Major Changes in "Minor" Theater: Luis Quiñones de Benavente's Dramatization of Dramatic Theory and its Effects on the Interlude in Early Modern Spain

MAJOR CHANGES IN “MINOR” THEATER: LUIS QUIÑONES DE BENAVENTE’S DRAMATIZATION OF DRAMATIC THEORY AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE INTERLUDE IN EARLY MODERN SPAIN by Anthony J. Grubbs Michigan State University THOUGH scholars have diligently researched the dynamic theatrical landscape of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Spain, most have concentrated on the more prevalent forms, namely the comedia and the auto sacramental, overlooking the shorter playlets that were performed before and after the primary work, as well as in between acts. With their comical topics and hilarious caricatures, these “minor” – and I use the term loosely – works (the introito, loa, entremés, baile, and jácara) played significant roles in the dramatic spectacle by settling and entertaining the often rowdy public. In fact, it was often the less-complicated style of the entremés, or interlude, that overshadowed the poor acting and bad scripts of many comedias, saving the afternoon’s spectacle.1 Both past and present critics recognize Luis Quiñones de Benavente as the quintessential entremesista of the Spanish Golden Age whose experimental and more-literary stylings changed many dramatic trends of the times. Manuel Antonio de Vargas, compiler of Jocoseria (1645), a collection of Benavente’s interludes, went so far to say that the dramatist’s entremeses gave support – literally crutches – to bad comedias and wings to good ones (3). His opinion was not unique, in Para todos exemplos morales, humanos y divinos (1645), Juan Pérez de Montalbán states: El licenciado Luis de Benavente no ha escrito comedias; pero ha hecho tantos bailes y entremeses para ellas, que podemos decir 1 segurísimamente que a él se le debe la protección y el logro de muchas y el aliño y adorno de todas; que en esta parte ha sido sólo por la gracia natural, ingenio florido, donaire brioso y agudeza continua con que le dotó el cielo. (121) More recently, Ludwig Pfandl praised Benavente in Historia de la literatura nacional española en la Edad de Oro: Él convirtió el entremés en sátira dramática y burlesca de la sociedad . . . Su fuerte está . . . en primer lugar, en la extensión, extraordinaria en comparación con Cervantes, que dio a los límites de los temas del entremés; en segundo término en la vis cómica, que le permit ía descubrir en los oficios, figuras y situaciones, aquello precisamente que despierta hilaridad, y finalmente, en un extraordinario talento de escritor . . . con clara, sencilla y popular dicción, sin vulgaridad ni extravagancias, conducir un diálogo original, apenas igualado en su viva fluidez . . . (493-94) Furthermore, Ángel Valbuena Prat, in Historia de la literatura española, states that “Quiñones suele componer improvisadamente piezas de una mezcla caprichosa de personajes y situaciones hilarantes, pero a veces su secreto instinto le lleva a un orden fantástico, a una verdadera síntesis poética . . .” (333). Benavente’s interludes represented the climax of the form’s popularity and inventiveness in early modern Spain, a feat that earned him the moniker of the “Lope de Vega del género chico” from Hannah Bergman (Luis Quiñones de Benavente y sus entremeses 9). By recognizing the mutual relationship between the playwright and the public – one molds the other – we, the modern-day critics, tend to approach literature from a different perspective than our predecessors, concentrating as much on the performance and reception of the work as on the dramatic text. This shift in authority illustrates the interrelation between spectacle, message, reception, and theory, that is, the whole dramatic event. This is not to say that such approaches ignore the text, quite the contrary, but rather they raise performance and reception up to an equal plane since, ultimately, theater is meant to be performed for an audience. Moreover, performance is a point of contact between the text and the public as it encodes the message embedded in the script, making it accessible to the audience. This essay discusses how Benavente understood – and reacted to – the dynamic nature of theater as a result of the changing needs of the public and, while paying close attention to performance and public reception, explores the way in which five...