211
Perhaps the most cowardly statement on Horacio's part is his using Tristana's opposition to marriage as an excuse for his not pursuing the matter with Don Lope (p. 1606b).
212
It should be noted, parenthetically, that the fortune Tristana's father lost belonged to her mother, another example of female oppression which Galdós includes almost as an aside (p. 1544b).
213
Joaquín Casalduero, Vida y obra de Galdós (1843-1920) (Madrid; Gredos, 3.ª ed., 1970), p. 104.
214
Casalduero, p. 107.
215
Casalduero, p. 107.
216
The growth in Galdós' own appreciation of the possible development of a woman of intellectual capacities can be seen by contrasting the case of Irene in El amigo Manso (1882) and that of Tristana, ten years later.
217
See Ch. VI, «The Creative Process», of H. Chonon Berkowitz, Benito Pérez Galdós: Spanish Liberal Crusader (Madison, 1948), pp. 104-118.
218
See Walter T. Pattison, Galdós and the Creative Process (Minneapolis, 1954), passim.
219
Berkowitz, pp. 104-1-5.
220
Michael Nimetz in Humor in Galdós (New Haven and London, 1965), asserts that «Manso is 'dead' [«Yo no existo...»] because he failed to take into account the more recondite spurs to behavior» (p. 61). With respect to literary problems, Nimetz makes the following statement: «Even the casual reader may find himself drawn to certain problems never heeded before: literature as magic, the author as conjurer, the autonomy of fictional characters, and the autonomy of the work» (p. 98). Pattison in «El amigo Manso y el amigo Galdós», Anales Galdosianos, II, 1967, interprets Manso's denial of his own existence to mean that Galdós wishes «to close the door to investigation on the sources or models which he was to combine in the figure of Máximo Manso» (p. 136). Pattison finds many autobiographical elements in the novel and suggests that Manso is an amalgamation of Kant and Galdós (pp. 140-142). Gerald Gillespie in his «Reality and Fiction in the Novels of Galdós», Anales Galdosianos, I, 1966, attributes Manso's denial of his own existence to his bitterness as narrator. According to Gillespie Manso «tells his story from the 'other world' with sardonic disillusionment; looking back and down from the clouds in his words, he sees reality as a puppet play» (p. 18). Gillespie goes on to suggest that one theme of the novel is «the abstraction of reality as a grotesque fiction» (p. 19). Denah Lida (ed.), in the «Introduction» to El amigo Manso by Benito Pérez Galdós (New York, 1963), affirms that Manso does not exist because he is not a «true Krausist» and «does not fulfill the ideal of the complete man, both rational and social, who harmonizes all the various spheres of life» (pp. 8-9). Robert H. Russell in «El amigo Manso: Galdós with a Mirror», Modern Language Notes, LXXVII (1963), argues that beginning with El amigo Manso Galdós «will try to achieve for his world of fiction an apparent independence» (p. 167). Russell also makes the following statement: «[...] it is not entirely imprudent to suggest that El amigo Manso is as much concerned with literature as it is with education» (p. 167). Leon Livingstone in «Interior Duplication and the Problem of Form in the Modern Spanish Novel», PMLA, LXXIII (1958), asserts that Manso contradicts Descartes' Cogito, ergo sum, since he thinks yet does not exist (p. 400). Livingstone, adds the following comment with reference to El amigo Manso: «This is the constant refrain of Ortega y Gasset: that life is a program one must constantly invent and thus man becomes the novelist of his own existence. The artificial identification of truth and reason and the concomitant relegation of fiction to an inferior level of imagination is now rejected. There can be no separation between reality and art when life itself is the work of the imagination. The two worlds of life and fiction are two interpenetrating realms in which the author is both author and fictional character and the character a literary creation and at the same time as real -if not more real than- the author» (p. 401).