Galdós' «positivism», like Galdós' «galdosismo», is too general an argument and needs to be rethought. Positivism works differently in diverse periods of an author's career. In early stages, for example, the bend of concrete realities over speculation can exert a bigger attraction and influence. For some of the problems and even diversities that one finds within its common features see Leszek Kolakowski, The Alienation of Reason: A History of Positivist Thought. Anchor-Doubleday (New York, 1969). The «over-all view» of positivism as related to Galdós needs to be reexamined in terms of the various transformations it had undergone in different historical moments and in terms of changes in Spanish society. (N. del A.)

It is admittedly risky talking about an author when, despite recent documents, we know so little about the details of his life, thought and problems. «Sólo conocemos muy por encima la vida del escritor», Montesinos, Galdós, op. cit., p. XI. We do not possess, despite Berkowitz's documentary study, a bona fide biography. When critics try to establish the diverse sensibilities of Galdós at different stages of his career, they are forced to do so by plucking attitudes from his fiction (not an easy task as can be seen in the debates following Antonio Regalado's view of Galdós as conformist) and then compare or contrast them to articles, letters or contemporary events. This lack of information forces critics to stick to what the texts reveal about the author. (N. del A.)

The Philosophy of Literary Form, U. of Calif. Press (Berkeley, 1973), p. 285. (N. del A.)

See in Woodbridge, op. cit., R. Gullón, V. A. Chamberlain, R. Cardwell, G. Correa. (N. del A.)

Cf. R. Cardona, op. cit., pp. 35-44 for an interpretation of the character of Pepe from the day of his arrival to his death which «is only the logical conclusion to his moral death» (p. 43). The analysis of «frankness-hypocricy» is especially pertinent. I have focused on the problem differently. Cf. Claire-Nicole Kerék, «Le personnage de Pepe Rey dans Doña Perfecta», Hommage à Georges Fourrier, Les Belles Lettres (Paris, 1973), pp. 209-33. I agree that Pepe need not be Galdós' mouthpiece. (N. del A.)

Much of what we know and what I use in this study comes from known history books. Very little is based on first-hand research. I have used, among others: R. Carr, Spain, 1808-1939, Clarendon Press (Oxford, 1966). The Spanish version, Ariel (Barcelona, 1969) contains more material. (See especially chapters IX and X on the Restoration and foundations of economy.) J. Vicens Vives, Aproximación a la historia de España (Barcelona, 1962), especially «Política y economía en la España del siglo XIX»; also, JVV, Director, Historia de España y América, social y económica, Vol. V, «Los siglos XIX y X» (Barcelona, 1974). Pierre Vilar, Spain: A Brief History, Tr. B. Tate, Pergamon Press (Oxford, New York, 1974), especially Ch. 4, pp. 48-84. E. J. Hobsbawm, «The Spanish Background», in his Revolutionaries, Meridian Book (New York, 1975), pp. 71-81. I avoid quotations as much as possible in order to concentrate on the relations between fiction and history. We still lack vital information in what J. Rodríguez-Puértolas calls «el papel de la burguesía madrileña de los comienzos de la Restauración», op. cit., p. 7. For some of the historiographical problems of the key periods 1843 to 1868 and 1868 to 1875, see Carlos Blanco-Aguinaga, «¿Cuál era 'el problema de España'?» in his Juventud del 98, Siglo XXI (Madrid, 1970), pp. 1-38. (N. del A.)

«Lukács' View on How History Moulds Literature», in Lukács-Works, op. cit., p. 200. (N. del A.)

«Pero este auge estuvo siempre limitado por un factor importante: el de la escasísima capacidad de consumo de la masa agraria», Vicens Vives, Aproximación, op. cit., p. 167. See also pages 162, 164, 166, 168. (N. del A.)

Spain, op. cit. (N. del A.)

The reasons for the intrigues against Pepe were decidedly economic: symbolically (to refer to only one instance), the modern city liberal was about to ruin the only chance for advancement of Jacinto, the rural conservative. (N. del A.)