REWRITING THE “GREAT MAN” THEORY: HISTORIOGRAPHIC CRITIQUE IN SPANISH AMERICAN LITERATURE ___________________________________________________________________ A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board ___________________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ___________________________________________________________________ by Thomas Joseph Stone May 2018 Examining Committee Members: Hortensia Morell, Dissertation Advisor, Department of Spanish and Portuguese Adam Joseph Shellhorse, Department of Spanish and Portuguese Víctor Pueyo Zoco, Chair of the Defense, Department of Spanish and Portuguese Daniel O’Hara, External Reader, Department of English ii ABSTRACT Rewriting the "Great Man" Theory: Historiographic Critique in Spanish American Literature Thomas Joseph Stone Doctor of Philosophy Temple University, 2018 Doctoral Advisory Committee Chair: Hortensia Morell This dissertation is a survey of postmodern historical fiction in 20th and 21st century Spanish American literature. It has diverse manifestations, but the defining characteristic of this kind of historical fiction is a rejection of any rigid distinction between historical and fictional discourse. This is a descriptive rather than a normative study: it examines how eight different authors use the techniques of postmodern historical fiction to develop implicit critiques of the “great man” theory of history. The Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle popularized this theory in the 1800s, and it asserts that biography is the proper model for history, namely, the biography of prominent individuals – “great men.” It treats these people as the source of history. Opposing this historiographic ideology, many authors of postmodern historical fiction see such figures as subjects that can be “written” and “re-written”; they are not the source of history, but the product of historical discourse. I conduct close readings of nine primary texts to elucidate how they challenge the “great man” historiography of four significant figures from Spanish American history: Montezuma, Simón Bolívar, Christopher Columbus, and Ernesto “Che” Guevara. I conclude that the historiographic critiques in these texts converge around three common strategies in their critiques: an extension of character from the iii domain of fiction to the domain of history, the subversion of the literary genres of biography and autobiography, and a commitment to rewriting the traditional narratives of specific historical events. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I could not have completed this dissertation without the assistance and support of many people. Although I am very grateful to them all, I cannot, unfortunately, thank each person individually in the scope of this section. Eight people have been especially important throughout this process. Above all, I want to thank my advisor, Dr. Hortensia Morell. The classes I have taken with her, her extensive knowledge of the field, her expertise in writing and editing, and her overall guidance in the dissertation process have been invaluable. I am also grateful for the help of the departmental members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Víctor Pueyo Zoco and Dr. Adam Joseph Shellhorse. They were very gracious in agreeing to serve on the committee, and I have benefited greatly from my interactions with them. I also want to thank the external reader of this dissertation, Dr. Daniel O’Hara. He was extremely kind to agree to serve on the committee of a graduate student he did not know. Along with the professional help I received from Dr. Morell, Dr. Pueyo Zoco, Dr. Shellhorse, and Dr. O’Hara, the personal support I received from my family was immense. My parents, Tom and Sue, gave me endless encouragement throughout a challenging process, and helped me in countless ways. Their involvement was essential to this endeavor. Last but not least, I want to thank my brothers, Matt and Eric. Their moral support, advice, and humor helped to sustain me while I was writing the dissertation. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………………………..iv INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………..vi CHAPTERS 1. CARLYLEAN HISTORIOGRAPHY AND THE PRE-COLOMBIAN WORLD: MONTEZUMA IN CONCIERTO BARROCO AND LLANTO: NOVELAS IMPOSIBLES……………………………………………………………...…..1 2. BOLÍVAR, MYTH, AND HISTORY IN “EL ÚLTIMO ROSTRO,” EL GENERAL EN SU LABERINTO, AND LA CENIZA DEL LIBERTADOR…………31 3. CONTESTING COLUMBUS: HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE COLUMBIAN NARRATIVES OF AUGUSTO ROA BASTOS AND ALEJO CARPENTIER………..60 4. REWRITING THE REVOLUTIONARY: ABEL POSSE’S AND PACO IGNACIO TAIBO II’S NEW APPROACHES TO UNDERSTANDING CHE GUEVARA………………………………………………………………………………92 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………126 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………131 vi INTRODUCTION In this study, I propose to investigate nine examples of what critics such as Seymour Menton have called “the new historical novel” and what theorists like Linda Hutcheon have called “historiographic metafiction.” Although both terms refer to different literary models, they have important characteristics in common. For this reason, I treat them as subcategories of the same phenomenon: postmodern historical fiction. The nine texts I examine, all by Spanish American authors, correspond to four figures that have a significant place in the history of the Americas: Montezuma, Simón Bolívar, Christopher Columbus, and Ernesto “Che” Guevara. The fundamental argument of my dissertation is that many postmodern historical novels function as implicit critiques of the “great man” theory, a historiographic vision popularized by the Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle in the 19th century. I do not analyze this theory as the exclusive property of Carlyle, but as a general tendency that finds its most explicit and complete defense in his writings. Structurally, the dissertation consists of an Introduction, four chapters and a Conclusion. In the Introduction, I describe the main argument, the theoretical framework of the study, and the content of the following chapters. In the first chapter, I compare two novels that deal with the Aztec emperor Montezuma, Concierto barroco (1974) by Alejo Carpentier and Llanto: novelas imposibles (1992) by Carmen Boullosa. In the second, I analyze three texts that deal with Simón Bolívar, namely “El último rostro” (1978) by Álvaro Mutis, El general en su laberinto (1989) by Gabriel García Márquez, and La ceniza del libertador (1987) by Fernando Cruz Kronfly. In the third, I study two novels that feature Christopher Columbus as a protagonist: Vigilia del almirante (1992) by vii Augusto Roa Bastos and El arpa y la sombra (1978) by Carpentier. The fourth deals with two works about Ernesto “Che” Guevara, Los cuadernos de Praga (1998) by Abel Posse and Ernesto Guevara, también conocido como el Che (1996) by Paco Ignacio Taibo II. The dissertation finishes with a Conclusion that summarizes the study, identifies and responds to possible critiques, and describes the implications of the investigation for future scholarship. Before addressing the primary texts, I will describe the theoretical background. I begin with a key term of this study: postmodern historical fiction. As one might expect, there are several defining features that distinguish the postmodern variety of historical fiction from its traditional precursors. Seymour Menton begins his analysis in Latin America’s New Historical Novel with the following paradox: “In the broadest sense, every novel is historical since, in varying degrees, it portrays or captures the social environment of its characters, even the most introspective ones” (15). For Menton, the new historical novel - as a unique and independent phenomenon - is defined by a list of six characteristics: a preoccupation with philosophical matters, a distorted version of history, the use of real (not fictitious) historical figures as characters, metafiction, intertextuality, and certain concepts associated with the Russian literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin. (22-24) Expanding on this definition, Menton states that new historical novels are characterized by their diversity: “in addition to these six characteristics, the New Historical Novel differs markedly from the traditional romantic historical novel in its far greater variety of modalities” (25). While Menton is referring specifically to the romantic historical novel in this passage, he still highlights an important point: postmodern viii historical fiction tends towards a plurality of discourses. It does not limit itself to traditional models. As a literary form, the historical novel comes from a long, old tradition. However, the new historical novel is fundamentally a product of the twentieth century. According to Menton, one of the first examples appears in 1949: El reino de este mundo, by Alejo Carpentier. (2) The new historical novel was not very relevant in the 1950s or 1960s, and the majority of its well-known texts appeared in the 1970s and 1980s. In fact, the flourishing of this literary tendency during that historical period corresponds with the epoch that many critics call “postmodernity.” As we will see below, this chronological correspondence is essential for a clear understanding of the literary phenomenon: it implies a shared worldview and critical strategy. Another interesting aspect of Menton’s model is the relationship between the new historical novel and the so-called “Boom” in Latin America. Indeed, it is difficult to talk about one