The Dramatic Use of Place in Lope de Vega's «Peribañez»

THE DRAMATIC USE OF PLACE IN LOPE DE VEGA'S«PERIBÁÑEZ» P. R. K. Halkhoree, University of Ottawa Lope de Vega's Peribáñez appears, at first sight, to be a simple play. But as a series of studies over the past few years has revealed, it is in fact a complex work, and though it is one of Lope's best-known and most widelystudied dramas, there still remain many aspects which merit further consideration by critics.(1) In this article, I propose to examine the way in which Lope handles place in Peribáñez, and the implications of such a treatment. By this, I refer not to the occasions on which different places are merely mentioned, but to what we, the audience, are meant to recognise imaginatively as actual changes of location. As the two hinged elements ofthe title indicate, Peribáñez y el comendador de Ocaña is structured around a fundamental binary opposition. The two opposed noun phrases, referring to protagonist and antagonist, find a thematic prolongation in a series offurther oppositions, such as virtue vs. corruption, country vs. town, Ocaña vs. Toledo, and Peribáñez's home vs. the Comendador 's. I shall concentrate initially on the last two pairs, which are the more concrete manifestations of the abstractions contained in the first two. As we know, although the neo-classical unity of action is maintained, the unity of time and, more particularly, the unity of place are consistently violated in Peribáñez, the action oscillating between Ocaña (country) and Toledo (town). This violation of the unity of place is not, I submit, idle, but rather deepens the meaning of the work. Let us review, first, the facts of the case. The major changes of location are as follows. In Act I, the first four cuadros unfold in Ocaña, the last one in Toledo, where Peribáñez and Casilda go to witness the festivities and whither they are furtively followed by the Comendador.(2) Of the seven cuadros which make up Act II, the first and last three are located in Ocaña; the central (fourth) one is situated in Toledo. In Act III, there are again seven cuadros, of which the first six are located in Ocaña (Peribáñez's departure from Ocaña at the head of his men and his secret return are reported, not enacted), while the final cuadro (echoing the scheme of the first act) moves to Toledo. To these major shifts of location must be added a series of more frequent minor, though equally important, ones within Ocaña itself. These, which I shall not enumerate in detail here, consist basically of alternations between the Comendador's residence (where Peribáñez's downfall is plotted) and areas where Peribáñez feels secure, in particular his house, but also his fields, the street outside his friend, Anton's, house, the town-council building, etc. These minor shifts of location are, by 13 and large, constant and predictable throughout, and must be borne in mind in the ensuing analysis. An important detail, evident to the spectator, but which may elude the reader, is the framing technique which Lope employs in this play. J. E. Varey has reminded us how the initial entrance of the Comendador, who is placed unconscious in a chair, is paralleled by his collapse into the same chair in Act III, when he is fatally wounded.(3) I shall elaborate on the implications of these visual «markers» later, but here I only wish to point out that this seemingly casual use of stage property subtly marks off and encloses what we can consider the main action proper. This is initiated and terminates in Peribáñez's house (which is thus the dramatic centre of the action), and is propelled along by Don Fadrique's dream-like acts of irresponsibility (if we use the term «dream» rather in the way E. M. Wilson did in his seminal article on La vida es sueño).(4) The main action, furthermore, is characterised by a deliberate parallelism in the use of place, which I shall now proceed to articulate in greater detail. The Comendador, leaving his...