To the Victor, the Potatoes!: Literary Form and Social Process in the Beginnings of the Brazilian Novel

180 Pages·2019·0.698 MB·English

by  Roberto Schwarz

TotheVictor,thePotatoes!
Historical Materialism
Book Series
EditorialBoard
SébastienBudgen(Paris)
DavidBroder(Rome)
SteveEdwards(London)
JuanGrigera(London)
MarcelvanderLinden(Amsterdam)
PeterThomas(London)
volume 206
Thetitlespublishedinthisseriesarelistedatbrill.com/hm
To the Victor, the Potatoes!
LiteraryFormandSocialProcessintheBeginnings
of theBrazilianNovel
By
RobertoSchwarz
Editedandtranslated,withanintroduction,by
RonaldW.Sousa
LEIDEN | BOSTON
Thisbookwasfirstpublishedin1977asAovencedorasbatatas:Formaliteráriaeprocessosocialnosinićios
doromancebrasileirobyDuasCidades/Editora34,ISBN978-85-7326-169-2.
ThetranslationofthisvolumewasgenerouslysupportedbytheFundaca̧ ̃odeAmparoàPesquisadoEstado
deSãoPaulo(FAPESP),grant2018/02369-5.
Disclaimer:Theopinions,hypotheses,conclusionsandrecommendationsexpressedinthismaterialarethe
responsibilityoftheauthorsanddonotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsofFAPESP.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Names:Schwarz,Roberto,author.|Sousa,RonaldW.,1943-editor,translator,writer
ofintroduction.
Title:Tothevictor,thepotatoes!/byRobertoSchwarz;editedandtranslated,with
anintroduction,byRonaldW.Sousa.
Othertitles:Aovencedorasbatatas.English
Description:Leiden;Boston:Brill,[2020]|Series:Historicalmaterialismbook
series,1570-1522;volume206|Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
Identifiers:LCCN2019039755(print)|LCCN2019039756(ebook)|
ISBN9789004417700(hardback;acid-freepaper)|ISBN9789004417717
(e-book)
Subjects:LCSH:MachadodeAssis,1839-1908–Criticismandinterpretation.
Classification:LCC PQ9697.M18Z825132020(print)|LCC PQ9697.M18(ebook)|
DDC869.3/3–dc23
LCrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2019039755
LCebookrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2019039756
TypefacefortheLatin,Greek,andCyrillicscripts:“Brill”.Seeanddownload:brill.com/brill‑typeface.
ISSN1570-1522
ISBN978-90-04-41770-0(hardback)
ISBN978-90-04-41771-7(e-book)
Copyright2020byKoninklijkeBrillNV,Leiden,TheNetherlands.
KoninklijkeBrillNVincorporatestheimprintsBrill,BrillHes&DeGraaf,BrillNijhoff,BrillRodopi,
BrillSense,HoteiPublishing,mentisVerlag,VerlagFerdinandSchöninghandWilhelmFinkVerlag.
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,translated,storedinaretrievalsystem,
ortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recordingorotherwise,
withoutpriorwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher.
AuthorizationtophotocopyitemsforinternalorpersonaluseisgrantedbyKoninklijkeBrillNVprovided
thattheappropriatefeesarepaiddirectlytoTheCopyrightClearanceCenter,222RosewoodDrive,
Suite910,Danvers,MA01923,USA.Feesaresubjecttochange.
Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaperandproducedinasustainablemanner.
Contents
ReadingtheTruthofFalseness:AnIntroduction vii
RonaldW.Sousa
Acknowledgements xxi
ABBCInterviewwithRobertoSchwarz,ontheSubjectofMachadode
Assis xxii
1 MisplacedIdeas 1
2 TheImportationoftheNovelandItsContradictionsinAlencar 16
3 PaternalismandItsRationalisationinMachadodeAssis’Early
Novels 48
1 GeneralConsiderations 48
2 AMãoeaLuva 56
3 Helena 70
4 IaiáGarcia 93
Bibliography 149
Index 153

Reading theTruth of Falseness: An Introduction
…study[theideas]intheirfunctioning,ofwhichfalsenessisatruepart.
∵
These few initial pages come to introduce the reader to an English version
of Brazilian cultural critic Roberto Schwarz’s groundbreaking 1977 book Ao
vencedor as batatas (‘To the Victor, the Potatoes’ in my translation), a study
principally of the early novels of the prominent Brazilian novelist Machado
deAssis(1839–1908).Ihavealonghistorywiththelittlebook,whichthispro-
jectcontinues.IrecallquitewellthefirsttimeIheardofRobertoSchwarzand
Aovencedor. It was sometime in the 1970s when one day my friend and col-
league Russell Hamilton handed me a copy he had recently received from a
colleagueinBrazil,sayinghethoughtitwassomethingI’dbeparticularlyinter-
estedinreading.Russellwasright–asusual.InitiallyIplannedtodoaquick
page-through to get an idea of the contents and then set it aside for further
explorationatamorepropitioustime.ButIfounditverydense–toodense
tobetreatedthatway–andIalsofounditrhetoricallyunlikeBrazilianliter-
ary/culturalcriticismofthetimeandthereforeintriguing.Iendedupspending
severaldayswithitandwentbackshortlythereaftertore-readsections.Itsoon
became,throughexcerptsthatIgavetostudents,apartofsomeofmyclasses–
whenever,thatis,thispoorPortuguesescholarwasgiventheopportunityto
wanderwestward.
SowhatdidIseeinthatinitialencounter?Firstofall,a–tome–new,innov-
ativeandpowerfulexplanatorydiscourseinPortuguese,onethatworkedsome-
whatlikesomeGermanorFrenchcriticalapproachesofthetimebut,evenso,
notenoughlikethemtosaythattheauthorwassimplyusingterminologyand
processesdevelopedin,say,Germanliterarycriticism,toworkonaBrazilian
problematic.Infact,oneofthebook’sfirstanalyticalstepsinvolvedproclaim-
ing Brazilian cultural problematics to be radically sui generis and pointedly
settingouttocreateacriticaldiscourseappropriatetothetaskofdealingwith
it.Inanycase,thebookdidacoupleof thingsthatonlyafewBraziliancrit-
ics of Brazilian culture had done before, and, even so, those predecessors –
amongthemSchwarz’sownmentor,AntonioCandido–werenotasdense,did
notcreatesodetailedananalyticalterminologyanddidnotengageintextual
‘explication’tothedegreethatthisbookwishedto–thatexplicatorydimension
viii reading the truth of falseness: an introduction
being,Isupposed,areflexionof theswaythatAnglo-Americannewcriticism
thenheldinBrazil.Acuriousmixture.Stillinall,therewasmoretoitthanjust
thoseconsiderations.Infact,alotmore.
NowI’mnotgoingtoreviewhereinanysystematicwaythebook’scontent-
and-argumentbase.Thatisforyouthereadertodo.But,asyouarelikelyunfa-
miliarwithBrazilianhistoryandculture,youwill,Isuspect,benefitfromsome
introductoryorientationtailoredtowhatappearsintheensuingpages,anori-
entationthatwill,inordertofashionsomeoverallcoherence,leadmesome
smallwayintosectorsof Roberto’sargument.Beforegoingthatfar,though,a
scatteringofevenmorebasicconsiderations.
In Roberto’s words: ‘the purpose of this study is to follow the formation of
a thematic and formal complex that would be both observed and coherent’
(p. 78).The ‘thematic and formal complex’ he refers to is one he sees as the
foundation for the novels of the aforementioned Machado de Assis, which
he reads – very persuasively – as explorations of aspects of the superstruc-
turalproblematicthatadevelopingBrazilwasundergoinginMachado’stime,
explorationsrelevantforunderstandingsubsequentdevelopmentsaswell.(To
be clear, Roberto is careful to remind us on occasion that his specific focus
involvesadimensionhehaschosentoexploreforreasonsofimportanceand
notnecessarilysomehow‘the’waytoapproachtheproblematic–orthenov-
els.)Letusbeginwithaspectsofhisstatement.
Tobeginwith,thereadermustknowsomebasicinformation:thatJoaquim
MariaMachadodeAssisisstilltoday,outofallthegreatwritersBrazilhaspro-
duced over the past one-hundred-and-fifty-or-so years, well-nigh-universally
consideredthepredominantfigure–andwasevenmoresoconsideredatthe
time when Aovencedor was written.The so-called ‘warlock of CosmeVelho’
wroteshortstories,chronicles,poetry,literarycriticism,andnovels.Hisreputa-
tionderivesmorefromthatlastcategorythananyother–anditisthesolefocus
of Aovencedor. Criticism has generally divided Machado’s novel production
intotwodistinctphases,theearliercomprisingthefirstfournovelsasregards
publicationdateandthelaterinvolvingthefinalfiveoutof thetotalof nine.
Thefirstphasecomprises Resurreição(Englishtitle: Resurrection;dateof the
bookpublicationof thePortugueseoriginal:1872), Amãoealuva(TheHand
andtheGlove,1874),Helena(Helena,1876)andIaiáGarcia(IaiáGarcia,1878).
Theso-called‘second’,or‘mature’,phasecomprisesMemóriaspóstumasdeBrás
Cubas (The Posthumous Memoirs of Brás Cubas, also translated into English
asEpitaphof aSmallWinner,1881),QuincasBorba(PhilosopherorDog?1891),
DomCasmurro(DomCasmurro,1899),EsaúeJacó(EsauandJacob,1904)and
MemorialdeAires(CounselorAyres’Memorial,1908).(Bytheway,thetitleofthe
reading the truth of falseness: an introduction ix
bookyouarereading,Aovencedorasbatatas,isafamousphrasethatappearsin
thesecond-phasenovelQuincasBorba.)AstothecentralityofMachado’snov-
elstoPortuguese-languageliterarystudy,Irecallquitevividlybeingtoldearly
on–andinnouncertainterms–thattodowhatIwantedtodoprofessionally,
IhadtobethoroughlyfamiliarwiththenovelsofMachadodeAssis.
Robertoacceptstheearly-versus-matureevaluationandtheaccompanying
periodisationanddedicatesthistitletostudyof thefour‘firstphase’novels.
Whatismore,hemakesitclearherethatthisisthefirstpartofaset,thesecond
volumetobededicatedtocontinuingthesameprojectdirectedtoMachado’s
last five novels. That follow-up volume appeared in 1990 under the title Um
mestre na periferia do capitalismo: Machado de Assis [A Master on the Peri-
pheryofCapitalism:MachadodeAssis].Thatworktakesasomewhatdifferent
methodologicaltackfromthisvolume.(TooitappearedbrieflyontheBrazilian
best-sellerlist,aremarkableachievementforabookofliterarycriticism.)
Now another point: you will have noticed that I have usually been refer-
ringtothenovelistsimplyas‘Machado.’Putinasimplified–andillustrative–
way,itiscommonBrazilianpracticetorefertoculturallyrecognised/recognis-
ablefiguresbyasinglename,oratleastonereducedtoacoupleof words.I
shallforegoreviewofthemessyrulesabouttheavailablechoicesofshortened
formsingivencases,thecontextsinwhichthoseformsarelikelytobeused
or not, and so on. In referring to the subject of Roberto’s critical acumen as,
simply,‘Machado’Ithenmerelyechonear-universalpractice(which,incident-
ally, thereby bestows upon ‘Machado’ a matrilineal identifier).There is even
a consecrated adjectival form, ‘machadiano’ (or ‘machadeano’), that means
‘pertaining to or akin to Machado de Assis and/or his work’; I anglicise it to
‘Machadian’ and use it in translating. My usage replicates Roberto’s practice
in the Portuguese original of this book. By the same token I shall usually be
referringtohim–asIjusthave–simplyas‘Roberto.’Inthiscontextitwould
seemunnecessarilyrepetitivetosay‘RobertoSchwarz’everytimeandtosay
just ‘Schwarz’ would be either inappropriately formal or outright dismissive,
accordingtohowonereadsthetone.AsItranslateIshallbrieflyglossseveral
othernamesthatappearinshortenedformandaskthereadertobearinmind,
assheorhereads,theculturalpracticeinvolved.(OneofseveralthingsIshall
beaskingyoutobearinmindasyouread.)
Nowanotherdimensionthatmustbeunderstood:itistodealwiththefirst
fournovelstotheendsthathesetsforhimselfthatRobertofashionstheinnov-
ativecriticaldiscourseIrefertoabove,andhesetsitoutinrelativeabstraction
inthefirstchapter,whichisineffectaseparableessay-meditationoncritical
methodingeneralandinparticularasanintroductiontohisensuingchapters
(in truth, all of the book’s chapters are potentially separable pieces in their
x reading the truth of falseness: an introduction
ownright).Thatfirstchapterissubsequentlytreatedasjustsuchastand-alone
piecebyothercriticsaswellasbyRobertohimself.Henamesthatfirstchapter
‘Idéiasforadolugar,’conventionallytranslatedintoEnglishas‘misplacedideas’,
atranslationIfindparticularlyunsatisfactory(moreaboutthatissueshortly).
Thatchapterhasappearedpartiallyortotallysummarisedinvariouspublica-
tions–andhassubsequentlybeentranslatedintoto–andusedasthebasis
forcriticalprojectsofvarioussorts.Itisusedalsoasthetitleofabook-length
editionof selectedessaysbyRobertotranslatedintoEnglish.Ishallreturnto
considerationofthephraseinamoment.
Roberto further develops in a second chapter the concepts introduced in
thefirst.Inthatsecondchapterhedealswithoneof Machado’spredecessors
innovel-writinginBrazil,simultaneouslysettingforthbasichistoricalinforma-
tionandanalysisregardingBraziliancultureandculturalproblematics(andin
itslastpagesproducingwhatIconsideroneofthemostbrilliantexercisesinlit-
eraryreadinginthePortugueselanguage).Thatchaptertoohasbeenseparately
translated,thoughithasnotproducedwidely-usedcriticalconceptsparallelto
‘misplacedideas’.Inanycase,thetwoinitialchaptershavebecomego-tostate-
mentsaboutthedynamicsofdependentculturesaswellassourcesofcritical
terminologyandexemplarsofanalysisnotonlyforBrazilianculturebutaswell
forworkofasimilarsortaboutothercultures.
It is no great exaggeration to say that Roberto’s international prominence
owesmuchtothosetwochapters–logicallyenoughsincethey,especiallythe
first,lendthemselvestowiderapplicationthantoBrazilianculture/literature
alone and too because the rest of this book, superb though it is, presumes
someknowledgeofMachadodeAssis,hardlyahouseholdnameintheEnglish-
speakingworld,andhiswork.
Nowbacktothephrase‘misplacedideas’–bywayofintroducingthereader
tosomedimensionsoftheculturalproblematicinvolved.TheconsecratedEng-
lishtranslation,which,whileitconstitutesanicephrasetouchinggenerallyon
the right area, utterly misses much of what the Portuguese signals. In collo-
quialEnglishsomethingthathasbeen‘misplaced’isbeingregardedaslikely
notirretrievablylost;itwasprobablyleftintheglovecompartmentofthecar
orthepocketoftheshirtIworeyesterday.Itislikelytoturnuptomorrow,and
everythingwillbefine.Whatismore,thewholematterdoesn’tsoundurgent.
Ifitwere,‘misplace’wouldn’tbethewordofchoice.Bycontrast,whatRoberto
wishes to signal with ‘idéias fora do lugar’ – which I have always wanted to
translatewiththeadmittedlyawkwardphrases‘out-of-placeideas’or‘ideasout
of place’(to,Iconfess,nearuniversalrejectionbycolleagues)–issomething
very important indeed: in Roberto’s coining and critical use with respect to
Brazil,itgesturestowardasuigenerishybridBraziliancultureconstructedpre-