Metatheater and Magic in El magico prodigioso

METATHEATER AND MAGIC IN EL MAGICO PRODIGIOSO ROGER MOORE St. Thomas University The role of the Devil in El mágicoprodigioso has been analyzed from two quite distinct points of view according to which the Devil is either a projection of the interior workings of one or more of the characters, or else he is an autonomous character in his own right. A. A. Parker made the former point in 1957 when he wrote that «from the point of view of the action the Devil is an independent character, but from the point of view of the theme he is the external sign or symbol of something within Cipriano's own human nature.» 'Eight years later Parker renewed his commitment to the Devil as a projection of Cipriano's mind in these words: «The Devil as a dramatic character thus actualizes for the audience, in visible form, a potentiality within Cipriano himself.»2 According to Parker the Devil may play an independent role in the action of the play, but if he were removed the theme would still be complete and consistent for «all Cipriano's actions are perfectly explicable in terms of his intellect and will, and need no external supernatural influence to make them happen.»3 T. E. May* and B. W. Wardropper (at least in his early articles)5 scrupulously follow Parker's interpretation of the Devil's role, as does E. Keating who echoes him, writing that «en el tema el diablo es más o menos la proyección de los procesos que actúan en la mente, imaginación y sensibilidad de Cipriano; pero al mismo tiempo todas las acciones de Cipriano se explican perfectamente por su intelecto y su voluntad.»' C. V. Aubrun takes the argument of the interiorization of the Devil to its logical conclusion when he suggests that «le diable n'est pas un personnage comme les autres. C'est la créature de fiction d'une créature de fiction, c'est, sous une forme apparement humaine, la projection des hantises que l'auteur prête à ses personnages.» 7In a later footnote Aubrun goes even further for «le diable n'existe pas plus que le cadavre de Justina que Cipriano, devenu fou, croit étreindre.»' He also sug129 130Bulletin ofthe Comediantes gests that the Devil is not visible to everyone because «il n'existe pas pour eux puis qu'ils n'en sont pas obsédés, puis qu'ils n'en sont pas possédés.»' The opposite point of view, that of the Devil as an independent, autonomous character, is maintained by a second group of critics for whom the Devil's role is that of prime mover of the action. He misleads the protagonists and creates for them and around them a confusing series of illusory situations. E. W. Hesse sees the Devil as an autonomous character who«manipulates both actions: he causes confusion in the affairs of Cipriano, Justina and the galanes, Floro and Lelio. Truth has been deliberately hidden from Cipriano by the Devil.»i0This is also the opinion of A. Valbuena Briones for whom «la acción de la obra gira en torno a las manipulaciones del Demonio, el cual se introduce con diferentes máscaras.... Las habilidades y ciencias de este curioso personaje—estupendamente dramático—logran crear una atmósfera de tensión, en la que parecen vencer las apariencias y los simulacros por él creados.»" In this sense the autonomous role of the Devil can be considered metatheatrical in that, employing the basic means of the stage—impersonation and role play—," he changes El mágico prodigioso from a dramatic representation of the Summa of St. Thomas" into a metaplay which is «selfconsciously and self-referringly dramatic. »"T. A. O'Connor, in his article «Is the Spanish comedia a Metatheater?», has already suggested that El mágico prodigioso is the «most chrystalline case of metatheater...as the Devil tempts Cipriano to play a role.»'5 However, as I have demonstrated elsewhere/" it is not the role playing of Cipriano that determines the metatheatrical nature of El mágico prodigioso, but rather the Devil's constant rewriting of the rules and structure of...