casandra will deal exclusively with the first three acts: «Debo advertirle que el arreglo no se hará más que de los tres primeros actos, que son los actos de acción, por decirlo así; lo demás se deja» (Martínez Umpiérrez 113). This statement supports our contention that we are dealing with the novel and not the play since it seems unlikely that Galdós would include in the manuscript a seven-page outline of material that he had previously decided to exclude.
93
I disagree with Entenza de Solare who advocates a theory of «amplificación» and contends that Galdós almost always added and expanded as he progressed from one version to another. In contrast, Boo's work on the manuscript of La de San Quintín lends support to the present theory of reduction and avoidance, especially in regard to overt criticism of the Catholic Church (25). For quantitative evidence that Galdós consistently reduced and trimmed as he moved from draft to draft, see Schnepf's research on more than thirty Galdós manuscripts. See, specifically in this regard, Schnepf's essays on the significance of the «petardos» in La desheredada, the naturalistic content of La desheredada, and the creation of Juan Bragas de Pipaón in the second series of Episodios nacionales. The one clear exception seems to be Lo prohibido, the 1885 novel which Galdós began with a hastily written draft of 103 pages, which he then expanded in subsequent versions (Whiston 11, 263).
94
Galdós's hesitation in regard to this proposed marriage is obvious in MS 21787. The idea first crops up in Act II, and Alfonso and Clementina both respond negatively. It then seems to disappear momentarily, only to resurface several times in the same Act. Clementina subsequently has a change of heart and appears disposed to accept the sacrifice for the «bienestar» and «dignidad» of her family (f. 9, Act II). Alfonso remains firm in his resolve not to give in to Doña Juana. Finally, late in Act II, Clementina regains her courage and tells Insúa that she will not sacrifice either of her daughters (f. 55, Act II).
95
Galdós's indecision with respect to this priest is evident even in his marginal notes in the manuscript. On one page he writes «Padre Pérez, Padre Pez, Padre Pios, Padre Pi» (f. 73, Act II). On another he scribbles «Matar al monstruo» and then begins again with the names: «Padre?, Padre Gracia, Ruiz, Sales, Borja» (f. 84, Act II).
96
Galdós also provides additional information about the relationship between Pepa and Insúa. Early in the work Galdós seems to be wondering whether or not he should include the affair. As Pepa and Martina discuss Insúa (also referred to as Muñoz), the novelist asks the following about Pepa: «(Es amante de Muñoz?)» (f. 9, Act II). Insúa also speaks freely to Alfonso and Clementina about how and why he came to love Pepa, and we learn much more about the administrator's past life. In Act II, we read that he has been widowed since 1891. Insúa later tells Alfonso that he has been divorced for thirteen years, but at least he has managed to marry his two daughters well (ff. 55/57, Act II).
97
For Galdós's relations with Sol y Ortega, see Brian J. Dendle, «Galdós and Sol y Ortega», Hispanic Review 53 (1985): 437-47.