This article approaches the role of translation in Iberian literary modernity not as a question of importation of foreign models from Europe but rather as a question of the circulation of texts and cultural traditions within Iberia. It focuses on translation projects that originated within and among Iberian cultures in the nineteenth century, and that projected themselves outward. This study proposes a genealogy that links the revival and spread of floral games in Catalonia and across Spain beginning in the 1850s to translation practices in the Peninsula in the early twentieth century. After an analysis of the relationship between the spread of the floral games and the perception of their decadence in Catalan literary historiography, the article proposes an alternate understanding of the phenomenon that links the floral tradition to translingual cultural projects. Particular attention is paid to the ‘polyglot edition’ of Catalan poet Joaquim Rubió i Ors’ Lo Gayter del Llobregat (‘The piper of the Llobregat River’) (1888–1902). This publication, like the floral tradition that proliferated alongside it, reflects an effort to create a multilingual literary sphere anchored in the Iberian Peninsula that Spanish and Catalan literary histories have overlooked.

Reviewed by: This Ghostly Poetry: History and Memory of Exiled Spanish Republican Poets by Daniel Aguirre Oteiza Leslie J. Harkema Aguirre Oteiza, Daniel. This Ghostly Poetry: History and Memory of Exiled Spanish Republican Poets. U of Toronto P, 2020. 392 pp. In this illuminating book, Daniel Aguirre Oteiza makes a compelling case for the power of poetic texts written by Spanish Republican exiles to unsettle the narrative of national literary history into which they have been incorporated—under the guise of recovery—since shortly after the end of the Spanish Civil War. This Ghostly Poetry offers a much-needed redress of the effort to recuperate several well-known poets and canonize them within a Spanish literary tradition centered firmly in the Iberian Peninsula and in the Castilian language, with little acknowledgment of the spatiotemporal discontinuities that accompany geographical displacement and define exilic writing. The book builds productively on the work of Hispanic Studies scholars who have attended to the Republican exile, as well as on the well-developed critical discourse on hauntology and ghostliness in twentieth- and twenty-first-century Spanish cultural production. Drawing insights from recent interventions on the nature of lyric poetry (Culler) and on cosmopolitanism (Appiah), this study makes a highly valuable contribution to the ongoing debate on historical memory in Spain and Spanish studies, and it does so by focusing on a group of poems that, though predominantly read through a historicizing lens as biographical documents attesting to an unbroken connection to Spain and its tradition, also subvert and even actively resist this type of reading. To make this important argument, Aguirre Oteiza chooses to limit the scope of his study to “canonical, or potentially canonical” poets; that is, in Brad Epps’s and Luis Fernández-Cifuentes’s phrase (quoted by the author), “Spanish men who write in Castilian” (8). The writers Aguirre Oteiza studies—Max Aub, Luis Cernuda, Juan Ramón Jiménez, Antonio Machado, and Tomás Segovia—lend themselves to his analysis precisely because their place in the history of Spanish literature is unquestioned, despite the fact that all of them left Spain in the 1930s, some never to return. Their canonicity is also ensured by their gender and the fact that they wrote in the dominant language of the Spanish state. With this group, Aguirre Oteiza removes all hypothetical objections to argue that even the most “canonical” of the Republican exile writers produced texts that resist their incorporation into the narrowly nation-based version of Spanish literary history. In the introductory first chapter of the book, “On Forewords and Historical Ghosts,” Aguirre Oteiza proposes that this resistance arises from what he calls “poetic memory”: a “verbal fabric” reanimated upon every successive reading that requires attention to “the various threads of deictic, tonal, prosodic, rhetorical, topical, translational, and intertextual repertoires available in (and around) the poem” (7). As the description suggests, the readings carried out in this book are thorough and extensive, deep readings more than merely close readings, made up of multiple layers of critical reflection. Indeed, the text that generates these comments in the introduction (and the book’s title) is a single sentence from Max Aub’s foreword to [End Page 169] Diario de Djelfa (1944), where the writer deictically invokes “[e]sta poesía . . .” (4). The second chapter links the notion of ghostliness to the study of poetry, indicating especially how the retrieval of exiled poets from the time of the Second Republic has been a central component of the “narrativization of collective memory” for the Spanish nation deployed by contemporary novelists like Javier Cercas or Almudena Grandes (41). The third chapter further interrogates the notion that exilic poems embody a stable and unifying “voice of the people.” Rereading León Felipe’s poem “Reparto,” Aguirre Oteiza calls attention to a Whitmanesque plurality within Felipe’s own poetic memory (as translator of Leaves of Grass) that disturbs the assumed referentiality of the text. Chapters four through seven apply the methodology sketched out in the earlier chapters of the book to the cases of Jiménez, Cernuda, Aub, and Segovia. Studying Jiménez’s Guerra en España, a collage-like compendium of texts reflecting on lived experience (biograf...

This article analyses the presence of Pentecost as a metaphor and model for Iberian multilingualism in the writings of Joan Maragall and Miguel de Unamuno. The correspondence between these two poets, in addition to documenting their admiration for one another and their political disagreements, reveals their distinct theologies of language and theories of translation. While Maragall approaches translation as a means to self-recognition that reinforces a sacred linguistic diversity, Unamuno views it as a process of defamiliarization and purification that aspires to form a single, transfigured language. These ideas are worked out in letters, poems, articles, essays and public address. The persistence and proliferation of floral games across Spain in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century becomes a particularly telling backdrop against which to examine each poet's understanding of an Iberian 'pentecostal tongue'.

Reviewed by: Entresiglos: Del siglo XVIII al XIX. Estudios en homenaje al profesor Joan Oleza by Javier Lluch-Prats Leslie J. Harkema JAVIER LLUCH-PRATS (ed.). Entresiglos: Del siglo XVIII al XIX. Estudios en homenaje al profesor Joan Oleza. València: Anejos de Diablotexto Digital, 2017. 248 pp. ¿Qué es un homenaje? Según la denominación alemana, Festschrift, se trata de un texto que celebra la carrera y las contribuciones intelectuales del homenajeado. Pero también, en cierta medida, un homenaje refleja el estatus de un campo de estudio, puesto que ilumina la órbita de cierto académico, la influencia que ha tenido, los diálogos que ha entramado y las maneras en que su trabajo será incorporado en el futuro de la investigación y la enseñanza. Si bien celebra los logros del pasado, un homenaje tiene algo que decirnos sobre el presente de una disciplina. Es indudable que en el caso del profesor Joan Oleza la órbita de influencia es extensa y variada. Como indica el equipo editor en una nota preliminar, este volumen es fruto de un congreso organizado en 2016 en homenaje al Profesor Emérito de la Universidad de Valencia. El apartado introductorio, "Joan Oleza: perfil de un compromiso", detalla la carrera del homenajeado, haciendo hincapié en su actividad política durante el franquismo y su papel en la creación de la Facultad de Filología y Departamento de Filología Española en la Universidad de Valencia. Se subrayan, por lo tanto, diversos e interrelacionados compromisos: el compromiso político, el compromiso con la educación superior y la vida universitaria, y también un compromiso con el estudio de la literatura en un sentido amplio. Los editores destacan que la obra del profesor Oleza abarca varios siglos y múltiples enfoques. Se nos presenta como un defensor de "la diversidad de la especialización frente al monocultivo", un estudioso que trabaja "con disciplinas transversales: la teoría literaria, la historia cultural, la historia social, las nuevas tecnologías…" (12). Aquí la dedicación personal, en lugar de llevar a la delimitación y protección de cierta parcela del terreno intelectual, produce una apertura hacia toda una variedad de aproximaciones a la literatura y la cultura. Esta diversidad se refleja en las contribuciones reunidas en Entresiglos bajo la dirección del también profesor de la Universitat de València Javier Lluch-Prats. Se incluyen varios estudios diacrónicos o de recepción, entre ellos el rastreo de la figura del pedante en la literatura española desde Moratín hasta Clarín, realizado por Cecilio Alonso; el estudio de Jean Canavaggio sobre la visión del Arte nuevo de hacer comedias (obra ampliamente investigada por Oleza) entre los románticos franceses a principios del siglo XIX; y la aportación de Ricardo Rodrigo Mancho sobre José Marchena, traductor y difusor del pensamiento de Rousseau o Montesquieu en la transición del siglo XVIII al XIX. Otros dos artículos se dedican a temas dieciochescos: la reflexión de Ernest García sobre el debate entre los politólogos británicos William Godwin y Thomas Robert Malthus y su relevancia para la sociedad española del siglo XXI, y la presentación del proyecto MOVACT por Christian Peytavy. Como explica Pevtavy, este proyecto pretende reunir información sobre la circulación de actores y obras de teatro en una base de datos que se centraría en la España de finales del XVIII. Aparece además un estudio sobre literatura valenciana: el de Joaquim Martí Mestre, quien analiza las particularidades lingüísticas de la escritura del periodista decimonónico Joan Antoni Almela. Se echa de menos más reflexión sobre letras valencianas y catalanas en un homenaje a Oleza, cuya obra incluye varios estudios y ediciones de textos valencianos. [End Page 86] Muchas de las colaboraciones se enfocan en la novela decimonónica, tema tratado por Oleza tanto en uno de sus primeros libros—La novela del XIX: del parto a la crisis de una ideología (1976, 2ª ed. 1984)—como en sus ediciones de obras de Clarín (La Regenta, 1984 y Su único hijo, 1990...

Abstract The purpose of this bilingual, collaborative, many-voiced essay is to distill the dynamic, insightful and at times polemical exchange of ideas that took place during the “Modernity and the Avant-Garde in Spain: A Debate from the Perspectives of the United States and Spain” symposium organized by Susan Larson and Juan Herrero-Senés on July 17 and 18, 2019 in the Residencia de Estudiantes in Madrid. The gathering brought together 14 scholars (seven based in Spain and the rest in the United States and Great Britain) whose research stems from a wide variety of methodologies and intellectual traditions. This encounter was a unique opportunity to engage directly with each other’s work, to answer key questions about promising theoretical approaches and to share strategies to collectively solve some of the most pressing problems that are commonly faced by researchers and students in this rapidly-changing field. After the co-authors consider some of the most important ideas that came out of the encounter, this essay ends with the brief interventions of the participants in the dialogues: Andrew A. Anderson, Nuria Capdevila-Argüelles, Nicolás Fernández-Medina, Leslie J. Harkema, Juan Herrero-Senés, Juli Highfill, Susan Larson, Abelardo Linares, José-Carlos Mainer, Domingo Ródenas de Moya, Nil Santiáñez, Renée M. Silverman, and Andrés Soria Olmedo.

While the field of Iberian Studies proposes a radical departure from the understanding of the literary canon dominant within Hispanism, it largely continues to overlook areas marginalised under the traditional model, such as women’s writing. On a more theoretical level, there is a need for further reflection on the role gender plays in critical approaches to Iberian literatures and cultures. This essay turns to the feminist theory of Rosi Braidotti and to recent developments in Feminist Translation studies in Galicia to argue for a re-thinking of the field not only from the geographical peripheries of the Iberian Peninsula but also from the peripheries of the traditional canon.

El proposito de este ensayo bilingue y colaborativo formado por muchas voces es destilar lo dinamico, perspicaz y a veces polemico del intercambio de ideas del simposio "Modernidad y vanguardia: Debate desde las perspectivas de los Estados Unidos y Espana" organizado por Susan Larson y Juan Herrero-Senes el 17 y 18 de julio de 2019 en la Residencia de Estudiantes de Madrid. El encuentro reunio a catorce academicos (siete residentes en Espana y siete en los Estados Unidos y Gran Bretana) cuya investigacion se basa en una gran variedad de metodologias y tradiciones intelectuales de ambos lados del Atlantico. Este evento fue una oportunidad unica para compartir lineas de trabajo, lanzar preguntas sobre los nuevos caminos que ofrecen las teorias recientes y un intento de ofrecer soluciones de forma colectiva a algunos de los problemas mas apremiantes que afrontamos los investigadores, profesores y estudiantes que nos dedicamos a un campo siempre en evolucion. Despues de que los co-organizadores planteen cuales eran las ideas mas importantes del encuentro, este ensayo termina con intervenciones breves de los participantes en los dialogos: Andrew A. Anderson, Nuria Capdevila-Arguelles, Nicolas Fernandez-Medina, Leslie J. Harkema, Juan Herrero-Senes, Juli Highfill, Susan Larson, Abelardo Linares, Jose-Carlos Mainer, Domingo Rodenas de Moya, Nil M. Santianez, Renee M. Silverman, y Andres Soria Olmedo.

In this article I study Jos? de Cadalso?s satirical work Los eruditos a la violeta and its Suplemento (both published in 1772), in relation to the changing understanding of the ?Republic of Letters? in late eighteenth-century Spain. In doing this, I focus particularly on the discussion of translation initiated by a fictional female reader at the beginning of the supplementary text. Arguing that the Suplemento subverts the conception of the literary world presented in the original satire, I first analyse the construction of ideal and unacceptable versions of learned masculinity (that is, ?originals? and ?copies?) in Los eruditos. I then show how the letter from the female reader that opens the Suplemento destabilizes this binary understanding of knowledge and forces a reconsideration of the reaches of the literary sphere. In discussing this woman?s intervention and her request for translations, I reflect on the historical association of translation with the feminine that casts it as a reproductive rather than a productive mode of writing. In the final section of the article I study the translations that Cadalso includes in the Suplemento, and demonstrate how this addendum offers some steps toward a ?reframing of fidelity? through its nuanced contribution to the debate surrounding translation in eighteenth-century Spain.

This article argues that Antonio Espina's first novel Pajaro Pinto (1927), upends nineteenth-century understandings of development, not only through its rejection of linear narration on a formal lever; but also through its thematization of the concepts of youth, puerility, and maturity. After situating Espina's novel within the context of the Rif War (1920-26), the literature of Europe's "lost generation," and the transformation of the Bildungsroman in the early twentieth century, it discusses the geopolitics of cultural development that underlies the influential view of modernist art put forth by Jose Ortega y Gasset in his essays "La deshumanizacion del arte" and "Ideas sobre la novela" (1925). It then analyzes Espina's nuanced response to Ortega in Nam Pinto, highlighting especially how he draws from the aesthetics of film both to dehumanize his text and to advance a critique of the categories of humanity and dehumanization, puerility and maturity that structure Ortega's thought. Finally, these observations are brought to bear on a reading of the story "Xelfa, carne de cera" in order to demonstrate how Espina unravels notions of individual and national formation, condemning both Spain's colonial project in Morocco and the farcical maturity of the European metropolis.

Empire, Emotion, and Ethics:Reading the Finde-Siècle Essay on National Identity in Spain Leslie J. Harkema Krauel, Javier. Imperial Emotions: Cultural Responses to Myths of Empire in Fin-de-Siècle Spain. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 2013. Pp. 206. ISBN 978-1-84631-976-1. This spring, the students in my graduate seminar and I read Miguel de Unamuno’s En torno al casticismo, and the text elicited a number of emotions in us. At times, that emotion was frustration, caused by the dense language and meandering character of the series of five essays that Unamuno published in 1895. At others, and particularly when attempting to grapple with the baggage of the work’s reception history—that is, appropriations of its central ideas by Fascist and Falangist interpretations of Spanish identity—the emotion was closer to exasperation. Why did this young Basque place Castile at the heart of his analysis, a choice that ultimately (and in some ways paradoxically) reinforced the privileging of this region as incarnating the essence of Spain? As readers, my students and I were forced to contend with a complex mixture of emotions both within the text and in our twenty-first-century response to it. I cite this anecdote in order to convey the importance of Javier Krauel’s new book, which analyzes key fin-de-siècle essays written during and after the Spanish-Cuban-American war (Unamuno’s En torno…, Angel Ganivet’s Idearium español, Ramiro de Maeztu’s Hacia otra España, and Enric Prat de la Riba’s La nacionalitat catalana) through the lens of emotion. Spanish identity is a topic that excites emotions now, and it bears remembering that emotion also played a key role in how that identity was constructed by writers at the turn of the twentieth century. Drawing on some of the recent insights provided by affect theory as well as memory studies, Krauel sets out to show how a range of emotional responses to the diminishment of the Spanish empire in the late nineteenth century shapes these texts, and how analysis of those emotions can guide our own ethical relationship to Spain’s imperial past. This is a worthy undertaking, and Krauel is to be praised for venturing to revisit the turn-of-the-century essay on national identity and reveal the great affective diversity that exists within the genre. In taking up the topic of empire, Krauel duly acknowledges the ways postcolonial studies must frame a contemporary approach to these texts, and also argues that its lessons must distance our world from that of the turn-of-the-century writers he studies. He writes, [End Page 216] “I will assume that today we judge [the Eurocentric] presuppositions and prejudices [of the Age of Empire] with a theoretical, political, and emotional distance that precludes any kind of identification whatsoever” (5). Krauel’s point is well taken, though the assumption that contemporary culture finds itself altogether removed from early twentieth-century imperialism, that there are no analogous structures of thought, government, or even feeling in our present society seems optimistic to say the least. Moreover, the suggestion that the emotions felt by the essayists of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Spain are other than those felt today would seem to undermine the book’s endeavor. Krauel states that one of his goals is “to recover the ambivalent critical force that has been obscured by the subsequent canonization” of these texts (29). Such a recovery requires a delicate balance of critical distance and approximation—one which Krauel, by and large, maintains throughout his study, if perhaps privileging his (our) own historical moment a bit too much. After explaining his approach and presenting a strong case for the need to revisit these essays in his introduction, Krauel proceeds in the first chapter to study the commemoration of Columbus’ landfall in the Americas in the year of its four-hundredth anniversary, 1892. Though the chapter gets off to a slow start, laying the groundwork for the unsurprising-yet-necessary initial argument that nationalist commemorations largely presented Columbus as a hero and a model of imperial virtues, things pick up when Krauel turns to the alternative views of...