Reviewed by:

• Calderón de la Barca by Fausta Antonucci
• Eric Nicholson

THIS OUTSTANDING MONOGRAPH by one of Italy’s leading scholars and translators of Golden Age drama deserves a truly global readership, and therefore merits translation into at least Spanish and English. Fausta Antonucci’s Calderón de la Barca is a recent and highly welcome addition to the distinguished series of studies dedicated to single authors—among them Boccaccio, Ariosto, and Tasso—published by Salerno Editrice and favoring an emphasis on matters of literary career and production. Thus, Antonucci skillfully satisfies a primary objective familiar to her Italian readership, but one that remains relatively rare in the international field of Calderón studies. In this and other respects, hers is an accessible, rigorous, and critically refined as well as up-to-date introduction to the life and especially the works of the playwright that coherently privileges the criteria of genre and innovation over those of themes and zeitgeist.

By organizing her book according to the major but also the minor genres and subgenres into which Calderón’s output can be grouped, Antonucci aptly emphasizes this supremely professional theater poet’s extraordinary versatility and convincingly demonstrates his readiness to experiment with dramatic forms. While admirably holistic and scrupulously detailed, the presentation is neither exhaustive nor exhausting to follow, as a critical through line does emerge: one becomes aware of Calderón’s capacity to adapt his work to the form and pressure of his seventeenth-century milieu and to satisfy the tastes of his diverse patrons at the Court and the corrales, at church and in the plazas; at the same time, however, he manages to interrogate the conventional values of Spanish political, social, and religious life, often posing challenges to his audiences (this affinity for provocation comes across even before his plays begin, in their often dialectical, paradoxical, and even riddling titles). For example, Antonucci affirms Calderón’s long-recognized status as a loyal servant of the absolutist monarchy and a faithful supporter of Counter-Reformation doctrine whose final three decades of work were primarily devoted to writing court entertainments and autos sacramentales, yet she also accentuates how several important plays invite royal spectators to contemplate dramatized abuses of power and to practice the virtues of wise, morally exemplary Christian princes. This pattern certainly applies to La vida es sueño, but it also pertains to other dramas concerning tyranny and [End Page 79] unjust government, like Los cabellos de Absalón and En la vida todo es verdad y todo mentira. Without any recourse to the fallacy of authorial intentionalism, Antonucci persuasively teases out Calderón’s slightly antiauthoritarian and even “anticonformist” tendencies (32). In this portrait, he is more than Lope de Vega’s successor as court playwright and Madrid’s leading writer of comedias, but also crucially akin to Cervantes. Like the author of Los trabajos de Persiles y Sigismunda and the entremés “El retablo de las maravillas,” Calderón did not shy from deriding oppressive bigotry and denouncing racist prejudices: as Antonucci states, concluding her astute close reading of Amar después de la muerte, the play’s tragic recognition also prompts audiences to recognize “an equality of sentiment between nobles of Christian and of Moorish blood” and serves “to create a contrast between those who believe that ethnic diversity causes unbridgeable gaps between two peoples, and those who instead believe—and the playwright himself seems to believe this—that what truly matters is nobility of sentiment” (169). Without a heavy-handed or presentist treatment, Antonucci thus identifies significant links between critical voices and tensions in Calderón’s scripts and troubling twentieth-and twenty-first-century sociopolitical and ideological phenomena, among them racism, xenophobia, femicide, sectarian violence, and authoritarian suppression of justice and human rights. This is a principal reason why his plays matter today, more than ever.

Acute sensitivity to diverse public backgrounds and viewpoints is indeed a key facet of Calderon’s successful career, and Antonucci appropriately begins her study with a part 1 entitled “The Playwright and His Patrons,” which first provides a concise overview...

审核人：

• 福斯塔·安托努奇（Fausta Antonucci）的卡尔德隆·德拉·巴尔卡
• 埃里克·尼科尔森

这部由意大利著名学者和黄金时代戏剧翻译家之一撰写的杰出专着值得真正的全球读者阅读，因此值得至少翻译成西班牙语和英语。Fausta Antonucci 的Calderon de la Barca是 Salerno Editrice 出版的致力于单一作者（其中包括 Boccaccio、Ariosto 和 Tasso）的杰出系列研究的最新和非常受欢迎的补充，并倾向于强调文学生涯和生产问题。因此，安托努奇巧妙地满足了她的意大利读者熟悉的主要目标，但在卡尔德隆研究的国际领域中仍然相对罕见。在这方面和其他方面，她的作品是一部通俗易懂、严谨、批判性地提炼以及最新的生活介绍，尤其是剧作家的作品，始终将流派和创新的标准置于主题和时代精神之上.

通过根据卡尔德隆的作品可以归类的主要体裁和次要体裁来组织她的书，安托努奇恰当地强调了这位极其专业的戏剧诗人非凡的多才多艺，并令人信服地证明了他准备尝试戏剧形式。虽然令人钦佩的整体性和一丝不苟的细节，但呈现既不详尽也不详尽，因为确实出现了一条关键的线索：人们意识到卡尔德隆有能力使他的作品适应他 17 世纪环境的形式和压力，并满足他在法院和畜栏的不同顾客的口味，在教堂和广场上；然而，与此同时，他设法质疑西班牙政治、社会和宗教生活的传统价值观，经常对他的观众提出挑战（这种挑衅的亲和力甚至在他的戏剧开始之前就已经出现了，在他们经常辩证的，自相矛盾，甚至令人费解的标题）。例如，安东努奇肯定了卡尔德隆长期以来被认为是专制君主政体的忠实仆人和反改革主义的忠实支持者，他最后三年的工作主要致力于撰写宫廷娱乐和汽车圣礼，但她也强调了几部重要的戏剧如何邀请皇家观众思考戏剧化的权力滥用，并实践明智、道德模范的基督教王子的美德。这种模式当然适用于La vida es sueño，但它也适用于其他关于暴政和[End Page 79]不公正政府的戏剧，例如Los cabellos de Absalón和En la vida todo es verdad y todo mentira. 安托努奇不求助于权威故意主义的谬误，有说服力地梳理出卡尔德隆略带反权威甚至“反墨守成规”的倾向（32）。在这幅肖像中，他不仅是洛佩·德·维加 (Lope de Vega) 的宫廷剧作家和马德里主要喜剧作家的继任者，而且与塞万提斯极为相似。就像Los trabajos de Persiles y Sigismunda和 entremés “El retablo de las maravillas”的作者一样，Calderón 并没有回避嘲笑压迫性偏见和谴责种族主义偏见：正如 Antonucci 所说，她精明地仔细阅读了Amar después de la muerte，该剧的悲惨认知也促使观众认识到“基督教贵族和摩尔血统贵族之间的情感平等”，并有助于“在那些认为种族多样性导致两个民族之间无法弥合的鸿沟的人与那些相反相信的人之间形成对比——而剧作家本人似乎相信这一点——真正重要的是情感的高贵”（169）。因此，安东努奇没有采取严厉或现实主义的处理方式，因此在卡尔德隆的剧本中发现了批评声音和紧张局势与令人不安的 20 世纪和 21 世纪社会政治和意识形态现象之间的重要联系，其中包括种族主义、仇外心理、杀戮女性、宗派暴力和专制主义。压制正义和人权。这是他的比赛在今天比以往任何时候都重要的主要原因。

对不同公众背景和观点的敏锐敏感性确实是卡尔德隆事业成功的一个关键方面，安托努奇恰当地从题为“剧作家和他的赞助人”的第 1 部分开始她的研究，该部分首先提供了一个简明的概述......