I.5.3 DIGITAL ARCHIVE 731332
Pablo Rojas Paz (1896–1956)—an Argentinean writer and founding member of the Buenos Aires journal Proa in 1924—provides resolute opinions on what he views as the audacious claim that the capital of Spain could serve as Latin America’s cultural and intellectual point of departure. This idea was brought to the fore by Guillermo de Torre (1900–1971)—a Spanish literary critic and member of the Generation of ’27—in an editorial published in Madrid’s La Gaceta literaria [“Madrid, meridiano intelectual de Hispano-América” (April 15, 1927)]. It became a contentious and provocative issue taken up by most of Latin America’s avant-garde journals of the day. In addition to the work of Rojas Paz, the magazine Martín Fierro published the responses of some of the other leading Argentinean thinkers of the time, including Nicolás Olivari, Jorge Luis Borges—who was, coincidentally, de Torres’s brother-in-law—Santiago Ganduglia, Lisandro Zia, and Evar Méndez. This translation is from the original [Martín Fierro (Buenos Aires) year 4, no. 42 (June 10–July 10, 1927), 6, 356].
EVER SINCE THAT WANDERER CHRISTOPHER [COLUMBUS] put ashore on an island and discovered this uncertain continent, Europeans have entertained an endless succession of surprising ideas and absurd conjectures about the Americas. Even great European minds were susceptible to such impressions; Voltaire believed that Canada was nothing but a region of ice floes that France should not bother to conquer. But, to limit our focus somewhat, let us concentrate on what is now referred to as “Hispanic America.” Many have concocted long, terrible names for us—North America invented Pan-American; France came up with Latin American; Spain created the term Hispanic American. Each of these names, though thinly disguised as an overture to harmonious relations, is actually an expression of its creator’s frustrated imperialist designs. From time to time, these imperialists see fit to launch a show of force, which is swiftly followed by a formal protest. Pan Americanism allows North America to take advantage of a revolution and seize Nicaragua. Latin Americanism lets the French indulge in the illusion that France is our culture’s wet nurse. And Hispanic Americanism gives Spain a reason to announce that Madrid should be Hispanic America’s intellectual meridian.
South America is paying a high price for her original sin of being discovered, conquered, and colonized by Spain. Before going any further, I should state that I feel great love for Spain and have always been deeply interested in Spanish literature. But this love has its limits, which are based on truth. I do not care to see Spain invading foreign lands nor planting her flag on property that has already been claimed. As to Madrid being Hispanic America’s intellectual meridian, wouldn’t that mean that we would always be running behind? Wouldn’t the Earth have to spin a little more slowly to allow our clocks to catch up? Otherwise, night will fall sooner in Castile than on the Pampas. I would not want to be unfair in my assessment, though I have yet to reach the age of discretion. But the concept of attracting the youth of the Americas to Madrid so that it becomes the Mecca for Hispanic Americanism seems to me to be an idea whose time has passed (that is, a serondo [late bloomer] proposal, to use the word I learned from the Maestro [Miguel de] Toro y Gómez). America is in the Americas, and she has no reason to travel foreign roads in search of her own future. It is too late to nurture contrived utopias that, like greenhouse flowers, are doomed to wilt as soon as they are exposed to a cold climate. . . . But we have already progressed a great deal; so much so that we can’t say precisely what language we speak. Our goal should be to corrupt our Spanish to such a degree that a visiting Spaniard would be incapable of understanding anything we say. Should the French, Italians, and Spaniards have kept speaking Latin? Why then do they want us to keep speaking Spanish? This is exactly what is happening with the English language in North America. Why should we want to be yoked to an artificial tradition that is only maintained by politicians when they address the congress? We are developing a language of our very own, which will lead to our freedom. It is a sign of spiritual power when a nation of people can change their inherited language. Language is a form of wealth like any other, which must be changed so that it can be revitalized.
Why not… “Buenos Aires, the spiritual meridian of the Americas”…? We cannot indulge in such exclusive attitudes. Latin America is irredeemably broken up. It would be a miracle if a genius/savior appeared who was able to subdue minor egos and create a United States of South America. Europeans would be amazed at how little we actually care about. Older nations, on the whole, complicate their spiritual lives with artificial problems that seem more like jigsaw puzzles than ideological blueprints. Young nations—semi-barbarian ones, like ours—live a simpler life; they do not know how to philosophize, but they like to reign. They are not looking for meridians, and they know that what lies ahead is time delayed and not a future. Which is just what [the epic Argentinean poem] Martín Fierro was saying.
So, Madrid, the intellectual meridian of Hispanic America? That’s fine. But, what time will it be? The goal of that idea is to magnetize the youth of the Americas so that they will be attracted to Madrid rather than to Paris or Rome. But we should warn that the youth of the Americas are no longer in thrall to great European cities. We will let [José] Ortega y Gasset discuss culture in metaphorical terms alluding to the left wing on any soccer team. As a sporting reference it is very appropriate to the times. But our time has not yet arrived; we are awaiting it, standing like the peasant who waits for dawn to seize the day at first light.
. . . Until our own time arrives, we must resist all these pressures; we must train ourselves to harvest only the grain and leave the rest, as we have a right to do. We must not accept any tutorship from overseas that comes with strings attached which—playing on our desire to believe that we are wide awake and able to think—encourages our submission. Intellectual protectorates are far worse than economic ones because, in the cultural version, the oppressed are deeply grateful to the oppressor. I recently read an interesting article in which several French intellectuals, who had been lecturing in South America, asked the president of France to provide economic support to French schools in Buenos Aires, Lima, Montevideo, Santiago, and so on, on the grounds that these institutions were France’s front line in the struggle to impose cultural imperialism in South America. What a shame that Europeans don’t call us barbarians instead of semi-civilized peoples; because if they called us barbarians we would be entitled to dream of having our own culture! But we are doomed. And we are at the mercy of any European city that wants to tell us when to sleep and when it is time to read.