Engendering Interpretation

7/29/2019 Engendering Interpretation

1/22

ENGENDERING INTERPRETATION: IRONY AS COMIC

CHALLENGE IN MARA DE ZAYAS

Amy R. Williamsen

University of Arizona

Although as critics of Mara de Zayass two collectionsNovelas

amorosas y ejemplares(1637) andDesengaos amorosos (1647) weoften debate the feminism or anti-feminism of her work, we seldomdiscuss one of her most potent weapons against the extreme social

restrictions imposed on women during her time.[1]In both texts, irony

operates as a comic challenge to cultural myths definingla mujer.

Before undertaking a textual analysis of the irony in Zayass prose, a

few words about the process of critical reception and the impact of the

narrative structure on reception seem warranted. If indeed the texts doserve to undermine a misogynistic implementation of societal norms, how

can it be that such subversive manipulation of dominant cultural practices

would have remained unexplored until now? As literary scholars, we are

all aware that our experiences and expectations influence our

interpretations of literary texts. Scientific experiments have proven that

even transitory experiences can affect a readers understanding (Crawford11). A significant number of our expectations stem from our contact with

other critical studies of the texts in question, literary history and literary

theory. Current criticism of Zayass art relies, to a certain extent, on past

judgments of her work. Some of these are damaging, unfounded claims

that have been accepted without challenge. Thus, as we will see, past

reception of her work can act as a deception that misleads critics and

prevents them from perceiving vital aspects of her achievement.
http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn1http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn1http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn1http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn1


2/22

E. D. Hirsch, in his study entitled Validity and Interpretation, argues

that an interpreters generic conception of a text is constitutive of

everything that hesubsequently understands and this remains the caseunless and until that generic conception is altered (Hirsch 74, emphasis

mine). Yet, the concept of genre represents but one source of expectations

that we bring to the study of any given work. Other elements that inform

our predisposition toward a text include those resulting from a familiarity

with existing interpretations regarding the period, the author, and the

work itself. The theoretical stance of Hans Robert Jauss and other

proponents of Reception Theory offers many insights into theproblematic relationship between interpretation and the heritage of past

reception. Nonetheless, as Kaminsky notes, reception theory has all too

often remained blind to gender as a critical category (Kaminsky 378).

Fortunately, more theorists have now begun to recognize the need to

consider the role of gender in interpretation. If a transitory experience

such as reading an introductory study can so deeply affect readersreactions, then gender and gender-typing which are among the most

powerful influences channeling the experiences of individuals must

inform a readers interpretation (Crawford 13). Annette Kolodny argues

convincingly that reading is a learned activity which, like many other

learned interpretative strategies in our society, is inevitably sex-coded and

gender-inflected (Kolodny 588). Several elements contribute to thecomplexity of the situation. First, just as no one male reader exists,

there exists no one female reader. We need not adopt an essentialist

perspective in our consideration of gender; rather, we must recognize that

cultural circumstances generate many of the gender differences we

percieve. Gender remains unfixed, subject to cultural and individual

reformulations. Hence, a woman reading a text may not always read as

woman. To a great extent, many women, including students and literary


3/22

critics, have been trained by a patriarchal system to read in accordance

with a dominant male critical vision (Culler 57).[2]

A basic awareness of the dynamic of gender-inflected reading seems

crucial for an understanding of Zayassnovelas, especially considering

the emphasis on the manipulation of reader response in the works.[3]BothherNovelasand herDesengaosmake use of frame narratives in whicheach of the narrators, in turn, becomes a narratee who responds to the

others stories. Although Salvador Montesa maintains that the text,

through the exemplification of response dramatized in the narrative,

allows for only one interpretation, I would argue that a bipartite systemoperates on all levels. As Appendix I illustrates, each narrator directly

addresses two groups of narrateesone female, the other male.

References to the differing expectations and reactions of the narratees

based on their gender encircle all the novelas. The narratees, encoded

within the text, serve a crucial function. As Susan Suleiman states: In a

narrative with more than one level of narration (e. g., a frame narrative),the levels are related to each other hierarchically. . . . Clearly, a first-level

narratee may be considered the inscribed or encoded reader of the work

who provides a built-in interpretive system. (Introduction 1) Because

the text incorporates two sets of encoded readers, it embodies at least two

divergent interpretations, a fact that directly contradicts Montesas

assertion.The duality of the narrative structure extends beyond the level of the

narratees encoded in the frame. Each set of inscribed readers posits the

existence of a corresponding implied or postulated readera reader

whose existence, characteristics and beliefs are postulated by the

narrative itself. The two postulated readers, one female and the other

male, share some traits; in several cases, however, the divergences

between the postulated female and male readers become clear. In
http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn2http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn2http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn2http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn3http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn3http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn3http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn3http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftn2


4/22

theNovelas, the she believes in the existence of virtuous women, the

he does not. In theDesengaos, the she is a potential victim of

engaos, the he is a potential engaador. As Lotmanclarifies: any

text (and especially a literary one) contains in itself . . . the image of the

audience . . . this image actively affects the real audience by becoming for

it a kind of normalizing code (Lotman 81). The encoding of two

different roles within Zayass text permits the real reader to choose a

stance, a fact that proves especially significant given that the narrative

deals with the presentation of the often discordant relationship between

the sexes without forcing the reader to adopt the position occupied by theOther.

The frame in both works fulfills a vital function by postulating both

female and male audiences; however, the manipulation of reader response

differs drastically between the two collections. The frame structure in

theNovelasis explicitly designed to provide a sense of equilibriumbetween female and male perspectives. In theDesengaos, men areexcluded from the act of narrationthey are relegated to the role of

narratees. The textual description of the organization of the sarao states

that it constitutes the womens usurpation of a previously male dominated

sphere: Y como son los hombres los que presiden en todo, jams

cuentan los malos pagos que dan (118). Whereas in theNovelas the

audience reponse following the tales stresses agreement among thelisteners, inDesengaos, the text encodes diametrically opposed

responses defined by gender.

This and other crucial differences have been obscured by the conflation

of the two works (Kaminsky 378). As Kaminsky suggests, the continuing

tendency to read the texts as one unit serves to diminish the power of

theDesengaos, a prime example of the impact of critical tradition on

interpretation. The dominant vision defines not only the accepted literary


5/22

canon, but also the approved methodological procedures with which

critics approach literature.

In their illustrations of the impact of the acceptance of preceding

interpretations on critical reception, both Jauss and Julian Hirsch cite

examples of the perpetuation of positive myths regarding texts and

authors (Jauss 20 and Holub 48-9). Yet, works may also receive unduly

harsh critical treatment based upon unchallenged past evaluations.

Undoubtedly, the critical reception of Zayass narrative provides an

excellent example of how previous assessments can thwart, rather than

enrich, the interpretation of literary texts. We must realize that HaydenWhites assessment of the fictionality of history applies to literary history

as well. Just as historians emplot historical facts according to their

personal interpretation, so do literary historians and literary critics elect

the masterpieces of accepted literary canons according to their tastes

which are, of course, influenced by their own circumstances. This

subjective element cannot be eliminated, nor can it be ignored. We mustacknowledge the potential bias inherent in every generation of scholars

and respond to the undeniable need for continual re-examination of the

presuppositions that operate in our discipline.

Among the many misleading claims regarding Zayass works (not to

mention the harsh censure of their immorality and lasciviousness by

some critics) are repeated affirmations that her works are devoid of ironyand that they unequivocally support a rigid, Calderonian view of honor.

In fact, Amezas pronouncement, no conocer el humor ni la irona

porque esos matices no son posibles a su temperamento dinmico y

fogoso (Ameza XXI) remained unchallenged until the publication of

Salvador Montesas study in 1981. Montesa counters that la insistencia

en los aspectos trgicos de las novelas y en el pesimismo que destilan

puede hacernos olvidar una faceta interesante en la obra zayesca: el


6/22

humor (225). Of the six pages out of 400 that he devotes to his

discussion of humor, only one considers irony. I would contend that

Zayass irony does not, as he and Rincn suggest, quitar el hierro al

esceptismo zayesco (11), but rather serves to sharpen her attack on

patriarchal structures.

David Kaufers recent work on irony and rhetorical strategy provides

substantial evidence to support the claim that the bipartite narrative

structure of Zayass works represents an integral part of their ironic

nature. He states:

. . . we can explain this perceived disparity in the ironists relationship

to his audience if we ascribe to ironic discourse the implication of two

audiences. One audience identifies with the ironists literal meaning,

the other with his ironic meaning. . . . Thus the ironists audience . . .

is bifurcated into two distinct audiences according to its association

with either the literal or ironic meaning. (96-97)

Elsewhere I have demonstrated that, in a structured experiment, reader

response to Zayassnovelasdid vary according to the readers

gender.[4]One might argue convincingly that the divergences in

interpretation directly related to the audiences perception of textual

irony. Male readers tended to read the texts more literally while femalereaders often mentioned how the inclusion of a certain ironic phrase

undermined a more superficial level of meaning. This tendency, while by

no means absolute, would suggest that the narratives posit the male

reader as the audience of the literal meanings and the female reader as

the audience of the ironic. Following Kaufers argument on the strategies

of irony, such a technique allows authors to pretend that the target of their

discourse is part of their chosen audience (102). In this manner, Zayas


7/22

can criticize established societal norms ironically, a stance that might

prove politically dangerous if expressed directly (Kaufer 102).

As others have noted, Zayass feminism may not conform to our

current conception; however, her implicit program anticipates the

paradigm formalized by Rosario Castellanos, one of the foremost

Mexican feminists of our era. Castellanos states that her purpose as a

feminist is to explore the myths that govern societys expectations of

women and to begin the process of demythification using humor to reveal

the absurdities underlying accepted social conventions. (She warns us that

we must accept no dogma that cannot withstand a good joke.) She

identifies three constellations of myths that constrain women: the esthetic,

the intellectual and the ethical. Zayas, writing over three centuries before

Castellanos, embarks on a similar endeavor, for she employs irony as a

comic challenge to the same three categories of cultural myths. Thus,

Castellanoss construct may serve as a critical framework for the

consideration of irony in the novelas.[5]

In Golden Age Spain, the ideals or societal myths proscribing

women were codified in several ways, including their propagation

through popular literature in general and marriage manuals in particular.

Zayass ironic manipulation of definitions of Christian womanhood

demonstrates her challenge to the dominant tradition. Thus, her works

may be read as a critical response to these proscriptions, especially thoseembodied in Fray Luis de LensLa perfecta casada.

A consideration of the first category of cultural myths, the esthetic,

reveals Zayass ironic treatment of social conventions in which she

juxtaposes, as Montesa suggests, an apparent reality with an underlying

truth. The popular literature of the period reflects what historians term a

patriarchal economy in which a womans beauty represents her means

to secure stability and happiness. Throughout theNovelas and


8/22

theDesengaos, however, a womans beauty brings her only ill-fortune.

The frequent repetition of the paired adjectives hermosa and

desgraciada signals this inversion. In El traidor contra su sangre the

narrator explicitly states: El hijo tena por nombre don Alonso, y la hija

doa Menca; hermosa es fuerza que lo sea porque haba de ser

desgraciada (372).

La ms infame venganza manipulates another esthetic ideal. Fray

Luis de Len asserts that pone la hermosura de la buena mujer no en las

figuras del rostro, sino en las virtudes secretas del alma (172), and that

los frutos de la virtud include amor, y gozo y paz on Earth as well as

everlasting life in the Kingdom of God (180). He assures the reader that a

woman who follows this sacred path, who remains virtuous within her

husbands house, removed from temptation, will be blessed with a

peaceful life. The textual presentation of Camila in La ms infame

venganza directly challenges this position:

Lleg el da deseado de Carlos, ya nuevamente enamorado de Camila,

que aunque no muy hermosa, el trato y serropa nueva le haca de

apetecerla. Tena la belleza que ha de tener la propia mujer, pues ms

en las virtudes que en la hermosura ha de florecer; dems que no era

tan fea que pudiera por esto ser aborrecida y cuando lo fuera, la hiciera

hermosa ms de cincuenta mil ducados que tena de dote y deseaba yaCarlos verse dueo de todo. (187, emphasis added)

The inclusion of the phrase ropa nueva undermines the supposed

emphasis on Camilas virtuous manners. The text further ironically

manipulates the concept of inner beauty, clearly suggesting that her

riches, not her virtue, appeal to her suitor.


9/22

According to Fray Luiss writings, Camilas virtue should ensure her

peaceful, happy existence. Instead, the brother of her husbands mistress

seeks to avenge his honor by raping her. The textual signs underscore this

injustice: Mira que culpa tiene la inocente. . . . Mas Camila honesta,

Camila cuerda, Camila recogida y no tratando sino de servir a su marido

. . . (190). The only reward the conclusion allows for is the promise of

eternal life. Camilas husband le di un veneno para matarla, mas no le

sucedi as, porque deba de querer Dios que esta desdichada y santa

seora padeciese ms martirios para darle en el cielo el premio de ellos

(195). The use of deba de, however, leaves the matter open to

interpretation. It does not assure the reader that her suffering will be

rewarded.

Not only does Zayas question the assumptions underlying the esthetic

myths governing women, her texts also actively attack myths regarding

womens intellect. At the time, the majority of prominent thinkers

portrayed women as intellectually inferior to men, a position deemedconsistent with Catholic doctrine. Fray Luis de Len affirms that: a la

mujer buena y honesta la naturaleza no la hizo para el estudio de las

ciencias, ni para los negocios y dificultades, sino para un solo oficio

simple y domstico, as les limit el entender (149).

Within this context, Zayass defense of womans intellectual capacity

has been well documented; nonetheless, some elements still merit furtherstudy. In the prologue to theNovelas she states:

Con mujeres no hay competencias. . . . Y as pues, no has de querer

ser descorts, necio, villano ni desagradecido. Te ofrezco este libro

muy segura de tu bizarra, y en confianza de que si te desagradare,

podras disculparme con que nac mujer, no con obligaciones de hacer

buenas novelas. (Prlogo)


10/22

Montesa claims that in this passage Zayas desautoriza su propia

capacidad intelectual, no equiparable a la del hombre, puesto que tiene

que ampararlo bajo el manto de la feminidad para hacer comprensibles

sus fallos. (135) He fails to recognize the presence of thetopos of self-

deprecating irony commonly found in prologues of the period as evinced

by Ernst Curtiuss exhaustive study. Moreover, what he interprets as

acquiesence to the myth of womans intellectual inferiority actually

manipulates the male readers response by obliging him to comply with

his part of the ideal.Once again Montesas critical evaluation of the statement by Isabel, the

narrator of La esclava de su Amante: Si son buenos los versos que no

son tuyos y ms si son de dama, adralos y albalos; y si malos,

disclpala, considerando que no tiene ms caudal reveals his particular

bias. He argues: Si las almas no tienen sexo, idea que le gusta repetir,

tampoco los escritos lo tienen: ni son de dama ni de varn . . . al nocomprenderlo as abre una profunda grieta en el edificio de su

feminismo (135). This narrow understanding of feminism does not allow

for the valorization of gender differences. He does not consider that the

uniquely female voice posited by Zayass discourse might represent one

of her most revolutionary accomplishments. The metaphor he chooses to

express his position also proves interesting. The image of the edificereflects, as I will discuss later, an imposition of patriarchal structure, one

that her text defies by resisting categorical enclosure.

The attack on the intellectual myth reaches ironic heights in El

prevenido engaado. The male protagonist, Don Fadrique, views

womens intelligence as the cause of their deceptions; he discounts his

active participation in their sexual exploits. He opts to marry a completely

innocent, totally naive young girl despite warnings that stupidity does not


11/22

guarantee virtue. He falsely informs his new bride, Gracia, that in married

life, the womans nightly duty consists of keeping armed watch over

her husband. During his first absence, an ardent suitor assures Gracia that

he can teach her another way to fulfill her wifely dutyone she finds

much more pleasant. Unaware that she has engaged in an illicit activity,

she excitedly informs her husband, upon his return, that another

husband has helped her discover a more entertaining way to spend their

evenings. In the end, Fadrique praises las discretas que son virtuosas

porque no hay comparacin ni estimacin para ellas; y si no lo son, hacen

sus cosas con recato y prudencia (173).The conclusion incorporates another ironic twist: Entr doa Gracia

monja, contenta . . . porque como era boba, fcil hall el consuelo

gastando la gruesa hacienda que le qued (173). If el cido corris ivo de

la risa fails to reveal the absurdity of the dominant view of womens

intelligence as dangerous and antithetical to moral development, the

narrator explicitly identifies the texts purpose: para que se avisen losignorantes que condenan la discrecin de las mujeres, que donde falta el

entendimiento, no puede sobrar la virtud . . . (173). This novella, the

frame narrative, and other tales unequivocally defend womens

intelligence as a necessary, positive force.

Zayass examination of the ethical myths that attempt to define

womens morality proves even more scathing. Her novellas reflect theperiods preoccupation with the moral and ethical obligations imposed on

women. As Fray Luis and others argued: Womans natural state is that

of subjugation to man. The honor code represents one of the social

structures designed to perpetuate unchallenged male dominance and to

ensure womens compliance with the cultural expectations regarding

morality. Not only did women need to behave in accordance with societal

expectations, they also had to remain completely above reproach. Fray


12/22

Luis de Len, inLa perfecta casadastates that: aquella sola es casta en

quien ni la fama mintiendoosa poner mala nota (40, emphasis mine).

Any suspected transgression required the shedding of the offenders

blood in order to remove the stain.

Even those critics who recognize Zayass challenges to other social

restrictions placed on women still affirm that she adheres to a strictly

codified definition of honor. Studies often paraphrase Portals

assessment:

Por lo general, la novela cortesana ante el honor adopta una doblepostura, la tpicamente calderoniana, recordemos, la deshonra slo se

lava con sangre, y aquella otra, ms humana y realista, que a lo largo

de casi toda su obra defendi Cervantes. Mara de Zayas, apasionada y

fatalista, optara por la rigidez calderoniana. (Portal 17)

Although various characters articulate views Portal labels asCalderonian, several of thenovelas subvert the honor code.

Perhaps Al fin se paga todo best represents this ironic manipulation

of the code. The protagonist, Hiplita, recounts how she marries Don

Pedro only to find herself pursued by Don Luis, his brother. She resists

his advances, but succumbs to Don Gaspars charms. Four times they

arrange to meet to consummate their illicit love; each time theirencounters fail. (The obstacles to their union prove quite humorous.)

When her husbands unexpected arrival interrupts their fourth tryst,

Hiplita encloses Gaspar in a trunk. She mistakenly believes he has

suffocated, and appeals to her brother-in-law (Don Luis) for help,

explaining that: no he ofendido a mi marido y vuestro hermano de obra,

si bien con el pensamiento (247). Don Luis seeks to use his knowledge

to force her to accept him. When she resists, he schemes to enter her


13/22

bedroom under the cover of darkness and, pretending to be her husband,

rapes her. To avenge her honor, Hiplita kills Don Luis with her

husbands knife, then seeks refuge in Don Gaspars house. Perversely, he

beats her cruelly, steals her jewels, and throws her into the street. After

her rescue by Don Garca, she enters a convent. She eventually contacts

the authorities who have arrested her innocent husband. They declare her

innocent of any wrongdoing; nonetheless, she remains in the convent,

refusing to return to her husbands house. When Don Pedro dies,

dejando a su mujer, de quien no se tena por ofendido, heredera de toda

su hacienda (257), Hiplita subsequently marries Don Garca. After

revealing that Don Gaspars servant killed him to steal Hiplitas jewels,

the narrator pronounces que cada uno mire lo que hace, pues al fin todo

se paga (257).

The repetition of the title ironically underscores the subversion of

societal norms in the tale. Not only does the text manipulate the honor

code, but the doctrine of intention that was often employed to determineguilt as well. In 1215, the Fourth Lateran Council decreed that the

intention behind any act determines its morality. One need not complete

the offense to be guilty of the sin. The honor code incorporated this

definition in that the mere suspicion of ill intent was considered

justification for revenge. Al fin se paga todo clearly undermines this

doctrine. Hiplita admits that she has intended (and attempted) to commitadultery, yet she escapes any official sanctions. She then avails herself of

the cdigo (from which her dalliances remained exempt) to avenge her

honor by killing her brother-in-law with impunity. Only the men in the

narrative (Don Luis, Don Gaspar, the manservant) appear subject to the

justice alluded to in the title. That Hiplita, after her open defiance and

subsequent manipulation of the honor code lives happily ever after

shakes the very foundation of the patriarchal system.


14/22

In Paul Julian Smiths otherwise intriguing article, he diminishes the

subversive force of the text through a revealing mis-reading. He states:

Thus Hiplita, inAl fin se paga todoplunges her dagger five or six

times into the heart of her sleeping husband. . . . Zayas implies an

acceptance of the patriarchal code of honour, and does not question

the belief that blood can only be cleansed with blood. Women are thus

permitted to adopt a travesty of man, but cannot transgress the law of

the dagger and the phallus. (Smith 235)

He fails to notice the suggestive usurpation of male power embodied by

the phallic symbol. The dagger Hiplita employs is her husbands, a

weapon she turns against her brother-in-law, not her spouse. As

traditionally presented in Golden Age literature, the honor code would

call for Hiplitas husband to kill her so that her blood could cleanse the

stain on his honor. Instead, she avenges her own, not her husbands,honor.

A careful examination of the function of ironic inversion in this novella

and others challenges current critical evaluation of Zayass stance

regarding the honor code which affirms that hersense of justice consiste

tanto o ms en recompensar a los buenos y en castigar a los malos

(Montesa 171). In El jardn engaoso, for example, Teodisa employsthe code to secure the man she desires. She falsely accuses her rival, her

own sister, of infidelity, a ruse that costs an innocent young man his life.

Nonetheless, she eventually marries as she wishes. The devils

participation in El jardn also proves problematic. In an unselfish act,

he willingly returns the deed to a young mans soul. The in clusion of the

devils good deed is not gratuitous. In fact, the frame tale highlights it by

acclaiming the devil as the character who commits the greatest act of


15/22

good. Montesa argues that if one were to accept Zayass manipulation of

the construct of good and evil as deliberate, esto sera quebrantar las

bases sobre las que se sostiene todo el edificio. Desaparecera el arraigado

sentido de justicia de nuestra autora (171). He correctly identifies the

implications of the scene, yet dismisses them because they do not fit with

his construction of Zayas. In so doing, he fails to recognize the

tremendous subversive power of the novela. The recasting of the devil as

a entity capable of good can be read as a revisionist myth that challenges

the most fundamental oppositions imposed by traditional doctrine.

That Montesas critical analysis again incorporates the metaphor of the

edifice brings to mind another cultural myth that Zayas confronts.

During the period, the house served to define the womans role. Fray Luis

specifies that los fundamentos de la casa son la mujer y el buey (Fray

Luis 47). Marcia Welles and Elizabeth Ordez have intimated that

Zayass preoccupation with enclosure anticipates that identified by

Gilbert in 18th-century Gothic fiction. As Gilbert suggests, the housebecomes a sign for the architecture of patriarchy which represents the

entrapment of women by male-dominated social institutions. (85)

InNovelas amorosas, Zayas explores the comic possibilites of this

architectural sign, at times demonstrating that the rigid imposition of

patriarchal order also restricts men. In Al fin se paga todo Don Gaspar,

attempting to enter Hiplitas chambers, becomes trapped within theconfines of the house: . . . se qued atravesado en el marco de la ventana

por la mitad del cuerpo . . . siendo fuerza a don Gaspar el correr metido

en su marco . . . (245).Desengaos, on the other hand, portrays the

house as an instrument of torture employed against women. In Amar

slo por vencer, the father and the uncle kill the protagonist by

collapsing a wall on top of her. This resolution holds significant

interpretive possibilites. At the same time that patriarchal architecture


16/22

destroys the young woman, it itself crumbles. The text seems to suggest

that such extreme implementations of the honor code may lead to the

erosion of the social structure itself.

Many critics have read Zayass texts as offering no alternatives to the

oppressive patriarchal order. Nevertheless, she does challenge the ethical

myths that bind the woman to her husbands house forever. Fray Luis

proclaims Que por ms spero y de ms fieras condiciones que el marido

sea es necesario que la mujer le soporte. . . . Oh que es un verdugo! Pero

es tu marido . . . (57). He censures those women who abandon their

homes to calentar el suelo de la Iglesia (23). Both collections present

women who actively reject these strictures. Among them, Laura of La

fuerza del amor, frequently beaten by her husband, refuses to return to

him despite the Viceroys mandate. Instead, she elects the convent.

TheDesengaos present the most fervent challenge to the cultural

dictum that marriage represents the natural order and serves to restore

order and maintain harmony (Ordez 9). All female protagonists eitherdie or choose to enter a convent. Montesa and others interpret this

decision as one motivated by fear and consistent with the dominant order.

Nevertheless, the narration of the desengaos exclusively by women

(during a supposed engagement party for Lisis) in itself represents an

inversion of, rather than compliance with, the patriarchal order. That

women, after listening to the tales, join hands and enter the conventtogether defies the social norm. As Ordez notes:

The choice to enter a convent is based not only on a female decision to

save body and soul from victimization by men, but it signals a more

positive move toward the formation of another kind of bonding . . .

underscoring matrilineal alternatives to patriarchal coding in text and

social context. (8)


17/22

In fact, the entire asymmetrical structure of the second volume, which

privileges a gynocentric orientation, ironically represents an inversion of

patriarchal order.

Unquestionably, a careful textual analysis of

theDesengaos andNovelasrefutes the critical assertion that Zayass

narratives are devoid of irony. Thus, the consideration of irony in Zayas

not only reveals how she challenges esthetic, intellectual and ethical

myths that proscribed womens conduct, it also serves to reveal the self-

propagating nature of criticism. All too often, opinions fossilized throughyears of stagnation become transformed into indisputable facts. We

cannot naively accept past reception without falling prey to possible

deception. The revolutionary nature of her work has often been dismissed

by critics who note that she does not address other inequities inherent in

the social order. Zayas need not examine all the manifestations of

injustice generated by her societys hierarchical configuration, for sheattacks the very foundations of the patriarchal order. Her work itself

has been interpreted by critics trained by a patriarchal system to read in

accordance with a dominant male critical vision (Culler 57). This may

explain resistance to the broadest implications of her ironic manipulation

of the culturally defined constructs of good and evil, of la perfecta

casada and la mala mujer. Zayass comic challenge ultimately servesto quebrantar las bases sobre las que se sostiene todo el edificio

(Montesa 171).

Works Cited

Ameza, Agustn G. de, ed.Novelas amorosas y ejemplares de doa

Mara de Zayas y Sotomayor. Madrid: R.A.E., 1948.


18/22

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.

New York: Routledge, 1990.

Castellanos, Rosario.Mujer que sabe latn. Mexico: SEP, 1973.

Crawford, Mary and Roger Chaffin. The Readers Construction of

Meaning: Cognitive Research on Gender and Comprehension. Gender

and Reading: Essays on Readers, Texts and Contexts. Ed. Elizabeth

Flynn and Patrocinio Schweickart. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986.

3-30.

Culler, Jonathan. Reading as a Woman.On Decon-struction: Theory

and Criticism after Structuralism. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1982.Foa, Sandra M.Feminismo y forma narrativa: Estudio del tema y las

tcnicas de Mara de Zayas y Sotomayor. Valencia: Albatrs, 1979.

Gilbert, Sandra and Susan Gubar. The Madwoman in the Attic. New

Haven: Yale UP, 1979.

Hirsch, E. D. Validity in Interpretation. New Haven: Yale UP, 1967.

Holub, Robert C.Reception Theory. New York: Methuen, 1984.Jauss, Hans Robert. Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Minneapolis: U of

Minnesota P, 1982.

Kaminsky, Amy Katz. Dress and Redress: Clothing in the Desengaos

amorososde Mara de Zayas y Sotomayor.Romanic Review 79.2

(1988): 377-91.

Kaufer, David. Irony and Rhetorical Strategy.Philosophy andRhetoric 10.2 (1977): 90-110.

Kolodny, Annette. Reply to Commentaries: Women Writers, Literary

Historians, and Martian Readers.New Literary History 11 (1980): 587-

92.

Len, Fray Luis de.La perfecta casada. Mexico: Concepto, 1981.

Lotman, Yury M. The Text and the Structure of Its Audience. New

Literary History 10 (1980): 97-116.


19/22

Montesa, Salvador. Texto y contexto en la narrativa de Mara de Zayas .

Madrid: Minsterio de Cultura, 1981.

Ordez, Elizabeth J. Woman and Her Text in the Works of Mara de

Zayas and Ana Caro.Revista de Estudios Hispnicos 19.1 (1985): 3-13

Portal, Mara Martnez del, ed.Novelas completas de Mara de Zayas.

Madrid: Bruguera, 1973.

Rincn, Eduardo, ed.Novelas amorosas y ejemplares o Decameron

espaol. Madrid: Alianza, 1968.

Smith, Paul Julian. Writing Women in Golden Age Spain: Saint Teresa

and Mara de Zayas.Modern Language Notes 102.2 (1987): 220-40.Sulieman, Susan. The Reader in the Text. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1980.

Vasileski, Irma V.Mara de Zayas y Sotomayor: su poca y su obra.

Madrid: Playor, 1973.

Welles, Marcia. Mara de Zayas and hernovela cortesana: A Re-

evaluation.Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 60 (1978): 301-10.

Williamsen, Amy R. Gender and Interpretation: The Manipulation ofReader Response in Mara de Zayas. Forthcoming inDiscurso

Literano.

Zayas y Sotomayor, Mara de.Desengaos amorosos. Ed. Alicia Yllera.

Madrid: Catdra, 1983.

___.Novelas completas. Ed. Mara Martnez de Portal. Madrid: Bruguera,

1973.


20/22

APPENDIX I

From Narrators to Readers: The Bipartite Narrative Structure

Main Narrative

Voice

Individual Narrators of the novelas

Novelas

Amorosas............................................ 5 women, 5 men

DesengaosAmorosos........................................ 10 women, 0 men


21/22

t

t

Female

Narratees Male Narratees

t

t

Postulated female

reader Postulated male reader(Implied)

(Implied)

t

t

Real female

readers Real male readers


22/22

[1]All parenthetical references to theNovelasare from Portals edition; the

references to theDesengaosare from Ylleras.[2]In a work of the present scope, I cannot possibly address all the

intricacies of these theoretical issues. Nevertheless, I believe that the

concept of gender-inflected reading provides crucial insight into the

analysis of Mara de Zayas novelas (see works cited). For a provocative

discussion of gender as a performative construct, see Butler.[3]For additional discussions of the relationship between the reader and

the text in Zayas see Elizabeth J. Ordez (6), Sandra Foa (126), and

Salvador Montesa (333, 352).[4]

This is the central argument of my article (Gender and Interpretation).[5]The preceding discussion parallels that found at the beginning of my

related study Challenging the Code: Honor in Mara de Zayas(forthcoming).
http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref1http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref2http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref2http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref3http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref4http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref5http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref5http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref4http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref3http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref2http://tell.fll.purdue.edu/RLA-Archive/1991/Spanish-html/Williamsen,Amy.htm#_ftnref1

Documents

Engendering Interpretation