During the nineteenth century and early twentieth century, the same
tendencies seen on the Galician stage had a more or less direct reflection overseas. The Americas were on the touring itinerary of reputed professional companies in the Spanish state, as well as being the home of emerging or relocating actors. The drama staged on each side of the Atlantic followed similar parameters in terms of both form and content, in tune with the demands of audiences in the diaspora: predominantly costumbrista productions that exuded traditional values in a rural setting, at times exalting the landscape and the authenticity of the people, at times ridiculing the peasants’ lack of worldly vision.21
Whether through nostalgia or humour, these theatrical manifestations highlighted elements that, from a distance, could be identified by the expatriates as defining the land they had left behind. Their added function was the ‘preservation of identity quotas’,22
acting as a binding agent of the migrant community.
The events in 1936 and the developments thereupon caused a substantial shift
21 For a historical overview of Galician drama in the period, see Laura Tato Fontaíña’s works Historia
do teatro galego (das orixes a 1936) (Vigo: A Nosa Terra, 1999) and Teatro Galego, 1915-1931 (Santiago de Compostela: Laiovento, 1997).
22
Inmaculada López Silva, ‘Ramón de Valenzuela e o teatro: exilio escénico en Bos Aires’ in O exilio galego. Actas do congreso internacional (Santiago de Compostela: Consello da Cultura, 2001), pp. 1373-1405 (p.1376).
69
in the American incarnation of the Galician stage, with the arrival of cultural and political activists in Buenos Aires. In this context, cultural initiatives and the affirmation of national identity often went hand in hand. The premiere of Alfonso D. Rodríguez Castelao’s Os vellos non deben de namorarse on August 14th
1941 in the Teatro Mayo illustrates the effects of this overlap on dramaturgical activity. Without dismissing its innovative character, it is the status of Castelao as ideological beacon of Galeguismo that determined the immediate canonisation of the piece.23 The play was very well received amongst the more politicised, intellectual sectors of the Galician community but did not gain the unanimous favour of the public, ‘acostumado a outros códigos e a unha visión dignificada dos tipos populares, directamente confrontada coa que ofrecían as primeiras manifestacións dramáticas en galego ou de ambientación galega’.24
As exemplified by Os vellos, the political function of dramatic representations had to coexist with the expectations of the main part of the migrant community, whose level of political commitment was not on a par with that of the post-1936 arrivals. López Silva points at the duality of emigration and exile in the Galician community in Buenos Aires is a determinant element in the historical evolution of theatrical manifestations in that context:
máis que ‘teatro da emigración’ ou ‘do exilio’ debemos entender que a producción dramática de Bos Aires entre 1938 (ano en que se crea a Compañía de Maruja Villanueva) e 1964 (ano en que Valenzuela monta a última das súas obras) é ‘teatro para emigrantes e exiliados’, precisión que non só explica moitas das súas características estéticas (o realismo ruralista de Varela Buxán, o ton popular, constantes referencias a Galicia, temática da emigración...) senón tamén a súa propia evolución histórica: esmorece cando a colectividade galega de Bos Aires comeza a nutrirse xa de fillos e netos de emigrantes e cando o ferver ideolóxico do exilio ía quedando atrás no tempo (esmagado polo triunfo do dereitismo en Galicia) e os protagonistas directos da guerra
23 In a farcical tone, the piece tells the stories of three old men and the misfortune derived from their
falling in love with younger women. Castelao drew his inspiration from European avant-garde theatrical modes and suggested a visual conception of the play that steered away from naturalistic representations. Despite these innovative aspects and the dramaturgical qualities of the play, its popularity amongst Galician performers is undoubtedly due to its author’s status.
24
Norma Rodríguez González, ‘Teatro e creación dramática na diáspora e no exilio’, in Cento vinte e cinco anos de teatro en galego, ed. by Manuel F. Vieites (Vigo: Galaxia, 2007), pp. 97-110 (p. 106).
70
comezaban a morrer ou a regresar á terra.25
The use of the ‘theatre in exile’ denomination as an umbrella term for plays published or staged in the Galician-Argentine context during this period reflects the adscription of the agents of theatre production predominantly to the exile group.26 This overarching employment of the ‘exile’ label is a compensatory reaction to the historical invisibility of Galician exile, due to the multiple factors explained in the previous section. By highlighting the role of the exile community, the political significance of Galician drama in Buenos Aires is also heightened. However, this metonymy contributes to the isolation of the diaspora as a collective from the theatrical activity, and limits understanding of its historical evolution. As López Silva explains, key characteristics of the repertoire can be linked directly to the requirements of the existing immigrant audience:
[...] a estética populista e realista predominante (incluso no drama de Castelao, malia á impronta impresionista e vangardista), e o accesible do teatro coma espectáculo, da man do asociacionismo, fronte ó difícil acceso ó libro impreso por parte do groso da comunidade galega, máis proletaria ca intelectual, son algúns dos factores que nos fan comprende-la importancia do teatro dentro do programa cultural, social e político dos exiliados.27
Rodríguez González refers to the demands of the diasporic audience and the shift introduced by the exiles: ‘O público emigrante, sen o compoñente ideolóxico nin a selección que logo traería o exilio, precisaba unha conexión coas manifestacións culturais populares que marcaban a identidade autóctona’.28
She identifies three main lines of work after 1936: one that offers continuation to
costumbrista theatre tendencies; a second line marked by the incorporation of some
25 López Silva, ‘Ramón de Valenzuela…’, p. 1376. My emphasis. 26
Rodríguez González justifies the use of the term ‘diaspora’ in the Galician case for the pre-1936 period (‘Primeira diáspora’) and ‘exilio’ when referring to activity after the Civil War. This is a conscious terminological decision, which she explains in terms of the impact of exiled authors: ‘[…] todo o posterior ao 36 o considerarei pertencente ao exilio como período, independentemente das motivacións de cada caso particular. […] xa que no teatro da diáspora a chegada dos autores e distintos persoeiros procedentes do exilio significou non só unha marca definida desde o punto de vista ideolóxico e político, senón tamén de natureza poética e puramente estética’. Rodríguez González, ‘Teatro e creación…’, pp. 98-99.
27
López Silva, ‘Ramón de Valenzuela…’, p. 1378.
71
innovative aspects while maintaining features of popular theatre; and a third approach that was openly committed to innovation and experimentation, in tune with other European theatres. Rodríguez González makes this distinction in terms of dramatic writing rather than theatrical activity. Therefore, while the differentiation of these three perspectives facilitates a panoramic view of the Galician stage in Buenos Aires, they cannot be regarded as opposed categories in the realm of stage practice, where cross-collaboration was pervasive. An example of this is Manuel Daniel Varela Buxán, who founded in 1938 the Compañía Gallega Aires da Terra, later renamed Compañía Gallega Maruja Villanueva, after the successful actress. A playwright and stage manager, linked to the first stable theatre companies and identified by Rodríguez González as the main representative of the costumbrista trend, Varela Buxán directed the company in the emblematic 1941 production of Os
vellos non deben de namorarse, by Castelao,29 an author who is, incidentally, listed as key representative of the second approach to theatre in the exile-diasporic context. Varela Buxán’s plays enjoyed considerable popularity with audiences who connected with his themes and aesthetic values: ‘[n]a reivindicación da terra, a protesta social e o recurso ás trampas do folletín’.30
Therefore, in terms of theatre practice, we could speak of two complementary approaches: a commercial, professional line, represented by Varela Buxán and actors such as Maruja Villanueva (1906-1998), Maruxa Boga (1916-2010) and Luís Fernando Iglesias ‘Tacholas’ (1909-1991),31
and the association-based projects, with a focus on cultural and political concerns, of which Ramón de Valenzuela and María Victoria Villaverde would be key representatives. Most of these Galician
29
Villaverde attended that performance, which made a deep impression on her: ‘En Bos Aires xa enferma de tuberculose, o primeiro permiso que me deu Sánchez Guisande, o meu médico, foi para saír de noite, para ver “Os vellos non deben de namorarse” de Castelao.’ A partir dese momento comezou o meu fervor polo teatro.’ Marga Romero and Henrique Albor, ‘Memoria viva: Mariví Villaverde. Entrevista’, Terra e Tempo 136 (2005), 5-10 (10).
30 Rodríguez González, ‘Teatro e creación…’, p.105.
31 During the 1940s, Maruxa Boga, Argentine actress of Galician ascend, and ‘Tacholas’ worked
extensively together and founded their own company, the Compañía de Comedias Gallegas Boga- Tacholas.
72
intellectuals with an involvement in theatrical activity did so under the umbrella of the Galician migrants associations. Eduardo Blanco Amor, already an active contributor to the Galician cultural life of Buenos Aires prior to 1936, established the Teatro Popular Gallego in 1957. The project failed but Blanco Amor collaborated with Ramón de Valenzuela’s Escola de Teatro Lucense. After his return to Spain, the author took active part in the debates on different aspects of Galician theatre, with special attention to the issue of corpus supplementation through translation.32 Rafael Dieste, whose original play A fiestra valdeira (1927) was reprinted in Buenos Aires in 1958, and Luis Seoane, whose publishing activity was discussed in the previous section, became key figures for the Galician stage in Buenos Aires. Seoane favoured historical drama as a means of dignifying Galician culture, as exemplified by his plays A soldadeira and El irlandés astrólogo. 33
The overall impact of theatrical activity in Galician language beyond the diasporic community was small, but there was a certain degree of cross-over of practitioners to the Spanish-language Argentinian system. Such is the case of actor Luís Fernando Iglesias ‘Tacholas’, who enjoyed great popularity in Argentine film and theatre productions, or Roberto Villanueva, director of the Escola de Teatro Lucense, who became a prolific stage director and script writer. However, stagings in Galician language received no media attention other than in the periodicals linked to Galician associations, as López Silva has ascertained through comprehensive archival research in Buenos Aires. She attributes this relative invisibility, to a certain extent, to a conscious positioning on the part of the Galician community: ‘[...] a prensa bonaerense non dá conta dunha serie de actividades que, conscientemente, situábanse á marxe da cultura arxentina, pois dalgún xeito eran xa centrais noutro
32 For a discussion on the debates on translation during the 1970s, see Chapter Three. 33
The use of both languages, favouring Spanish for publication, mirrors Seoane’s strategy as a publisher with Citania. Originally written in Galician in 1956, Seoane published a Spanish version of La soldadera the following year (Buenos Aires: Ariadna, 1956). El irlandés astrólogo was originally written and published in Spanish (Buenos Aires: Losange, 1959). Seoane’s trajectory has been documented extensively in Xesús Alonso Montero, As palabras do exilio. Biografía intelectual de Luís Seoane (A Coruña: La Voz de Galicia, 2002).
73
sistema cultural, o galego, espallado polo mundo’.34
However, initiatives such as Citania contradict this view, as they aimed to attract the attention of a broader audience.
Even when efforts were made to enrich the corpus in the Galician language through the incorporation of innovative themes and approaches, the realistic, the popular and the rural maintain a constant presence. In this context of displacement, where the defence of Galician national identity and its defining elements was a key function of dramatic manifestations, there was little room for translation. It is against this backdrop that we must consider the stage productions of translated texts, driven by Ramón de Valenzuela and María Victoria Villaverde. At first sight, their O
casamento do latoneiro (after J.M. Synge’s The Tinker’s Wedding) appears to be a
deviation from the predominant trends in the extraterritorial system. However, close analysis of this incorporation reveals a degree of embeddedness in the Galician diasporic context as well as links to past and future understandings of Irish drama on the Galician stage.