SPAN 4163:

PRUEBAS & EXÁMENES
DIAPOSITIVAS & PELÍCULAS
JUICIOS
 

PRUEBAS & EXÁMENES:
A. Robert Lauer
Primera prueba de español 4163
Nombre del estudiante:____________________________.

Extra crédito (identifique sólo UNA de las fotos siguientes):
 

Redacciones (escoja sólo TRES de las 4 opciones) [use oraciones completas en español]:

A. ¿Cuáles son algunas de las causas del atraso de España en el siglo XVIII, según Feijoo? 

B. ¿Qué es lo que critica José Cadalso en sus Cartas marruecas por medio de «Nuño»? 

C. ¿Qué (o a quiénes) critica Moratín en La comedia nueva o el café? D. Discuta una de las fábulas de Félix María de Samaniego y demuestre su valor didáctico.

Identificaciones (escoja sólo TRES de las cuatro opciones):

1. La Guerra de Sucesión 

2. Carlos III de Borbón 

3. El Barón de Montesquieu 

4. Melchor de Jovellanos

(Dé vuelta a la página para continuar)

A. Robert Lauer
Primera prueba de español 4163
Nombre del estudiante:_____________________________________.

I.  Identificaciones (escoja TRES de las cuatro opciones): 

a. Doña Inés de Ulloa. 

b. Doña Ana de Pantoja. 

c. Heinrich Heine. 

d. Don Giovanni.

II. Redacciones (escoja DOS de las tres opciones): 

A.  Por qué es Don Juan Tenorio una obra romántica y no neoclásica? 

B. Describa a Manrique («El rayo de luna» de Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer). 

C. ¿Cómo son las Rimas de Bécquer diferentes de la poesía romántica anterior?

III.Identificación de imágenes (identifique dos de las tres para recibir crédito):
 
 
 

 

DIAPOSITIVAS & PELÍCULAS:
 
Diapositivas sobre arte realista, expresionista y fascista (siglos XIX y XX):
I.  Pintura:
    A.  Realismo:
          1.  Christian Krohg (noruego, 1852-1925):
                a.  Syk pike [sick girl] {1880-81}.  Nasjonalgallerie, Oslo, Noruega
                b.  Mor ved sitt barns seng (1884). Nasjonalgallerie, Oslo, Noruega.
     B.  Expresionismo:
          1.  Edvard Munch (noruego, 1863-1944):
               a.  Det syke barn [the sick child] (1885-86).  BONO (Museo de 
                    Edvard Munch), Oslo, Noruega.
               b.  Dagen derpa (1894-95).  BONO, Oslo, Noruega.
               c.  Livets dans (1899-1900).  BONO, Oslo, Noruega.
               d.  Pikene pa bryggen (ca. 1901).  BONO, Oslo, Noruega.
               e.  Skrik [El grito] {1893}.  BONO, Oslo, Noruega.
           2.  Vincent van Gogh (post-impresionista neerlandés, 1853-1890):
               a.  Selvportrett [Autoretrato].  Nasjonalgallerie, Oslo, Noruega.
     C.  Cubismo: 
            1.  Pablo Ruiz y Picasso (español, 1881-1973):
               a.  Guernica (1937).  Salón del Buen Retiro, Museo del Prado, 
                    Madrid, España.
II. Arquitectura & escultura:
     A. Fascismo:
          1.  Belem, Portugal:
               a.  Padrão [Memorial] dos Descobrementos [Descubrimientos]:
                    1).  Enrique el Navegante & Philippa of Lancaster.
               b. Puente Salazar (ahora Puente 25 de Dezembro).
          2.  Valle de los Caídos, España:
               a.  Entrada.
               b.  Cruz.
               c.  Escudo de los Reyes Católicos y falange.
               d.  Evangelistas.
               e.  Tumbas:
                    1) Francisco Franco
                    2) José Antonio (fundador de Falange Española)
               f.  Capilla.
               g.  Cruz al atardecer.
Películas:

«Goya».  Museo del Prado.
Don Juan en Alcalá
Don Giovanni.
Amadeus.
Doña Perfecta.  Dir. Alejandro Galindo (Méjico, 1950).
La Regenta.  España.
Fortunata y Jacinta.  España.
¡Ay Carmela!  (de Saura).
Goya en Burdeos (de Saura).
The House of Bernarda Alba.  UK.

Música:
Padre Antonio Soler.  «Fandango».
Domenico Scarlatti.  Sonatas para clavicordio.
Joseph Haydn. Seven Last Words from the Cross
Manuel de FallaEl amor brujo.
Isaac AlbénizSuite Iberia.
Enrique GranadosGoyescasDanzas españolas.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

JUICIOS:
JUICIO SOBRE DON JUAN TENORIO:
 

Dear Students,

On the day of the trial (Friday, 8 February), please sit in the following manner (below) and follow the protocol that ensues:

I.  Defenders of Don Juan:              JUDGE        II.  Proesecutors of Don Juan:
A: Doña Inés de Ulloa
A.  Don Gonzalo de Ulloa & Don Diego Tenorio
B. Brígida & Ciutti (his partners in crime); 
B.  Don Luis Mejía & Doña Ana de Pantoja, Don Rafael de Avellaneda, el Capitán Centellas, Gaston
C. El dramaturgo (Zorrilla) himself, brought back from Wherever to defend his dramatic character; also, el escultor, Christófano Buttarelli, Miguel
C.  Don Juan Tenorio himself (in Limbo at the time of the trial, but ready to pack his bags and go elsewhere [Paraíso, Purgatorio, Infierno] at the end of the trial)

This is an ecclesiastical trial.  The accused (Don Juan Tenorio) is dead already.  Don Juan's soul is now in Limbo (a half-way place at the entrance of Hell, but not in Hell, for those in a difficult case [the unbaptized, pagans before the First Coming of Christ, etc.]).  By civil law everybody knows where his soul belongs; but by the Grace of God he might be relocated, as it were.  Devils and angels are fighting for his soul.  The devils don't want to be cheated out of their most eminent soul; the angels are appealing to the accused's last act of contrition.  It's a mess.  The author himself, Zorrilla, probably wrote some sort of religious allegory; so if Don Juan goes down the moral lesson of divine clemency sort of goes out the window.  On the other hand, can someone that deserving of Hades be spared because of a little act of contrition at the very last second?  It doesn't sound fair, does it?  We are not too sure of Doña Inés's  moral character either (where is she at the end of the play anyway?).  And what could Don Juan possibly say in his defense?  "The Devil made me do it?" or  "It's all my father's fault."  Really!  But then, where in Heck's name is the good Comendador himself, Don Gonzalo?  And, since Don Diego Tenorio is dead too, where would he have gone?  Sure, he gives up all his money to build a cemetery to bury all of his son's victims, but, for tooth's sake, that's the least he can do.  Should he be as innocent as Jeffrey Dahmer's father? Does not the Good Book say that the sins of the parents will be visited on their sons?  What exactly did he do for his son, besides abandoning him in the end, like everybody else?  And then you have accusers like Don Luis & Doña Ana, people morally tainted and the first almost as bad as DJ himself.  And are Brígida and Ciutti deserving of our attention, having being auxiliaries to Don Juan's evil deeds (which would include corruption of the innocent)?  Messy.  Anyway, since there are religious matters involved (profanation of sacred places or holy ground [convents, cemeteries], desecration of corpses, etc.), the trial has to be ecclesiastic.  But as the good Books says (St. Mark's Gospel, I believe), whatever is bound in this vale of tears is bound in Heaven, so there you have it.  Whom are you going to call in cases like these?  Father Bob will oblige.

Protocol:

  • Strategy planning (group discussion: 5 minutes).
  • Defenders and accusers will sit where designated (all defenders to the Inquisitor's right; all accusers to his left, in the order suggested).
  • No group should occupy a middle position.
  • Accusers (fiscales) must present all their charges [cargos] (moral, social, religious, etc.) first (5 minutes per group; 1 minute per person: 15 minutes total).
  • Defenders must answer the charges and make a defense (5 minutes per group; 1 minute per person: 15 minutes total).
  • When presenting charges, each person must stand up, address him/herself to the judge, and identify him/herself as the character in question using the following formula: «Yo, don Juan Tenorio . . . »; «Yo, Doña Inés de Ulloa, . . . », etc.  Accusers may also address themselves to the accused afterwards, or to any other individual in those groups.  If five persons are doing the same character, each of them must identify him/herself as already stated here.
  • The judge should be addressed using the following formula: «Su reverencia».
  • Feel free to dress up as you would normally (capes, gowns, swords, etc.).  The judge will do likewise.
  • Feel free to be as eloquent and persuasive in your accusations or defenses, using not only the appropriate verbal tactics, but also non-verbal tactics (pointed fingers, etc.) And tone of voice (angry, sad, shocked, commiserating, etc.).  Father Bob is easily moved by tears.
  • Do not lie.  The Inquisitor has already seen the written statement of Zorrilla.  Any departure from the truth, if it cannot be textually substantiated, would not please «Su reverencia».  Likewise, rumor or hearsay would not do.  In Roman Law, the accusers would be countercharged and punished accordingly.  The Holy Office likes confiscation of property. 
  • After the first round of accusations (15 minutes) and defenses (15 minutes), 5 minutes will be given to each side (of three groups each) to answer charges and countercharges (10 minutes).  This tends to be the most heated part of any trial.  Enjoy.
  • If time allows it, all groups will disband immediately after the trial and occupy their normal places.  They are now jury members.  They will vote: «Sentencia» (guilty on all grounds, down you go), «Clemencia» (innocent on all grounds, up you go), or «Purgación» (severe punishment for an indefinite period of time but with the eventual hope of redemption).  This should take 5 minutes.  The vote will be by secret ballot.  Execution of the sentence will follow immediately afterwards. Ideally this should take place coldly the next day and be based entirely on the presentation of the evidence and the defense made.
Obviously, it would be much easier to condemn than to defend.  Keep that in mind.  The prosecutors have lots of proof on their side (women deceived, men killed, religious sites profaned, etc.).  To accuse, however, the accusers must be morally clean (so that their word have weight). The defenders can only do two things: appeal to a higher power (the Law of God [Moral Law]), clemency, etc., applied here on the grounds of a change in character, etc.; sharing the guilt around, e.g., if Don Juan was evil, so was the society around him which willingly helped him [the acceptance of acts of subornation; moral corruption of the naïve and innocent, improper moral training, vengeance and hatred, etc.]).  Needless to say, the defenders would have to accept responsibility for aiding their master in the past.  To do so without incrimination, they should have made a convincing move towards the straight and narrow (they might have become persons of the cloth, whatever).

Purpose of the trial: since this is a postmortem trial (not unusual in the Middle Ages), the trial attempts to do one of three things: 1) exonerate Don Juan Tenorio's soul from guilt in the same way that, e.g., at the Nuremberg trials, common soldiers were exonerated on the grounds that they had limited choices in an Unrechtstadt (a legal albeit unjust state) [in other words, on moral grounds] {hence, only officials were tried and condemned}]); 2) Condemn Don Juan's soul (throw the book at him) on all grounds (forget clemency or Christian pity; go back to classical or non-Christian legal sources, which gave society the right to avenge offences [the Eichmanns of the world are beyond clemency or hope on account of the magnitude of their offenses; in Don Juan's case not only against humanity at large but even against God by his acts of profanation]); 3) Negotiate, e.g., reason things through coldly and analytically and charge Don Juan only on what he can be charged justly (e.g., Don Juan's killing of Don Luis and Don Gonzalo seem to be  are acts of self-defense, not murder, no?  Don Juan does not violate or force Doña Inés; even Doña Ana may not be the purest woman in town, for by allowing a man into her bedchamber [regardless of whether he is Don Juan or Don Luis], she is in effect putting at risk her father's honor, etc.).  At the end (the day after the trial), students, now jury members, will cast a ballot coldy, based on the evidence heard from group members.  Three ballots are possible: 1) Clemencia 2) Castigo 3) Purgación. The first choice would exonerate Don Juan on all grounds here on earth and his soul would be expected to reach Heaven, God willing .  The second choice would throw the book at him on positive law grounds (the only true legal grounds) and forget sentimentalism, clemency, and other exceptional and wishy-washy "moral" law grounds which simply serve to obfuscate true absolute justice.  If one breaks the law one ought to pay for it.  Where is the ambiguity?  Don Juan's soul is tarnished to the core and he ought to go straight down to Hades.  That would show an example to others that, as the good book says, "the wages of sin is death." Sure, Inés tries to save him, but we can't be sure that she is entirely pure or stable.  After all, didn't she betray her father by wishing to marry his murderer (where is filial charity?); didn't she betray her eternal Father by giving Him up for a sinner often compared to the Prince of Darkness himself? (Where is Christian love?).  Didn't she choose Don Juan and not the other way around?  If one has free choice (as Catholic doctrine teaches), she too is responsible for her moral choices, especially if she has spent her entire life in God's service.  She should have known better.  Frankly, I think she is just as guilty as Don Juan.  That or the poor girl is hysterical, a form of depression (after all, didn't she faint once?) and probably needs to have a lifetime of psychoanalysis with Dr. Freud.  The third choice would exonerate Don Juan, but only after a zillion years of purgation for sins in good old Purgatory.  After all, there is no such thing as a free lunch, is there?
Should there be a tie, Father Bob will break it (otherwise he will not vote [deep down he empathizes with Pontius Pilate]). It's hard to tell how he would break it, though.  On the one hand he is an ecclesiastic and the clemency bit might work on him, provided it's persuasively presented.  On the other hand, he likes to play with matches. 

Pax,

Fray Roberto del Santo Oficio

JUICIO SOBRE DOÑA PERFECTA:
 

Dear Students,

Your third composition for SPAN 4163 is due on Monday, 8 April (the day
of the trial). It will be like any other (at least three pages long, in 
Spanish, have personal information on the upper left corner, be 
double-spaced, have a bibliography, a title, etc.). However, it will be a 
formal letter written in first person narration taking the identity of one of 
the characters of Doña Perfecta and addressed to only one addressee, Coronel de caballería Pinzón. He should be addressed at all times by his civilian 
and military title: Estimado Sr. Coronel. In the letter you must identify 
yourself («Yo, Doña Perfecta, . . . ») and give a brief description of who 
you are. Afterwards give an opinion of the murder that has taken place in 
Orbajosa (Pepe Rey, apparently, died under ambiguous circumstances; some say it was a suicide, although two shots were heard) and give an opinion about 
who should be blamed for the murder (and hanged). Don't be wishy washy. Be 
assertive and choose only one of the many likely candidates (heck, even the 
murdered person himself, who is probably the most guilty anyway, no?). End 
the letter with a pleasant farewell to catch the good will of Cavalry Colonel 
Pinzón (a military man, one not given to much emotion; he does not like 
civilians too much ["too undisciplined"]). Also, sign the letter, 
mechanically and by hand. What you are submitting to Col. Pinzón is a legal 
tract. Follow protocol. 

Pinzón has been appointed by H.M. the King to pacify rebellious lands that seem to forget they belong to a realm and insist on doing things their 
way, including taking justice in their own hands, as seems to have happened 
recently. Pinzón has seen a lot of internal fighting throughout the years 
("too many civil conflicts"), precisely in small villages and towns that want 
to be decentralized and independent of the crown. Pinzón is a liberal. He 
wants, like the monarchy, to do away with this kind of feudalistic small-town 
mentality and have a strong central government that would be in a better 
position to serve the needs of its vassals. He is also a man of action with 
a task to do: to find the assassin and garrote him or her (unless he be an 
ecclesiastic, in which case he will be exiled to Rome [since there is no 
longer an Inquisition, thanks to the liberals]). Since Orbajosa has rebelled 
against the King's army (hence the villagers are all tainted with treason 
against the realm), Pinzón will establish a military tribunal. All he wants 
are the facts. Who did what to whom and who should pay for it. He will hear 
from all the principals and then a jury of his peers (also military 
personnel) will determine who should be penalized (by garrote, the standard 
form of capital punishment in Spain). Since one of the persons is dead, he 
will speak through a medium or intermediary (if he is to be found guilty, he 
will only be charged with opprobrium). Pinzón, of course, does not believe 
in this hocus pocus (he is, after all, a positivist), but if it works that's 
fine with him. All he wants is swift justice. Heck, as far as he is 
concerned, the entire village is guilty, but his instructions were, 
specifically, to find only one guilty person. King's orders ("heck, in the 
bad old days entires villages were razed to the ground on the grounds of 
treason; I tell you, there's too much burocracy nowadays; one of these days 
the military might well have to take over the realm, but not yet" [a private 
thought of Col. Pinzón, the product of private frustration with civilian 
misrule, no doubt]).

TRIAL (8 April): 
Each (of the six) group is to take one of the following personae: 

  • Doña Perfecta 
  • José (Pepe) Rey 
  • Don Inocencio 
  • Cristóbal Ramos («Caballuco») 
  • Rosarito 
  • Others: María Remedios, Jacinto, Pedro Lucas (el «Tío Licurgo»), don Cayetano, Juan Rey.
Each person must defend him/herself and put the blame on the right person 
(and of course, everybody knows who that would be). Needless to say, 
everybody knows (it seems) who pulled the trigger, but when a society is 
corrupt or has bonded so well with each other, that person may well be the 
least guilty ("he was just following orders"). Also, some people seem to do 
nothing and may well be the most conniving and guilty of individuals even 
though they would never throw the first stone (but will tell you where the 
target is and where you can get the stones). Some people may also betray 
others and claim insanity (poor Rosarito). Some people may well have to act 
in self-defense to protect their property and children. Some people think 
they are doing the right thing, fighting a just cause, and not realize they 
are the most guilty of all. Others do nothing at all and their silence 
allows crimes to happen (the Church recognizes this as a sin of omission). 
(In the long run everybody is probably guilty, but society likes to scapegoat 
individuals; otherwise, well, you might have to raze the entire village of 
Orbajosa to the ground, as Pinzón seems to have pondered at one time).
Have fun!
ARL
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

OU Home | Disclaimer | Copyright | Equal Opportunity | OU Web Policy