A Note on the Ending of Calderon's La vida es sueno

2 Alberto y Arturo García Carraffa, Diccionario heráldico y genealógico . . . , XVI — Vol. XVIII of the Enciclopedia — (Madrid, 1954), 121. 3 Leti's label for the Duke of Gandía as Prince of Squillace is not verified in Garcia Carraffa. But in Iulio de Atienza, Nobiliario español (Madrid, 1959), s.v. Borja, the title appears as one of those borne by the Borjas. 4 It is not our purpose here to attempt a history of the term. Juan Corominas' Diccionario crítico. . . , III (Madrid, 1954), 101-103, although it has a long discussion of Undo, includes nothing on the meaning as 'fop.' 5 Our effort to identify Sebastián on a previous occasion was unsuccessful; see the Hispanic Review, XXXIII (1965), 265, no. ^32. Later (Wade, "Tirso and the Court Circle," in Walter Poesse, Ed., Homage to John M. Hill. In Memoriam [Indiana Univ., 1968], pp. 254255 ) we thought we had identified Sebastián as Don Gonzalo Chacón because of this courtier 's involvement in an episode similar in certain elements to the Cigarrales' and Papell's story. That identification was in error. 6 The Marquis of Peñafiel, as seen, was married in December of 1617. This fixes Tirso 's composition of the Sebastián episode of the Cigarrales as subsequent to that date. ^€.«7^ A NOTE ON THE ENDING OF CALDERÓN'S LA VIDA ES SUENO P. Halkhoeee, Westfield College, University of London An interesting and, perhaps, puzzling aspect of La vida es sueño, viz., the fate of the rebel soldier, has recently been subjected to scrutiny in a number of stimulating articles.1 La vida es sueño is, however, a complex play, and it is this complexity which I shall use as an excuse for looking again at the ending from a sHghtly different angle. There are two preliminary points I would make. First, the soldier's fate, it seems to me, ought not to be considered in isolation from the other characters' fates. The latter, as I hope to show, constitute a pattern which is reinforced by the former, albeit in a negative way. Secondly, this pattern becomes more distinct if we see the play not so much in legal and political as in moral and religious terms. The trajectory of the action of the play may be seen as a progression from a situation of harmony disturbed to one of harmony restored.2 This progression exists on various levels; but the principal and crucial one, on which the others largely depend, is that which is concerned with the BasiHo-Segismundo relationship . The initial situation is a complex one. There is, first of all, Basilio's act of injustice towards his son. His motives are mixed: on the one hand, he acts out of hubris; on the other, his action is motivated by a very real concern for the welfare of his kingdom. His action, therefore, however wrong, is not wholly to be condemned. Not so acute, however, is the moral dilemma posed by the actions of the other characters who contribute to the initial disharmonious situation. Astolfo 's lack of responsibiHty towards Rosaura can have little excuse. His courtship of Estrella is motivated not by love, but primarily by ambition. Basilio, ignorant of Astolfo's prior commitment, favours the union por razón de estado, thereby unwittingly threatening to add to the disharmony. (Basilio's initial act of injustice toward Segismundo has, of course, been done por razón de estado. The play, as a whole, indirectly stresses the danger of allowing moraHty to be 8 subordinated to reasons of state. ) The third element in the situation is the Clotaldo-Violante relationship, which, in a sense, is the origin of the Rosaura-Astolfo problem. However, Clotaldo's attitude, although not perfect , has perhaps not been as irresponsible as Basilio's: by leaving his sword with Violante, he showed himself willing to be responsible for the consequences of his actions. He evinces an even stronger sense of responsibility in the course of the play.3 Turning now to the situation at the end of the play, we can agree that it is basically one in which harmony is restored...