On Spain and literature – V

retrato de soledad anaya
My Mac broke down again (I didn’t fix it properly the previous time for lack of funds) but I’ll use a borrowed laptop because I’ve read a classic in Spanish literature and would like to say something about it.

Quoting Julio Rodríguez-Puértolas, on page 7 of The Culture of Critique Kevin MacDonald wrote:

A prime example is The Celestina (first edition dating from 1499) by Fernando de Rojas, who wrote “with all the anguish, pessimism, and nihilism of a converso who has lost the religion of his fathers but has been unable to integrate himself within the compass of Christian belief.” Rojas subjected the Castilian society of his time to “a corrosive analysis, destroying with a spirit that has been called ‘destructive’ all the traditional values and mental schemes of the new intolerant system. Beginning with literature and proceeding to religion, passing through all the ‘values’ of institutionalized caste-ism—honor, valor, love—everything is perversely pulverized.”

I confess that I found La Celestina quite boring, but I am not sure if it would be proper to catalogue this comedy—because it is a comedy—as “destructive” in the sense that MacDonald (who doesn’t seem to have actually read it) put it.

en la estacaHowever, it is true that Fernando de Rojas felt alienated in the late 15th century Spain. Some of his biographers even claim that, when Rojas was a bachelor studying in Salamanca, he received the tragic notice that his father, a Jew converted to Catholicism, had been condemned to die at the stake by the Inquisition.

As crypto-Jews usually did, Rojas married a converso woman; i.e., an ethnic Jewess, the daughter of Álvaro de Montealbán. De Montealbán also suffered a trial by the Inquisition and, although Rojas was a very successful lawyer by profession, he was not allowed to defend his father-in-law because Rojas was also of Jewish heritage, and therefore suspicious.

La Celestina was a huge bestseller of the time, even in translations outside Spain, but Rojas was always scared for having written it in his youth and, for forty years, remained silent about his authorship.

See my recent entry about the Spanish Catholic Kings Ferdinand and Isabella, who in 1492 promulgated a law to expel those Jews who didn’t want to convert to Christianity. The Jews who had lived in Spain for centuries had to go and the conversos who stayed became second-class citizens for the next centuries. The mission of the Inquisition was to keep under close scrutiny the conversos and see if they continued to practice their religious ways in secret.

Except for the first act, which was not authored by Rojas but by a non-Jew (either Juan de Mena or Rodrigo de Cota), as I said I found the comedy boring. Whatever the influence of this searing exposé of the Neo-Platonic idealization of women, an idealization so common in popular authors those times such as Petrarch, it probably didn’t go beyond the similar exposé by Cervantes of the chivalric novels of the age. To my taste mentioning La Celestina in the first pages of The Culture of Critique is a little off the mark, especially when taking into account that the most hilarious pages against women were authored by a gentile.

Rojas died in 1541, four years after Pope Paul III granted the bachelor soldiers in America permission to mix their blood with Amerind women. Now that I’ve just read the book I’d say that, although there’s a ring of truth in what MacDonald quoted, it should be obvious that the Spaniards’ lust for gold (see my previous entry about my teacher of literature), together with Catholicism, were the main cause of their racial suicide in the Americas. In those centuries conversos rarely got—as Rojas did—positions of cultural influence in this society that seriously tried to get rid of the subversive tribe. For those knowledgeable of the history of Spain and of Spanish literature, it would be laughable to hear that the book written by Rojas was a factor in the mestization of the New World.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://chechar.wordpress.com/2014/01/08/on-spain-and-literature-v/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

9 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. non-ethnic Jew

    Out of curiosity, by this do you mean a person who isn’t racially Jewish but who has converted to the religion of Judaism, or do you just mean someone who isn’t ethnically a Jew?

    • I realized that I used ambiguous syntax just after I posted the entry (now I corrected it as “non-Jew”). I meant that Juan de Mena and Rodrigo de Cota weren’t ethnically Jewish, according to the commentator of this heavily annotated edition I obtained recently (Bambú editions, 2010).

      • Ah, okay.

        That’s always an annoying grammatical pitfall, and one of the reasons I use Nazi rather than a National Socialist.

        If you say Ayn Rand was an anti-Nazi everyone knows what you mean. If you say she was an anti-National Socialist that might mean she was a International Communist, which is obviously incorrect. If you hyphenate all three worlds (anti-National-Socialist) then it looks bizarre and still isn’t quite clear.

        The most Germanically correct way would be Nationalsocialist, as a single word, but no English speaker seems inclined to do that and it would still be six syllables.

  2. Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.

  3. This entry is another indictment of Catholic man being the harbinger of his own dissolution sans Jewry.


    • Complete non sense, this argument of the spanish catholics racemixing in Mexico being proof catholicism is what caused our demise. Christianity has kept our stock genetically clean for 1500 years. The same holds for Islam, that is a driving force between the darker forces to take over entire continents and become brown.
      The Bible is what had the pioneers who took over all red North America to make it white. Mexico is just a very bad exemple out of context. In all southern american countries and even in Mexico yourself the elite has remained remarkebly white after 300 years.
      And even if they spread their genes, they made indians whiter….

      Back to the church bashing :
      It was on demand of the popes the crusades took place to kick back the Sarrazins and it was the orthodox church that heavily fought the the Ottomans invasions. It was not until after WW2, when everyone fell including the church for judeo marxist infestation.
      The christian church is what held Europe together, and it was the church who was the catalysator for our crafts, science and arts.
      If you deny this you just deny the obvious of the beauty of Europe and what caused it, what made the best come out of man.
      BTW even today the strict north Italian and Spanish catholics are among the mots racialist inhabitants of Europe. Not in the south of Spain, they have been mongrelized because of the jews who let the Moors in. Facts only facts, not the picking of one fact to create a theory.

      • Complete non sense, this argument of the Spanish Catholics race-mixing in Mexico being proof Catholicism is what caused our demise. Christianity has kept our stock genetically clean for 1500 years.

        Rubbish! By the time it was conquered by the Muslims Constantinople’s population was barely different physiognomically from the invaders—and precisely because since its very foundation Constantine ordered that a person of any ethnicity may become inhabitant of the city as long as he or she was a Christian: an obvious ethno-suicidal statute.

        The Bible is what had the pioneers who took over all red North America to make it white. Mexico is just a very bad example out of context.

        Nonsense! The Puritans moved with their families to this continent (on the south, the Iberians were bachelor soldiers). That was one of the causes. The other cause was that these early Puritan families were attacked viciously by the redskins for a long time, while the Aztecs and the Peruvians submitted after their empires were easily conquered by the Spanish soldiers. This had nothing to do with a “right” interpretation of your “Bible”.

        and even in Mexico yourself [sic] the elite has remained remarkably white after 300 years.

        False. The elites are not whites: they are castizos and harnizos, which means some Amerind blood (the current president is clearly a mestizo).

        And even if they spread their genes, they made Indians whiter….

        How ignorant you are! Have you been in Latin America? Have you seen the oceans of mud people I see every day on the streets? “Whiter” you say? Those browns I see everyday are not only interbreeds between Iberians and Amerinds: they’re a mixture between Iberians, Amerinds and the imported Negroes during the times of New Spain. You forgot to say that the common Mexican you see in e.g., Los Angeles is the mongrel product of the three races, not two. More millions of Negroes were imported to Mestizo America than to the north of Río Grande.

        Back to the church bashing…

        Have you even read the many anti-Christian entries in this blog debunking your POV?

        BTW even today the strict north Italian and Spanish Catholics are among the most racialist inhabitants of Europe.

        I doubt it. The last time I was in Madrid I was shocked to see an Amerind woman from Peru working in a state-run facility to import Asian babies for the degenerate white women who want kids but not childbirth pains.

    • Your arguments remain feeble chechar.
      If the roman globalist Constantine and the wretched conquistadores who were lacking women desperately is all you have to back up your case,
      facing 1500 years of racial homogenity on the European continent, our very womb, under catholic rule,
      whilst that very homogenity crumbled under the atheist french revolution and more so after the ruin of the CC after WW2 because of jewish cultural terrorism leading the goyim to rampant atheism and therefore multiculturalism..
      Look nobody is that stupid to state that the CC can be or was the saviour of the white race now, but to state the contrary is dishonest.
      The popes were the ones who launched the crusades against those evil Moors, the popes were the ones who banned slavery and urged to expel the jews. If it had been left to pagan rulers it would have been 100 times worse, every would have delt for personal favor with the highest bidder, jew or ottoman.
      Off course you ‘re right it is not THE jew, always the jew, in the same way it is not all bad black white regarding the CC.
      You just can’t get let go of your anti-catholicism as your basis of this blog, whilst you have so many qualities to go for, you are glued into this self made dogma, that is not backed up by any fact, except the most farfetched as such above.
      As is your personal Irvingian holocaust dilemma, able to dig up gems about Aztecs and cannibalism in rare old book, but unable to deal personally with Himmlers letters and orders and all other overwhelming evidence one can study, to hold on to the almost offical HH story eating out of the hands of completely isolated Irving..
      It is because of my aryan politeness but not for naivety I shy away from concluding that these two typical features of CC bashing and HH continuation make you a WN converso.
      It is a pity as you so much to go for on other subjects.
      So please Chechar refrain countering with another exemple from behind the bushes and state really in centuries and numbers, what racemixing and massive invasions really took place under strict catholic ruled regions from 500-1940 AC. No not in the jew ruled colonies of Brazil and the Carribean.

      • We obviously agree to disagree. Apparently you have not read the books on the white race by Pierce and others that prove beyond reasonable doubt that Christianity has been noxious for white interests. (And you didn’t even reply to my question above if you have read the main anti-Christian articles in this blog.)

        …your anti-catholicism as your basis of this blog

        The real basis for this blog is not “anti-Catholicism” but the One Ring of degeneracy that screwed the white mind. See Yockey’s quotation from his book about the enemy of Europe in my post on Mammon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: