Selecciona una palabra y presiona la tecla d para obtener su definición.
Anterior Indice Siguiente



  —43→  

ArribaAbajo The Manuscript of Galdós's Tormento

Michael A. Schnepf


Tormento (1884) is an enigmatic novel in which Galdós depicts the characters and their moral dilemmas in a highly complex and nuanced way. The Pedro Polo/Amparo Sánchez Emperador affair offers a perfect example: the novelist leaves out or intentionally blurs; key details about the relationship, and this makes it difficult to make a clear distinction between seducer and seduced. Diane Urey writes the following about this kind of ellipsis in the novel: «Thus Tormento is always discontinuous in that it is never completely written; the reader creates the continuity by filling in the text's empty spaces» (47). She goes on to say that in Tormento «we are forever guessing, never certain of what 'really' happened; there is no ultimate closure. To conclude Galdós's novel it must become out own as we write in its unwritten words through out reading» (48). In the Tormento manuscript, however, Galdós incorporates fewer deliberate ambiguities into the text and adds various forms of background material that make his portrayals of the protagonist and other characters more one-sided. The present essay not only reveals this new information found in the manuscript, it also examines how the deletion of these passages significantly affects out interpretation of Tormento53.

The expanded characterological pool of the manuscript becomes apparent, for instance, in Galdós's explicit portrayal of Refugio, Amparo's younger, but apparently more experienced sister54. In the published text, insinuations about her sexual misbehavior abound, but we find little explicit evidence to support such a conclusion. Instead, Galdós embeds subtle clues about her dubious moral character within the text. As Lou Charnon-Deutsch has indicated, he uses the filthy Sánchez Emperador apartment to suggest that Refugio has indeed strayed from the path of virtue55. Sevetal crossed-out sections of the manuscript, however, reveal a more direct, less elliptical style. At one point, Refugio's arrest seems imminent, and when Amparo refuses to give her the money she needs to avoid this embarrassment, the younger sister reveals the seriousness of her situation: «A tí te gustaría que me llevaran á la cárcel. Pues eso es lo que pasará si no me das lo que te he pedido» (f. 221)56. Amparo, still unconvinced of her needs, wants more details, and so Refugio counters with the story that Amalia Rufete has loaned her the money which she must now repay. «Mentira», responds the elder Sánchez Emperador, «Que venga doña Amalia á pedírmelo á mí. ¿Has [illegible] [illegible] en una tienda? Que pongan la cuenta. La pagaré» (f. 190). Finally, Amparo reveals her suspicions: «No, si no me engaño tú andas en malos pasos. ¡Quieres que te diga la verdad! Pues me ha dicho Nicanora, que ayer vino acompañándote hasta la esquina, un hombre de mala fama, uno que tiene sala de juego... Jesús, Jesús» (f. 191). This reference to the gambling community stands as the most overt indication of Refugio's flawed character. Here, Galdós is recalling a major casino scandal that shocked Madrid and did irreparable damage to the Cánovas government in 1880 and 1881. The effects of this episode were far-reaching; for years to come anyone even tangentially associated with it came in for harsh criticism57. After threatening to pull out Nicanora's tongue, Refugio makes an obvious reference   —44→   to another place where she might find money to cover her gambling-related debts: «Si no me das lo que necesito, se lo pediré á tu amiguito el señor cura» (f. 192). This additional information simplifies the readers' task in the manuscript since they need not make guesses about Refugio's reputation or about why she eagerly pressures the manipulable Amparo for money.

A somewhat different kind of silence surrounds both Rosalía and Francisco Bringas in the published text. Although Rosalía's actions suggest an exploitative attitude toward the two sisters and opposition to the marriage of Amparo and Agustín, a significant part of her displeasure nevertheless remains expressed in subtle insinuation. The manuscript version, in contrast, presents a more clearly defined adversarial relationship. The sisters enter an openly hostile environment when they visit the Bringas home: «Amparo o Refugio, pues nunca fueron á comer las dos, eran excluidas de la conversación general; se las atendía poco; se las servía las últimas y el niño más pequeño, que era un [illegible] de mala educación, se permitía con ellas bromas pesadas, sin que sus padres le reprendieran» (f. 56). For some unspecified reason, Rosalía has doubts about Amparo's morals early in the manuscript. Her reaction when she finds Caballero and Amparo alone in her home late at night is very clear: «Mal humorada estaba la Pipaón de la Barca al día siguiente. No le había gustado, no, encontrar á su primo en la casa tan á deshora en coloquio con Amparo» (f. 160); «[illegible] y se confundía mucho al recordar que los dos estaban aturdidos, ¡turbados...! ¡Líos en su casa!» (f. 134)58.

Francisco Bringas's attitude toward Amparo in the published text proves slightly more ambiguous. He shows some concern for her welfare and he provides her with a modest «allowance», but he does so grudgingly and on an irregular basis. The Francisco Bringas of the manuscript version reveals a somewhat more negative disposition toward the young woman: «Yo la compadezco», he tells Caballero when he is unable to give her money, «es una buena chica; pero no podemos [illegible] sus gastos domésticos. Hoy no he podido darle nada. Por cierto que ha sido que su hermana no es modelo de [illegible] y están como están [illegible] me ha dicho que la vió la otra noche en un café acompañada de un sujeto» (f. 136). Later, his lack of resolve becomes even more apparent: «Por mi parte, creo que debemos poco á poco ir quitándonos de encima esta obligación. Si Amparo se mete monja y hay quien la dé el dote, la apadrinaremos, pero si no, que cada uno en su casa» (f. 137). More important, when news of her illicit affair with the priest leaks out, he remains unconvinced of Amparo's innocence: «Hija mía, está uno expuesto á llevar solemnes chascos en el mundo. Hay cosas que no las puede creer uno aunque se lo diga el Evangelio, sin embargo, son verdad» (f. 511)59.

The role of Amparo in the published text, as Urey indicates, is indeed enigmatic. Galdós challenges his readers by incorporating a number of ambiguities into the textual account of her affair with Pedro Polo, thereby raising the question of whether or not she consciously sets out to trap Caballero as a husband. For the most part, critics have consistently described Amparo as a victim, but is she really «una buena muchacha... que arrastrada a la indignidad y la miseria por el sacerdote Polo Cortés, es salvada por Agustín Caballero» as Casalduero (96) contends? Or have critics overlooked an important dimension of this character? The manuscript once again offers key information. Walking toward Polo's house, Amparo remembers similar trips: «¡Cosa por demás extraña! En otra época, algunos días ó semanas antes, había tomado aquel camino con más ó menos gusto» (f. 200); «[illegible] sin recelo ni terror de ser   —45→   observada» (f. 201). A subsequent comment by Polo likewise draws attention to the brief amount of time that has passed between her affair with the priest and her interest in Caballero. «He estado», laments Polo, «doce noches seguidas sin pegar los ojos» (f. 212). Not only do these passages depict Amparo as an eager partner, they also show her jumping from one relationship to another in a matter of days (in the published text, on the other hand, she had gone to Polo's house only once, four months earlier). Furthermore, comments by the priest in the manuscript contain implicit indications of Amparo's willing participation in their affair: «Es V.», shouts Sánchez Emperador, «el monstruo más grande que yo conozco», to which Polo responds: «Sí, monstruo soy, mejor dicho, somos dos monstruos, cada uno por su estilo» (f. 470). Subsequent statements by Polo likewise reverse the traditional roles of seducer and seduced: «Sí, soy más malo que Lucifer, más malo que Judas... yo sé que instintos de perversidad han nacido en mí y tú tienes la culpa. Tú que me has trastornado, que me has perdido, tú hechura de Dios, para mí tormento» (f. 473).

Besides portraying Amparo as more of an aggressor than a passive victim in her entanglement with the priest, the manuscript suggests that she launches an active campaign to marry Caballero. When Felipe delivers the envelope stuffed with money, she anxiously grills him about Caballero: «'Oí decir que tu amo se casa... no sé con quien...' dijo Amparo [illegible] esfuerzos para recordar alguna cosa. Pero Felipe se alzó de hombros. '¡Oh! no, tú lo debes de saber... alguna señorita de por ahí; de familia muy estirada'. Felipe volvió á alzar los hombros. 'No saber nada, hazte el tonto'» (f. 175). Later, she quizzes the boy about Caballero's nocturnal habits: «Porque habrá entrado [Caballero] ya... no será hombre que se pasa las noches fuera» (f. 175). Either Amparo possesses information not made available to the reader (regarding Caballero's impending marriage) or she hopes to trick Centeno into revealing Agustín's intentions through this sly approach.

Another surprising difference between the published version and the manuscript version lies in Galdós's portrayal of the priest, Pedro Polo. First, the priest of the manuscript version occupies a much more prominent position. In order to create a more direct confrontation between Amparo's secret and public lives, Galdós makes Polo a frequent visitor to the Bringas home: «La sala estaba muy galana con el plano que Caballero había comprado para que la niña aprendiera y ya en las noches [illegible] se podía bailar un poquito, aunque las parejas tuvieran que piruetear en el recibimiento. Frase á frase, Rosalía llegó á decir: 'El que está muy malito es Pedro Polo. Hace dos semanas que no parece por aquí ninguna noche. Bringas ha estado á verle y le encontró muy abatido'» (f. 199). Polo himself confirms this visit in a conversation with Amparo: «Tu padrino, Bringas, que estuvo a verme anteayer me dijo también que iba á mandar un médico. Le contesté que no quería médico» (f. 211). Even Ido del Sagrario has dealt with the priest. «No le ví», he tells Amparo, «más que una vez, un día de Reyes cuando fuí á llevar á V. una cartita del D. Pedro Polo» (f, 363). Ido goes on to add a few «detalles que mortificaban á Amparo como punzada» and then mentions that «fué un día que estaba con dolor de cabeza» (f. 363). Finally, Felipe shocks Amparo with the news that one of the friends who visits and plays billiards with Caballero is none other than Pedro Polo (f. 175).

Moreover, Galdós seems determined to elicit the reader's sympathy for the fallen priest. The manuscript has Polo pleading for help on several occasions: «¿Cuántas cartas te he escrito diciéndote que vinieras? Creo que catorce ó quince. Y tú sin verme, cruel inhumano como una fiera» (f. 215). Another comment by Polo high-lights   —46→   the priest's sincerity while underscoring Sánchez Emperador's coldness: «Vale más ser criminal y llevar algo aquí dentro, aunque de ese algo haya brotado un crimen, un hecho contrario á todas las leyes, vale más ser criminal que insensible, más vale ser monstruo como yo, que fantasma animada como tú» (f. 146). When Amparo asks about money owed him, Polo's response is moving: «Sí... échales un galgo [his debtors]. Yo, cuando he tenido, he sido una mano rota para los menesterosos. Me faltaba tiempo para conocer las necesidades que veía á mi lado. Ahora que estoy miserable, si llamara á una puerta, me dirían: 'perdone por Dios'» (f. 248). Later in the novel, after learning of Amparo's impending marriage, Polo sends an urgent message. In the published account this is a harsh and threatening missive: «Todo lo olvidé, y sin encomendarme á Dios ni al diablo me vine á Madrid, donde estoy dispuesto á hacer todas las barbaridades posibles» (216). The manuscript version, in contrast, reveals a pitiable, jilted lover: «No te aseguro, tormento, que tengo valor para emprender este viaje tan largo, dejándote aquí. Creo que me moriré por el camino... Si tú quisieras...» (f. 410). Polo's laments during Amparo's second visit likewise seem designed to prejudice the reader in his favor:

Si no me viera expulsado de la vida, desterrado de la patria de los afectos, si no fuera un fugitivo. Porque yo no [illegible], y ahora me quejo. Dios no me oye, nadie me hace caso. Yo me metí en este callejón sin salida cuando hice votos que me atan. No tengo derecho de quejarme; pero me quejo. Es mi único consuelo las quejas, y me estaré lamentando eternamente.


(f. 407)                


Finally, in another major departure from the published text a magnanimous Pedro Polo agrees to Amparo's suggestion that he leave Spain:

«¡Ah! perra!... si no te quisiera más que mi vida», dijo acariciándole la barba. «No estés de rodillas delante de mí. Estoy muy lejos de ser santo. Pero el alma humana tiene grandes energías, y yo seré santo, y triunfaré, y yo haré lo que tú no has sabido hacer, y yo haré el gran sacrificio».


(f. 476)                


As if this benevolence toward Polo were not enough to make him sympathetic to the reader, Galdós uses other devices. First, he attenuates the conflict between Polo and his sister, Marcelina, who suggests that he not go to the Plillippines. «Vuelve á vivir conmigo», she urges, «y júrame no hacer sino lo que Gracián y yo te mandemos. Por algún tiempo no podrás ejercer tu [illegible]; pero [illegible] [illegible], y Dios te perdonará» (f. 481). Secondly, he has Polo warn Amparo with a mysterious, unfinished letter: «Tengo que hablarte esta noche. Te rodean grandes peligros. La pobre Celedonia se me murió esta mañana. Esta noche después de las ocho iré á tu casa. Espérame y ten...» (f. 519). Thus, whereas the Pedro Polo of the published text struggles continually with both God and man, the manuscript character seems to have reached a tenuous accord with himself, his religion, and his ex-lover.

The multiple differences between the published version and the manuscript version give rise to a series of vital questions. Why, for example, does Galdós first present Pedro Polo in the foreground only to shift him into the background in the printed text? Since Galdós performs the same maneuver in the El doctor Centeno manuscript (where Polo is presented as a friend of Federico Ruiz and they have a long conversation during the dinner party at the observatory) one can surmise that this evidence supports Gullón's contention that El doctor Centeno, Tormento, and La de Bringas form a trilogy (109-10)60. One might also argue that, by shifting Polo from foreground to background, Galdós surrounds the priest with an enigmatic silence   —47→   which increases both the dramatic and the psychological tension of the novel and converts his character into the haunting «sombra negra» which continually disturbs Amparo's thoughts.

The manuscript passages likewise call into question the traditional assessment of the relationship between Pedro Polo and Amparo Sánchez Emperador. Is the latter, for instance, really «una persona decentísima en el fondo, víctima de la caquexia moral española» as Montesinos would have us belleve (111)61. The manuscript presentation of this affair suggests almost the opposite scenario, namely, that Amparo was a willing, perhaps eager participant in the affair who then hurriedly abandoned Polo when a more lucrative prospect (Caballero) appeared on the scene62. But why exactly does Galdós make this intriguing move from explicit (manuscript version) to implicit (published version) and create the kind of discontinuity mentioned by Urey? Wolfgang Iser comments from a theoretical standpoint on the significance of the kind of textual silences produced by this shift: «What is missing from the apparently trivial scenes, the gaps rising out of the dialogue -that is what stimulates the reader into filling the blanks with projections. He is drawn into the events and made to supply what is meant from what is not said» (168). Rodney Rodríguez, writing from a more specific perspective, takes Iser's and Urey's argument a step further. Galdós's readers, he argues, face an arduous task; only through meticulous analysis of the textual ellipses found in both El doctor Centeno and Tormento can they comprehend that Amparo is both morally flawed and given to self-flattery63. For Rodríguez, the reader's chore becomes even more difficult as a result of a collusive effort on the part of the narrators and several characters to hide incriminating evidence about the protagonist and to cover up her ulterior motives64. This collusion and deception, he writes, is all part of a Galdosian «strategy» that obliges the reader to play the role of sleuth: «By untangling the web of deception, the readers become bound in a nexus of artistic concerns that force them to probe the nature of truth and its role in fiction» («The Reader's Role» 70). The revisions between the manuscript and the printed text, thus, have significant ramifications. On the one hand, they thrust the readers into a more active role and force them, as Rodríguez explains, to seek out those «codes and subcodes that lie beneath the lexical level of the text» («The Reader's Role» 71). On the other hand, they serve to heighten the overall atmosphere of suspense in the published novel, to show that Amparo is easily manipulated by others, and to underline the moral confusion in her mind about whether her liaison with Polo was reprehensible or not.

University of Alabama



Anterior Indice Siguiente