Back to Work

It is now time for me to come back to work, and review, study, read, and focus for another week and a half before my oral. I had a few days off of lazying, eating, drinking, sleeping, and am now forced back into action. Thanks again to Mesro and Dena for the signs, the lunch afterwards with Nati and Chem Mike too, thanks for the good words Voncookie, Selene, Dreadlock Dan, Chang, and others, my parents (are you guys reading the blog yet?), Jgill for sticking by me and everyone else who I've forgotten or can't mention because then my cover is blown (Heavy Metal crew).
This means that once again my blog will be active. Not good, but active.

Phd Exam

Today is the day...

La Regenta

Ana Ozores, La Regenta - beautiful, thoughtful, fear of abandonment, object of sexual desire in the pueblo Vetusta, poet, educated, a wife to be sold to the highest bidder
don Alvaro Mesia, El Tenorio - jefe del partido liberal, politician, smooth-talker, good-looking, wants to seduce Ana Ozores, dresses fashionably like in Paris, speaks foreign languages
Her father - librepensandor, leaves others to raise Ana, example of lazy liberal who doesn't know what he's talking about but relies on the ignorance of others to ignore his unintelligible comments, lives abroad, Romantic (bans Ana from reading modern literature)
El Magistral, De Pas - corrupt, sly, spiritual advisor to Ana, has a telescope that he uses to look over his city, powerful, likes to climb shit
Her Husband, Victor - older, like a father to her
Voyeurism of the confessions; it's a jewel all the priests desire
Digressions galore
The way the canonigos talk, vulgar, sexual, dirty dirty filthy filthy; they hate mass and yawn, clearly anti-clerical portrayal of the lazy unholy ones
Blend of Erotic/Church (Obdulia walking around with that short skirt of hers)

Literature (and History) and GALDóS

Lukacs: “To illustrate moral issues, therefore, the novelist may invent plausible potentialities; this the historian cannot do.”
---Soldados de Salamina a clear example of this

Ribbans: “One should not look in a historical novel for a documentary contribution to historical knowledge.”
---Maybe, but then why do so many histories cite passages of Galdos novels?

Hayden White: If “what was at issue throughout the 19th century, in history as in both art and the social sciences, was the form that a genuinely ‘realistic representation of historical reality’ ought to take’, White claims that, for historians as well as novelists, there is no certain scientific or objective proof of superiority of one response over another.”
---Historical knowledge as a construction as much of the imagination as of thought and that its authority is no greater than the power of the historian to persuade his readers that his account is true.

“Brook Thomas comments ironically, ‘World History confirmed God’s will to have a higher state of civilization progressively emerge in Europe’.”

Menéndez Pelayo on Galdós: “Sin ser historiador de profesión, ha reunido el más copioso archive de documentos sobre la vida moral de España en el siglo XIX.”

In his first historical novel, Galdós sees a continual line between the 1812 Cádiz Constitution to the 1820-1823 ‘trienio constitucional’ and ‘la crisis actual’ of 1868-1870, when Prim was searching for a suitable constitutional monarch. Advocates to his liberal contemporaries caution, moderation and unity in order to avoid mistakes of predecessors.
---Prim was assassinated in 1870

3800 imaginary characters in his novels, about 6% recurring ones

In broad terms, he subscribed to the Hegelian or realist concept of history characteristic of the 19th century; seeks ‘the recorded past’ and participates in the ‘rage for a realistic apprehension of the world’ (Hayden White); like the tree metaphor.
---deviations in his obsession with the historia chica
---intrahistoria
---Aware of the precariousness of his information (gaps in narrative, retelling of stories different than his, holes in information)
---Role of chance in shaping history

Once he has returned to the episodios in 1898, no longer easy solutions to Spain’s problems; almost an esperpento, bloodbath, constant conflict, struggle to balance progress and stability

***General lessons to be learned:
Disgust at intrigue and capricious government, loathing of instinctive recourse to violence, distrust of heroic rhetoric and foreign adventures, apprehension about popular uprisings, ironic contempt for bureaucracy, despair at the neglect of education, concern for innocent victims (often women), approval of free and honest personal relations.
-critics claim that his historical perspective in certain areas, econ, working class, regionalism, are lacking
---La de Bringas is an essay on credit consumerism capitalism free market values and the Spanish crown's bankruptcy

Difference bt Episodios nacionales y novelas contemporaneas:
1) Galdos named them this way as such (and even packaged the episodios in yellow and red)
2) Practical working out of national problem, not philosophical-religious theorizing
3) Content dominated, not as interested in the form/style
4) Quantity of Historical knowledge necessary in episodios is greater
5) Titles of episodios refer to historical event, date or person; novelas, minus one exception, do not
6) A major historical development or figure is shown in action in every episodio
7) Lukács: “Necessary Anachronism”
8) Didactic purposes
9) Formal framework: 10 vol. Series unit, progressive sequence of time, prescribed quantitative limitations (?), 85000 words, 30 chapters
10) Narrative Structure: Autobiography, 3rd person, mixed technique
11) Time-scale: Episodios up to 60 years difference; Novelas 6 years
12) Free Indirect Discourse, and character contamination of narration (ideas and vocab enter into the narration)

Historian’s task is not futile: “it is complex, incomplete, and inexhaustible”

Since the future is predetermined in his novels, Galdós is trapped in a rigid deterministic pattern.

Takes particular trouble to construct characters who offer a broad spectrum of opinions from the contemporary scene, and possibilities of outcomes are explored before the expected one arrives. Open-mindedness and reader-response; I’d even say in España sin rey, if you didn’t know the history of Spain well, would you know who is chosen King? And would it matter? Are you more interested in the history outcome or the outcome between Fernanda, DJ and Céfora?
---Take España sin rey as an example; there is much dialogue, discussion and debate over who will be the next King of Spain: Carlos VII, a foreign king, Alfonso XII, etc…etc…we even get a close perspective of los carlistas and the main reason, at least in this narrative, for their failure to put Carlos in the throne (lack of $$$; put into a difficult situation with the constitution)

Galdós on episodios: “el género novelesco con base histórica”

Doña Perfecta (1876)
-First novela contemporánea, de la primera época
-which means: Clear-cut confrontation between two political attitudes representing traditional Catholic values and Modern liberalism; imaginary, provincial setting (Orbajosa) and an unspecified time of action (although it can be deduced rather easily)
- Moderate use of standard form of the traditional novel, the epistolary mode, as in the letters by Don Cayetano which conclude the novel

España sin rey (1908)
-Ribbans quotes the first page of this book as proof of the further justification of unrecorded or overlooked personal events –authentic or fictional—which form part of the totality of history
-Representation of la historia pequeña o la historia chica with the metaphor of the tree and its associations with steady organic growth to designate the fictional stories of obscure individuals
-Anonymous personal narrator
-Novel ends with murder of Céfora by Fernanda, guardia civil comes, theater dialogue with acotaciones: Ribbans calls it ‘pseudo-dramatic dialogue’
-Wayward traditionalist Tapia declares the Progressives would disappear without Prim

Prim not presented directly, but rather mentioned by characters in the episodio
-Most pressing complex problem facing Prim was the ? of succession
-Carlos VII el niño terso (smooth boy)
-This novel deals with the dangerous time, ‘la maldita Interinidad’, before the new choice for Monarch is made
-Prim’s murder anticipated
-Much of book centered on absurdist Carlist figure Don Wifredo de Romarete, Bailío de Nueve Villas and Caballero de San Juan, from Ultra-Traditionalist Vitoria, and reflects the naïve, anachronistic, optimistic claims of Carlist legitimacy. Identified with Don Quijote, idealistic integrity and sympathy as well as unpractical (amorous weapons of ’43); we see the Cortés through him; Dios en el Sinaí speech by Castelar, overwhelms and dazzles his opponents, including Wifredo, who is disillusioned by this and the love affair of DJ and Céfora, engages in drunken orgy, goes crazy, distorts Castelar’s speech while drunk
-Carolina embodies the flexible go with the flow position, at least whichever flow will coincide with your personal interests: she reminisces about her time as camarista for dona Francisca, and loses her property rights during the Revolution, but regains them when restored by Serrano’s gov, accepts Bourbon restoration of Alfonso XII.

Cánovas the leader of the alfonsinos and his powerful influence, behind the scenes, loss of revolutionary zeal and inexorable progress towards Restauración.
-“Esperamos, y esperando hacemos la Historia de España”

DJ Urries does not have much depth of character, due role as donjuan and political intriguer, when he betrays Fernanda he is betraying the unspoilt values of the country.

-Echegaray, using science vocab in his speeches, will win the Nobel Prize for literature in 1904; ‘lastima q no sea usted dramaturgo’



La de Bringas (1884)
-Narrator has an ironic role, unobtrusive but highly significant intervention (he becomes the one who divides and hands out all of the goods of the Royal family, in the final few pages no clear resolution but does tell us that Rosalía will take care of the family after they’ve left the Palacio Real)
-Example of historical incident which forms part of flow of narration and impinges on fictional characters, Los Bringases involved in the fall of Isabella II within the Palacio Real
-Also an example of resemblance bt a fictional character and an eminent historical figure: Bringas is consistently and ironically identified with the French economist and statesman Thiers
-Set toward the end of Isabella II’s reign, and her indiscriminate charitable instincts are used for a fictional purpose: serve as the last recourse for financial assistance for those in her service.
-When Rosalía has a new shawl, she tells her husband that it was generously given to her by Isabella II. She uses her generosity as a way to avoid consequences of her extravagance. When her financial despair has reached critical level, the Señora’s absence has a disastrous effect: she tells how usually Isabella II will help out her friends if you throw yourself at her feet and beg a little bit and cry.
-Milagros: cunning, insinuating, hypocritical, Rosalía’s role model
*-We come near to the queen is the dinner served to the poor after the traditional ceremony of washing their feet. A good example of Hayden White’s Emplotment!!! Viewed a distance from a distorted angle, gives Isabelita Bringas nightmares, seen through the eyes of the children, grotesque parody relieved by Isabelita, the royal part being played by her mother accompanied by Pez (who she cheats on her husband with); identification of Rosalía and Isabella II, each of them adulteresses.
-Galdós does not disguise his disgust for this travesty of charity: calls it ‘comedia palaciega’ that has nothing to do with the Evangelical. Spectators are noisy, poor women hardly eat anything as they are bewildered and shamed, food packed up to be later resold at boarding houses. Another example of unthinking charity. Farce
-Shadows of forthcoming upheaval are everywhere in evidence in La de Bringas
-Caballero’s immoral decision to take Amparo as his mistress and live with her in France a confirmation of the widespread moral and political disorder: “La revolución no tarda; vendrá el despojo de los ricos, el ateísmo, el amor libre.”
*The whole action of the novel, more or less, is confined to the Palacio Real, its own little city, metonymic fashion as a microcosm of Spanish society on the verge of Revolution.
-Thiers prominent in the revolutionary situation, the collapse of the 3rd Empire; Bringas is el ratoncito Pérez, obsession with hoarding recalls the classic miser is the reverse of the dynamics of capitalism; ‘dinero en manos muertas’
-Pez is the mechanism through which politics is explored for most part: is first neutral, makes sure not to upset Bringas with the inevitable coming of the Revolution, sympathizes with the expulsed generals of Unión Liberal
-Bringases rejoice at the forceful sign of government; bodily reaction to the Navy uprising; Bringas blames Prim for the revolution, and rejoices at a false rumor of his death (pseudo-prolepsis)
-Dona Candida says Queen only needs to show up in Madrid to squash the uprising
*-Consistent, meticulous use of historical detail not required; rather it offers the effects of the crumbling of a style of life, the end of a dynasty and a system, with 2 reactions presented: 1) Bringas’ apocalyptic conviction that all traditional values are irreparably lost, 2) Cynical, accommodating view of Rosalia and Pez, who are confident in facing the unknown, things won’t change that much, Pez nicely situated with revolutionary friends
-Surprisingly peaceful transfer of the building; although fearful of the revolutionaries, are meek and the new administrator (the narrator) is very accommodating to his friends
-Bly: La de Bringas is 1/4th historical novel and 3/4th socio-psychological novel
: “I think that it is not inappropriate to assert that the story of Rosalia and Francisco can be construed as an allegory, or a metaphor, on the decline and fall of the House of Bourbon.”

Reign of Isabella II 1843-1868
Daughter of Ferdinand VII and María Cristina. Father died when she was 3. Took throne. Ferdinand VII’s brother, Carlos V, and his supporters rose up in arms, first Carlista Wars. María Cristina abdicated in 1840. Espartero falls in ’43, Isabella 13 and declared Queen by Narvaez and O' Donnell.

Why was the Transition successful, Paul and Raul?

Paul Preston, a British expert on the Spanish transition, said one of its lessons was that ''the longer a dictatorship has lasted and the nastier it is the more likely it is that the opposition will relinquish its demands for revenge.'' He added, ''Any improvement is worth going for, and you get the kind of broad consensus that was the key in Spain.''

Raul Morodo, a Spanish politician and author, was more blunt. ''The key factor in the transition was fear, and fear produced the consensus,'' he said. Spaniards feared a return to the anarchic bloodletting of the civil war; they were determined not to let it happen again. King Juan Carlos feared the anti-monarchist sentiments among the newly legalized Socialists. The military feared a purge, and the left feared the military. By turning its back on old scores, and on its own blood-stained history, Spain achieved the transition.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEED6143DF935A25757C0A96F948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Cadiz 1812

First bourgeoisie liberal revolution in Spain
2 aims:
1) Adopt reforms (influenced by French Revolution) that would undo the Antiguo Regimen
2) Institute Constitution to change political regimen

Including: freedom of press, individual freedoms and equality for all citizens under the law, economic freedom (free market), abolition of the Inquisition, Disamortization of Church goods, rejection of sole power in Monarch's hands, individual rights like education, liberty, property, a limited suffrage...

General Elio pronounces on behalf of Fernando VII in 1814, staunch absolutist supporter, Fernando undoes all of the reforms and Constitution of 1812.

Many in the military opt for liberalism, in 1820 another pronunciamiento, this time by General Riego, invokes the Constitution of 1812 and the trienio begins.

Split in liberals over whether or not to have strict interpretation of Constitution and the role of the Monarchy, division later is progresivos y moderados, which causes great instability.
-Liberals clearly anti-clerical, confrontation with the Church

French intervention in 1823 ends the liberal rule

AG II

Political ideal of the AG?
-Anarchism
Octavio Paz says, “el arte y la poesía de nuestro tiempo viven de modernidad y mueren por ella.” ?
-"Ya la modernidad con 2 siglos del movimiento q se ha convertido en tradición…se funde en la ruptura.”
-The agonic or self-destructive function of the AG

Another definition of the AG:
“joven literatura, nueva literatura, creacionismo, ultraísmo y ‘la pamplina’ (nonsense) del superrealismo, para concluir q el concepto, ‘demasiado móvil’, escapaba a toda definición, ‘quizá pq le empuja ese hondo instinto de la Historia q es, ante todo, voluntad de renovación.”

II. Principios de la Vanguarda

• Fascinación por la tecnología
• Arte ‘aristocrático’
• Alineación del artista de las masas
• Colectividad reducida/definida de artistas
• La novedad en arte
• Protagonismo de la imagen/visual
• Tendencia arcaizante
• Desfamiliarización de lo familiar
• La creación del objeto virtual
• Atención a las cosas triviales/cotidianas (“La pistola es el grifo de la muerte”)
• Radio transnacional
• La Velocidad
• Modernismo: o continuación de simbolismo, o un movimiento vanguardista en su momento
• ---El avión era una máquina de guerra en este momento (WWI, even in Civil War and WWII), los ases gran héroes de WWI

Historia de una escalera (1947)

Antonio Buero Vallejo (1916-2000)

• Written during the dictatorship, is usually the work he is most associated with
• Was imprisoned for years after the end of the Civil War, had been a medic on the Republican side, spent six years in jail, was sentenced to death, was out by 1946
• Did not go into exile, remained in Spain, utilized symbolism to criticize dictatorship (hence, the fame of Historia de una escalera)
---Put on the stage in 1949
• TRAGEDY
• Representation of deterioration and vejez (old age), important to contemplate this work within its context and situation
• Theater dominated by evasive tone, or works from past playwrights like Benavente
• Tragedy of the common man, doesn’t have to be ‘great or grand’ people
• In the same year Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman came out, saw convergences with his own work
• Outside Spanish borders, a new theater developing: “El existencialismo como actitud individual y la consideración del destino de los grupos menos afortunados de la sociedad.”
• Another contemporary work La familia de Pascual Duarte by Cela
• *** 2 key innovations:

1) la tragedia contemporánea, con personajes del aquí y ahora del vivir cotidiano del momento de las respectivas escrituras
2) La nueva formula del teatro histórico, entendido como revisión de nuestro más conflictivo pasado y como iluminador de las acciones presentes
• Social Realism; pueblo oprimido por las penurias económicas o las trabas individuales y sociales q soportan los menos afortunados
• How does the end affect the reader? More so than the actors?
-“Es difícil pensar que la vida va a cambiar para la joven generación q se promete un destino distinto del de sus padres…el texto…nos induce a una interpretación q frustra las esperanzas de los personajes q intervienen en el drama.”
• Over 30 years time in this obra
• We don’t see what happens out in the streets or the interior of the viviendas (Escenas omitidas)

Urbano: Proletario sindicalista q pretende la acción colectiva
Fernando: Individualismo insolidario

Acto 1: opens with cobrador de luz coming around to collect payment for light/electricity, Paca yells at him, one woman can’t pay and the more wealthy neighbor Don Manuel can, so he does. Cobrador de luz hates his job, is a symbol of the repressive economic forces against these people. Anticipation within the conversations of people of the love conflict between Elvira and Fernandito and Carminaor the violence of Urbano (who threatens throwing Cobrador down the stairs)
Escena III: development of the relationship bt Fernando y Carmina

Everything repeats itself. The same dialogues are repeated. The kids of Fernando and Carmina are replicas of themselves, Fernandito and Carmina, hija. Fernando’s kid smokes in the same casinillo that Fernando smoked in as a kid, and had the same crush on Carmina that his kid has on Carmina, hija. Fernandito has the same dreams and says the same thing about becoming a better person, taking her out of this dreadful place, becoming an engineer, same dreams, same hopes, we already know how this story ends, it’s the story of their parents.
Time: 30 years pass, and from textual references, we know it starts in 1917 and ends in 1947, contemporary time. Nothing changes during this 30 years, except for the people age and the owner of the building fakes making it nicer. Also, at the end of the 30 years new neighbors which represent the new money and higher class, oficinistas and businessmen, and who look down on their poorer neighbors; they want them to move out so they can take over their places and have bigger apartments. They are symbolic of modernization and industrialization, talk about once the poorer residents are kicked out they will have an elevator, and talk about new cars.
Time: 10 years passes like it’s nothing, like it’s a day. Feeling of stagnation, they have nothing to look forward to except DEATH. Obsession with death. We also find out at the beginning of each act who has died. Stagnation of the dictatorship, the years pass, the people age, and everything remains the same, there is no progress, no moving forward, no visible changes, hope is squashed, whether you decide to confront it yourself or in a group (Individualism vs. Syndicalism) represented by Fernando and Urbano, Dreamer vs. Obrero
Action: All of the action takes place offstage, except for the final confrontation between Urbano and Fernando and Elvira and Carmina. We know about people from conversations, it’s all chisme chisme.
Fractured love stories: Carmina loves Fernando and Fernando loves Carmina, but they do not end up together because Elvira, whose father had money $$$, seduces Fernando for her money $$$. Instead of getting out of the same vicious cycle, stuck in it even deeper.
Nostalgia: nostalgic for juventud, the innocence of their youth and dreams which are quickly crushed, they fight to keep the past alive but are defeated, and we get the image of little Manolín, Fernando’s independent kid, who has a birthday and wants pasteles, but his parents can’t afford to buy him some, and he hits on Trini who wants to give him money to buy pasteles and he acts tough smoking instead, same old story, repetition
End up the same: no matter if they take different paths, they all end up the same, miserable, poor, unhappy…Fernando and Urbano, dreamer and worker, individual and syndicalist, both end up repressed poor and living in the same building they grew up in on the 5th floor without an elevator. Trini and Rosa also end up the same, Trini is single and Rosa ends up alone after marrying womanizer, Trini prude and Rosa prostitutes herself to pay the bills…sad, it’s all very sad.
Pauses/Silences: Lots of pauses, silences, silence speaks and has meaning in this play, creates suspense but also reflects the mood of melancholy that permeates the play.

Fueros

Medieval rights granted to regional areas, typically in exchange for the recognition of the monarch but not complete integration into the kingdom. In Basque region, had these fueros and wanted to reconstitute them. Throughout the 19th century they were losing partial rights of autonomy and regaining them, but after the Fall of the First Republic and the constitutional monarchy, their fueros were abolished in 1876. The Second Republic passed an Estatuto de Autonomia in 1936, but Civil War limited it to the regions which were not under Nationalist control.
1876 The Abolition of the Basque fueros

The granting of autonomy, especially for Catalonia, was an ongoing struggle, and the Second Republic guaranteed many of the freedoms. and then they lost them during the negro bienio, the conservative reign of the CEDA and Gil Robles.



What did the Constitution of Cadiz 1812 actually promise?
Protection and Recognition of individual rights, equality of all under the law, right to property, education, freedom, press
Restricted Suffrage

Was a symbol, a flag of liberalism, against the absolutism of the monarchy, even though it was only actually used in 1812-1814, 1820-23 and briefly before the new Constitution of 1837.

Don't forget to mention somewhere the role of carlismo, especially against the liberals and the battles with the Army, as well as then moving into a powerful alliance with the military, the church and the falange in move to Civil War

Only a constitutional monarchy for Canovas could provide stability for Spain, after two projects in 1868 and la gloriosa fell: the democratic monarchy and the First Republic.

El sistema canovista.
La Constitución de 1876 y el turno de partidos.
La oposición al sistema.
Regionalismo y nacionalismo.

Regionalismo y nacionalismo.

A fines del siglo XIX, nacen en Cataluña y el País Vasco movimientos que cuestionan la existencia de una única nación española en España. El punto de partida de los argumentos nacionalistas consiste en afirmar que Cataluña y el País Vasco son naciones y que, por consecuencia, tienen derecho al autogobierno. Esta afirmación la basan en la existencia de unas realidades diferenciales: lengua, derechos históricos (fueros), cultura y costumbres propias. Estos movimientos tendrán planteamientos más o menos radicales: desde el autonomismo al independentismo o separatismo.

El nacionalismo catalán

Cataluña y los demás reinos de la Corona de Aragón habían perdido sus leyes y fueros particulares con los Decretos de Nueva Planta, tras la guerra de Sucesión.

Durante el siglo XIX, el siglo del nacionalismo en toda Europa, el sentimiento nacionalista se reavivó entre una burguesía que estaba protagonizando la revolución industrial. El regionalismo y el nacionalismo catalán se fue construyendo en varias etapas:

*

En la década de 1830, en pleno período romántico, se inicia la Renaixença, movimiento intelectual, literario y apolítico, basado en la recuperación de la lengua catalana.
*

En 1882, Valentí Almirall creó el Centre Catalá, organización política que reivindicaba la autonomía y denuncia el caciquismo de la España de la Restauración.
*

Enric Prat de la Riba fundó la Unió Catalanista (1891) de ideología conservadora y católica. Al año siguiente, esta organización aprueba las denominadas Bases de Manresa, programa en el que se reclama el autogobierno y una división de competencias entre el estado español y la autonomía catalana. Fuertemente nacionalista, la Unió Catalanista no tuvo planteamientos separatistas.
*

En 1901 nace la Lliga Regionalista con Francesc Cambó con principal dirigente y Prat de la Riba como ideólogo. Es un partido conservador, católico y burgués con dos objetivos principales:
o

Autonomía política para Cataluña dentro de España. La Lliga nace alejada de cualquier independentismo. Cambó llegó a participar en el gobierno de Madrid, pese a no conseguir ninguna reforma ante el cerrado centralismo de los gobiernos de la Restauración.
o

Defensa de los intereses económicos de los industriales catalanes. Defensa de una política comercial proteccionista.

El nacionalismo catalán se extendió esencialmente entre la burguesía y el campesinado. Mientras tanto, la clase obrera abrazó mayoritariamente el anarquismo.

El nacionalismo vasco

A lo largo del siglo XIX, las sucesivas Guerras Carlistas no supusieron sino derrotas para el Pueblo Vasco, tras las cuales se fueron eliminando paulatinamente los Fueros, en un complicado proceso que, iniciado por la Ley de 25 de octubre de 1839 de Reforma de los Fueros Vascos, culminó con la Ley de 21 de julio de 1876, que supuso la definitiva liquidación del ordenamiento foral.

A lo largo del siglo XIX, las sucesivas Guerras Carlistas no supusieron sino derrotas para el Pueblo Vasco, tras las cuales se fueron eliminando paulatinamente los Fueros, en un complicado proceso que, iniciado por la Ley de 25 de octubre de 1839 de Reforma de los Fueros Vascos, culminó con la Ley de 21 de julio de 1876, que supuso la definitiva liquidación del ordenamiento foral.
http://www.historiasiglo20.org/HE/11a-3.htm

Strategies

Take your time, relax, think clearly, deeply
Take five minutes to think through the question, make a brief outline of things to hit
Leave five/ten minutes at the end to look over the response, make sure it makes sense
Focus more on making a strong argument and then supporting it with examples, rather than giving a ton of examples without a strong link or narrative thread
Fueros n cortes
word

Spanish Civil War

Three movements or underlying problems that developed in the 19th and early 20th century that can be traced to contributing to the spark of the military uprising of 1936 and the Spanish Civil War are the failure of liberalism, the role of the Military and the peripheral/regional issue.
One of the elements of the Spanish liberal tradition was the failure to take root, and the lack of a successful liberal government would echo in the 20th century as the Second Republic floundered. The Spanish liberal tradition began in the years 1808-1814, while it was under attack from French invasion. As the Spanish fought off the Napoleonic invasion, the Spanish Cortés was relocated to Sevilla and then to Cádiz, where in 1812 it wrote what has become to be called the Constitution of 1812. It called for many liberal ideas and implementations, such as universal suffrage, disamortization of Church lands and freedom of religion. It failed to take root, and General Elío declared a pronunciamiento in 1814 that placed Fernando VII (El Rey Deseado) at the throne and allowed for the Constitution to be revoked. Liberals again took the civil power with the help of the Military in 1820, and for three years the ‘trienio’ again attempted to implement liberal ideas without success. Foreign intervention, once more coming in from their neighbors to the north, re-installed Fernando VII to the throne and thwarted liberal government. From 1834-1836 what was known as the Estatuto was briefly implemented and undone. Liberals were divided as to the form that the liberal state should take; some were monarchists, some were republicans, some were more self-interested, and there was also a division between the more established and the younger liberals. In addition, many of the populace were either indifferent to liberalism or unaware, as the high illiteracy rate and slow flow of information allowed certain powerful groups to control the production and dissemination of news and information. By 1868, General Prim and other generals declared another pronunciamiento which was to eventually lead to the First Republic. It was short-lived, and it’s failure was subsequently followed by 50 years of the Canovine system of ‘turno pacífico’, where the progressive and moderate parties would theoretically share power, every 5 years turning it over to the other side. They would manufacture votes through the cacique system and social reforms were kept to a minimal. After this system was finally dismantled in 1923, it was followed by Primo de Rivera’s dictatorship until 1930 (with the blessing of Alfonso XIII, which ironically was also to lead to his downfall and exile). By 1931, enough support from both conservative and liberal parties led to the creation of the Second Republic. The left was divided among many different groups, including the socialist PSOE, Partido Socialista de Obreros Españoles, the PCE, Partido Comunista de España, and anarchist groups who were opposed to any form of bourgeoisie state but welcomed the Republic as a change from the extremely repressive Canovine system and Primo de Rivera dictatorship. The many workers’ strikes and uprisings had been put down with violent reprisals, and the hope of the CNT and the anarchists was that the Second Republic would be less oppressive in its measures. They were to be disappointed though, as uprisings in 1933 in Casas Viejas and in 1934 in Austurias (symbolically these were key, although there were many other areas and strikes/uprisings) were handled with extreme violence and repression by the Republican government in the hands of the Left and the Right. After the 1934 Austurias uprising was squashed by the Conservative-led CEDA government, many anarchists realized that their best bet was a Leftist government, and after the split of 1933 had led to a conservative victory at the polls, the various distinct parties formed the Frente Popular and won what turned out to be an ephemeral victory in 1936.
What followed was much unrest from the conservative base, many of whom had decided that dismantling the Republic from the inside was not their best strategy. Instead, military planning which had begun much earlier was strengthened and after the death of Calvo Sotelo, Franco joined General Mola and many others for the military uprising of July 17th, 1936. Yet again, the military had become involved in the politics of Spain. It had a long history of involvement in politics, from General Elío’s pronunciamiento in 1814. Their disastrous losses against France and Britain, including the famous battle of Trafalgar in 1805, as well as the poor financial state of Spain at the turn of the century, contributed to an Army that was top-heavy, not modernized, and unhappy. There was also the beginning of the losses of the colonies, the disintegration of the Empire, which not only weakened Spain financially but militarily, as the losses mounted in vain attempts to secure the colonies and then the blame that was distributed for these losses. At first the Military sympathized with the liberals, as evidenced by their support and assistance with the removal of Fernando VII and the support of the trienio. They were so weak, however, that they could not repel French intervention in 1823. The military was consistently involved in the civilian politics and also seen as the best way to keep law and order. Any fears of unrest would be put down by the military, and the creation of the Guardia Civil by General Narváez was an important step in the use of military force and the existence of a military force that was fiercely loyal to the leaders of the government. Since the military had a history of intervention in politics, it was no surprise to see the Revolution of ’68 led by Generals, who removed Isabel and began the process of replacing her and the debates as to who would lead Spain and in what form of government. By 1873, King Amadeo had already abdicated after a 3 year reign, and the vacuum that was left was the First Republic. Once the turno pacífico was agreed upon after the First Republic fell, the military was a force that was to be relied upon by the government to keep strikers and revolutionary tensions at bay. However, the military was losing force as in 1898, Spain was at war with the United States and lost, resulting in the final dissolution of the Spanish Empire and the colonies of the Philippines, Cuba and Puerto Rico. This military defeat left them humiliated and they took the blame, and it caused a need for rethinking the Spanish identity. Later wars in Morocco also put a strain on the ill-equipped, non-modernized and ill-trained Spanish Army. The division in the Army between those who served in Africa, los africanistas, and those who did not, los peninsularistas, helped cause problems as the system of promotion was debated. Should the promotions be based upon merit or years of service? In addition, compulsory military service was not so, as the rich could buy their way out of the military, which resulted in many of the poor having to pick up the slack. This added to the grumbling. With Spain suffering unexpected defeats in Morocco after already fighting there from 1909-1914, the Spanish public was outraged. The military was going to take the blame, the government was going to take the blame, there was going to be inquiries and responsibilities. This is one of the reasons that led to Alfonso XIII supporting the military takeover by Primo de Rivera, who was staunchly against Spain’s presence in Morocco, and would also help defray the responsibilities issue. Ironically, during his dictatorship, France and Spain united against native forces in Morocco and were victorious. The precedent had been set throughout the years: the Military guaranteed stability, or supposedly did so, it guaranteed law and order, and was a key player in civilian politics. If the unity of Spain was under threat, the Military had the right to intervene in the name of saving Spain, which is what the military uprising of 1936 claimed. The plans had been laid, and Calvo Sotelo’s murder (retribution for a previous murder) enraged enough people that the uprising was to move forward and Franco was convinced of its chances for success.
How did the peripheral/regional question fit in to the explosion of this crisis which was the Spanish Civil War? Due to Spain’s reliance on land and Agrarian production for most of its economy, there was a lack of industrialization compared to other parts of Europe. Where industrialization did take root was mainly in the north, in Vizcaya and Catalonia. Immigration from the countryside to the cities was tame, as the amount of jobs was not sufficient to support the influx of new workers. Many returned back to their rural towns and the strength of regional loyalties was high. One of the contentious issues between liberals had been this question: Do we want a government that will be centrally strong or a federal system with more autonomy for the disparate regions? In the late 1800s, a movement that first began as nostalgic quickly turned to contemporary issues in Catalonia as some of the anarchist workers as well as industrialists were looking at the need for expression of their difference. The Catalan industrialists felt that they paid a high percentage of the taxes but did not have sufficient representation in the centrally located government. Self-rule was an issue, but there was a conflict of interest for the industrialists in Catalonia, who wanted more autonomy but also wanted to insure control over their workers and their businesses. They feared a revolution, so their alliance with the anarchist workers was porous and easily stretched. Offered incentives and assurances of protection by Primo de Rivera, the Catalan bourgeoisie actually supported his ascension to power, but were quickly disappointed with his repressive moves and centralist beliefs. All sort of autonomy was removed; by the time the Second Republic had come to be, many in Catalonia decided their time was now and Lluís Companys and others formed the Esquerra party, which participated in the central government and was granted many autonomous rights, only to have those same rights stripped by the conservative bienio negro of ’33-’35. They too formed a part of the Left coalition in the Frente Popular, and Companys’ death became emblematic of the outcome for regional autonomy if Franco and the Nationalists were to be victorious…

Don't look back, something might be gaining on you

"Yo pensé que la Constitución había acabado con todo eso. No digo que haya que olvidar, sino que hay que mirar al futuro y que ha sido la Constitución de la concordia la que nos ha permitido avanzar juntos sin mirar al pasado y sin echarnos nada en cara", insistió.
---This reminds me of Sarah Palin's argument about global warming. Rather than focus or argue about the causes of global warming, we should focus on the solutions, look to the future and not dwell on the past...
Uh, how do you fix global warming if you don't look back and see what caused it?


Satchel Paige pitched at the age of 59 in the major leagues. How old was he when he threw his first pitch in the major leagues?

Zapatero: Olvidar 20-N

En su rueda de prensa con el primer ministro tunecino, Mohamed Ghannuchi, en La Moncloa, el presidente del Gobierno añadió que "lo mejor de todo es que hoy [aniversario de la muerte de Franco] la mayoría de los españoles ya no se acuerda de lo que representa el 20-N". "Fue el día en que murió el dictador Franco y eso es algo absolutamente marginal y testimonial".
What to remember, what to forget...this is getting confusing

Catholic Church

Cardenal Rouco, the archbishop of Madrid, declared yesterday that: "A veces es necesario saber olvidar." That was what I was referring to a few posts earlier when I said hypocrisy is funny, but I erased my original post. I wonder why the Catholic Church would like to forget the Civil War and the Dictatorship?

How do we know when we should forget and when we should remember?

Probably better to forget:
-Inquisition
-Crusades
-The Catholic Church supporting the Nationalists and Franco, christening their struggle as another Crusade
-Child Molestation charges
-Church cover-up of child molestations
-Our donations going to pay the legal bills and financial settlements from these child molestation cases
-Homosexual priests sleeping with each other and covering it up, using it as leverage to cover-up child molestation

A veces es necesario saber olvidar.

Sometimes I am really saddened to have been raised in the Catholic Church, which is so out of tune with reality, and to have been so involved in it (altar boy). There are certainly good things that the Church does, like charities, and there are good people that belong to the Church, but the hypocrisy and inability to live up to its teachings and reality and practicality and to treat people equally is shameful.

"La Ley de la Memoria Histórica no me parece necesaria", proclamó ayer el cardenal Antonio María Rouco, arzobispo de Madrid y presidente de la Conferencia Episcopal Española (CEE). Su tesis es que la generación que nació "cuando la Guerra Civil" [Rouco, en el año 1936] no debería "trasladar ese problema a otras generaciones".
---They've also obviously lost their ability to rationally argue too. I guess we should forget slavery than too. Don't want to pass on that legacy to the next generations...and WWII, that'd suck if we had to deal with the consequences of that war, and the Holocaust, forget, don't pass that shit on to your family members who were gassed and their bodies torched, and why keep on remembering the Armenian Holocaust either, because it doesn't affect the next generations of Armenians who had to flee their country and land or face death, how could have possibly affect them, just forget about it...

A veces es necesario saber olvidar
His argument is that reconciliation is needed, and the Ley de Memoria Historica only can cause violence, and violence isn't reconciliation, so it is wrong. So we need to reconcile by forgetting. Just like Jesus did...