Twitter: @Ajulianperez1

ttu.academia.edu/AlbertoJulianPerez



sábado, 30 de noviembre de 2019

Juan Luis Martínez: cómo salir de la literatura



                                                                Alberto Julián Pérez ©


          El escritor chileno Juan Luis Martínez (Valparaíso 1942-Villa Alemana 1993) publicó su primer libro, LA NUEVA NOVELA, en 1977. Lo había compuesto entre 1968 y 1975 (Kirkpatrick 225-34). A este le siguió un segundo libro-objeto, que apareció al año siguiente, LA POESIA CHILENA. Fueron estos los dos únicos libros que publicó en vida.
            La década del sesenta fue una época de activa militancia política en el Cono Sur. Los conflictos sociales se intensificaron. Los sectores populares se enfrentaron a las oligarquías. Chile, país de larga tradición democrática, eligió en 1970 en las urnas a un presidente Socialista, Salvador Allende. Muchos intelectuales y artistas lo apoyaron. Los escritores jóvenes buscaron un lenguaje artístico innovador, que expresara el espíritu del cambio y un nuevo comienzo. En 1973 el cruento golpe militar del General Pinochet terminó abruptamente el proceso político democrático e inició una oscura época de tiranía y represión en Chile (Rioseco, Maquinarias deconstructivas 55-70). 
            Martínez, que residía en la ciudad puerto de Valparaíso, formó parte, durante esos años, de un movimiento de poetas jóvenes, en el que participaron también Raúl Zurita, Cecilia Vicuña y Diego Maquieira. Se identificaban con los ideales de las Vanguardias históricas de la década del veinte del pasado siglo y se propusieron crear una literatura neovanguardista experimental y crítica que trajera cambios radicales al mundo de las letras. Juan Luis Martínez, según Marcelo Rioseco, fue quien inauguró, en Valparaíso, con la publicación de LA NUEVA NOVELA, el movimiento de la Nueva Poesía Chilena, que luego se proyectó en la capital, Santiago (Rioseco, “La poética matemática de Juan Luis Martínez” 856). 
          En LA NUEVA NOVELA, Martínez entabla un diálogo abierto con el movimiento surrealista. El Surrealismo fue el movimiento vanguardista que más se prolongó y se transformó en el tiempo. Contó durante décadas con el liderazgo de André Bretón, que escribió sus extensos y bien pensados manifiestos, e inició una provechosa discusión intelectual con los otros miembros del movimiento. Bretón dio a través de los años al Surrealismo un contenido revolucionario; cuestionó al estalinismo ruso y a la política cultural del Partido Comunista, que apoyaba el Realismo Socialista y censuraba a las vanguardias, y abrazó el trotstkismo, que apoyaba la libertad del artista y sostenía la necesidad de una revolución permanente que impidiera la fosilización de las estructuras revolucionarias (Suárez Mayor 151-65). Apoyó la libertad en el lenguaje, el juego de la imaginación. Consideró a la poesía el género que mejor expresaba al ser humano total, y atacó a la novela por la ficción de realidad que instalaba. Rimbaud y Lautremont eran para él los poetas que habían liberado a la poesía. Freud y Marx representaban nuevas etapas y posibilidades del conocimiento de la mente y de la liberación social. Para Breton sueño y vigilia formaban parte de un continuo, que la lógica trataba de separar. La actitud militante de Breton extendió la vigencia del Surrealismo. Cuando ya las otras vanguardias, como el dadaísmo y el ultraísmo, habían perdido su poder de convocatoria, el surrealismo continuó y se renovó. La vigencia de sus propuestas y su mensaje revolucionario llegó a los jóvenes rebeldes de las décadas del sesenta y el setenta. En esa época, surrealistas históricos como Luis Buñuel y Jean Tardieu continuaban en actividad.

          Martínez no toma en su libro como interlocutores a poetas o escritores chilenos. Su diálogo es con la literatura francesa. Las ideas de Breton tienen un peso decisivo en sus propuestas y en la selección de sus temas. Encontramos en sus páginas imágenes y comentarios sobre Rimbaud y Marx, a quienes toma como personajes. Discute importantes textos de poetas simbolistas, como Mallarmé y Valery, y de poetas románticos como Gérard de Nerval. En la página 89 menciona a varios artistas a quienes Breton consideraba antecentes del Surrealismo, como Brisset y Roussel, o miembros del mismo, como Duchamp. Cita en sus epígrafes a intelectuales contemporáneos franceses, como el crítico Roland Barthes y el filósofo Michael Foucault.

        Martínez asimila importantes textos de autores franceses y de otras literaturas europeas a los que los surrealistas valoraban, como el matemático británico Lewis Carrol y el alemán Christian Morgenstern, del que cita un poema en su lengua con términos sin sentido. Martínez indaga sobre una cuestión vital para él, así como también para Tardieu, su principal interlocutor: el problema del lenguaje. Cuestiona la capacidad de representación del lenguaje e indaga la relación del lenguaje verbal con el lenguaje visual y otros lenguajes, como el numeral y el musical. Igualmente se pregunta por la relación del lenguaje con la realidad, e interactúa con esta, introduciendo objetos del mundo real dentro del espacio verbal y el visual, como el anzuelo y el papel secante.

          Su cuestionamiento al estatuto de lo real empieza cuando tomamos el libro. Nos encontramos, en la solapa de la tapa, con preguntas y respuestas sobre la realidad, seguidas de la afirmación “Nada es real”, de Sotoba Komachi, personaje de la obra Noh del mismo nombre del autor japonés Yuquio Mishima, y con otras preguntas y respuestas en la solapa de la contratapa, seguidas de la nota de André Breton: “Todo es real”. Ambas posiciones son excluyentes solo en apariencia, por cuanto si la afirmación de Komachi implica que vivimos en un mundo ilusorio, la de Breton nos permite pensar que el sueño es parte de lo real.

         Bretón, en su Primer Manifiesto Surrealista de 1924, habló de la “realidad”, a la que consideraba lo más “precario” de la vida, y formuló su idea sobre la “surrealidad” o suprarealidad (19). Definió al Surrealismo como « el automatismo psíquico puro, a través del cual una persona se propone expresar, ya sea verbalmente, por escrito o de cualquier otra forma, el funcionamiento real del pensamiento” en total libertad (Breton 44). La razón no debía ejercer ningún control sobre él ni las preocupaciones morales o estéticas limitarlo.

          En las primeras dos partes de LA NUEVA NOVELA, de la página 9 a la página 43, Martínez incorpora como personaje al escritor surrealista francés Jean Tardieu. El poeta acepta responder al cuestionario “Petits problems et travaux practiques”, de su libro Un mot pour un autre, de 1951, y a su vez lo invita a contestar sus preguntas, tal como él responde parcialmente las suyas. Titula a la primera parte de su libro “RESPUESTAS A PROBLEMAS DE JEAN TARDIEU” y a la segunda “CINCO PROBLEMAS PARA JEAN TARDIEU”.

         La obra a la que se refiere Martínez, Un mot por un autre, es una sátira, en que Tardieu introduce a un personaje cómico, el profesor Fraeppel. Fraeppel, en la obra de Tardieu, es un filólogo delirante, que descubre varios lenguajes: la “lengua jaguar”, la “lengua Augusta”, el “patois” “Champagne nature”. En medio de su locura el profesor logra descifrar el lenguaje de la naturaleza. Su discípulo lo encuentra en medio del bosque, hablando con los árboles. La fatiga y la enfermedad acaban con su vida. El profesor deja una serie de obras póstumas, que incluyen poemas y comedias, y un diccionario de los lenguajes que ha descubierto (Tardieu, Œuvres 373-439). Tardieu las publica a continuación de la biografía. Son obras de una gran comicidad. El autor concluye su sátira poniendo a prueba la comprensión y el saber de los lectores: les plantea unos “Pequeños problemas y trabajos prácticos” sobre el espacio, el tiempo, la aritmética, la geometría, la astronomía, la lógica, el lenguaje, la arqueología, la geografía y la psicología. Martínez en la primera parte de LA NUEVA NOVELA va a intentar resolver los problemas y contestar a las preguntas de Tardieu. Para esto, traduce los planteos y preguntas de “Pequeños problemas y trabajos prácticos” y los incorpora a su libro. Algunas las responde, otras no; se trata de preguntas disparatadas, absurdas muchas. Martínez finge tomar las preguntas en serio, y las contesta en el mismo espíritu en que fueron formuladas por su autor. Preguntas y respuestas son escritas en un tipo de letra diferente, para no confundir al lector, que puede así separar el texto de Tardieu de la respuesta de Martínez. A su vez, le formulará preguntas al francés en la segunda sección de su libro, planteándole situaciones cómicas y absurdas, con una lógica similar a la suya. Es de notar que cuando Martínez visitó París en 1992 fue a conocer a Jean Tardieu. En una entrevista con María Ester Roblero, le contó que Tardieu se puso muy contento al verlo y lo abrazó emocionado (Roblero 74). 
         Tardieu propuso en su sátira una trama con dos autores: él y el Profesor Fræppel. Abre su libro con una cita de Maurice Blanchot, advirtiéndonos de que a pesar que estamos rodeados de cosas y seres ambiguos, la frivolidad puede ser una máscara de lo serio (“L´ ambiguïté est partout: dans l´ apparence futile, mais ce qu´il y a de plus frivole peut être le masque du sérieux”, Tardieu, Œuvres 373). Tardieu presenta lo serio bajo el disfraz del humor. También lo hace Martínez.

          Atribuye LA NUEVA NOVELA a dos autores: JUAN LUIS MARTINEZ y JUAN DE DIOS MARTINEZ, con sus nombres tachados y cuestionados. Son sujetos puestos en duda. El segundo suplementa su primer nombre, Juan, con el apelativo “de Dios”. No se trata, claro, de una broma inocente. El sujeto poético trasciende al autor. El poeta, en la tradición occidental, recibe el don de la poesía de una presencia espiritual superior. Escucha la voz de una musa o divinidad. La musa le ayuda a inspirarse y le transfiere esa voz. El se apropia temporalmente de ella, e, inspirado, canta. El poeta es un sujeto transitivo. La poesía circula por los sujetos, que no pueden considerarse sus dueños definitivos. En la poesía lírica el sujeto poético no se ajusta al sujeto psicológico. En la poesía chilena se desarrolló una polémica alrededor del estatuto o el “poder” que debía ostentar el sujeto poético. Huidobro sostenía en su “Arte poética” que el poeta era “un pequeño Dios”. Gabriela Mistral y Pablo Neruda, por su parte, celebraron el poder espiritual visionario del yo. No así Parra, que en su “Manifiesto” lo condenó, y propuso como modelo a un anti-poeta que hacía bajar a los dioses del Olimpo, y criticaba a los poetas pequeño-burgueses, que se expresaban en un lenguaje cargado de complejas figuras poéticas y se alejaban del habla popular, a la que él quería acercarse y tomar como base y fundamento de su poesía (Pérez 289-95).

          Los escritores surrealistas atacaron la figura del autor. Breton propuso dejar que en los textos hablara el inconsciente (Breton 26-32). Sus “cadáveres exquisitos”, en el que los escritores participan de una creación colectiva, agregando versos al azar, sin conocer lo que escribieron los otros, eran una manera de crear un autor plural impersonal. Martínez buscaba, como dice en sus reportajes, escribir una obra donde el autor estuviera prácticamente ausente (Brodsky 75). En su libro el poeta manipula escritos de otros, figuras compuestas, objetos. Encontramos pocas composiciones en que aparece un yo poético. La prosa informativa y conceptual, la explicación pedagógica, los pastiches de frases y figuras, conviven con otros textos en los que notamos una expresión más personal, y el uso de la estrofa.

         Martínez abre el libro con un cuestionamiento de la realidad, tema central en la obra. Para el Surrealismo la novela era el género que nos quería acercar a lo que el novelista creía era la “realidad” (Manifiestos del surrealismo 22-27). Breton ataca al género. Martínez propone una “nueva novela”. En su obra no podemos diferenciar la realidad de la ilusión, el orden del caos, no podemos separar un lenguaje del otro. Los lenguajes prometen abarcar la realidad, pero, como afirma el autor en la solapa de la tapa, “El ser humano no soporta mucha realidad”. El surrealista trata de trascender lo real a partir del impulso psíquico de lo imaginario y lo irracional y acercarse a lo “surreal”.

         En “RESPUESTAS A PROBLEMAS DE JEAN TARDIEU”, Martínez contesta con ingenio y humor a varias de las preguntas que planteara el escritor francés en “Petits problèmes et travaux pratiques”. En “EL ESPACIO” leemos: “Dados dos puntos, A y B, SITUADOS A IGUAL DISTANCIA UNO DEL OTRO, ¿cómo hacer para desplazar a B sin que A lo advierta?” (11). Tardieu juega aquí con la idea de que los puntos A y B son sujetos psicológicos que se observan y vigilan. Responde Martínez, poniéndose a su nivel, con picardía: “-Plantéesele a A el siguiente problema: ¿Cómo haría A para desplazarse sin que B lo advierta? (En el momento que A se concentra en el problema, B se desplaza rápidamente)” (LA NUEVA NOVELA 11).

           En “LA ARQUEOLOGIA” el personaje Tardieu le pide al lector que “regrese con el pensamiento a los tiempos antiguos” y describa la “ceremonia” en que la Municipalidad de Atenas ponía la “piedra fundamental” de las “ruinas” del Partenón. Juan Luis responde que antes de describir la “ceremonia” sería conveniente hacer una “réplica exacta” de las “ruinas” del Partenón. Le explica como llevar adelante esta tarea. Dice Martínez: “1º Usando como vigas algunos pedazos de piedras planas y delgadas levante primero el techo, después de lo cual puede agregar la base y las columnas. 2º Empuje suavemente cada una de las columnas hasta hacerlas caer, dejando así, paralelos y a una misma altura, el dintel y el plinto del famoso edificio.” (19). La broma de Tardieu consiste en ver las ruinas como una construcción del hombre y no como una consecuencia del paso del tiempo, y Martínez, siguiendo su lógica, le muestra cómo se pueden construir las ruinas.

          Sumamente inventiva y cómica es la respuesta que da Martínez a la pregunta sobre “LA GEOGRAFIA”. El escritor francés nos propone: “Aplaste el relieve de Suiza y calcule la superficie así obtenida”. Martínez da como resultado una cifra que excede ampliamente la superficie real del área de Suiza, y explica que, al aplastar las montañas, Suiza se extendió a los países limítrofes. Describe cuál es el nuevo territorio que ocupa. Su superficie abarca parte de Alemania, hasta la ciudad de Friburgo, y todo el norte de Italia, hasta la ciudad de Milán (20).

        En “TAREAS DE POESIA”, nos presenta el siguiente “trabajo práctico”: “Un barco ebrio cuenta sus recuerdos de viaje. Este barco es usted. Dígalo en la primera persona del singular” (27). Tardieu tomó la idea del poema de Rimbaud, “Le bateau ivre”. Esa era la situación que planteaba el poema. Martínez, en su respuesta, reproduce un dibujo de Rimbaud que le hiciera Fantin-Latour. Divide la imagen del dibujo en dos mitades, jugando con la palabra “partir”, en su acepción de dividir e irse de un sitio. En el espacio que separa ambas mitades, incluye una supuesta frase de Rimbaud. Este pregunta con sorpresa si vale la pena recordar con palabras su experiencia onírica y contar que partió de él un barco llevándolo.

     La “tarea” siguiente es sobre el poema “L´après-midi d´un Faune” de Mallarmé. Martínez la resuelve creando un “ex libris”, un collage decorativo que incluye dibujos inspirados en la obra y fragmentos de comentarios en francés recortados de publicaciones (28).

     De manera muy ingeniosa realiza la tarea que Tardieu propone a su lector en “Devoirs de poésie” en Un mot pour un autre (432). Este le pide que se imagine que es un “Príncipe de Aquitania”, “viudo” y “tenebroso”, y cuente su vida en primera persona. Tardieu no le dice a su lector que había tomado la idea del motivo del poema célebre del poeta romántico Gérard de Nerval: “El desdichado”, que comienza con los versos “Je suis le ténebreux, -le veuf- le inconsolé,/ le Prince d´ Aquitaine à la tour abolie…”. Martínez, que conoce el texto, y sabe que ese era el tema principal del poema de Nerval, responde, con viveza, transcribiendo el poema original en francés (29).

     En la página siguiente se enfrenta a una pregunta de Tardieu sobre el poema “El cementerio marino” de Paul Valery (30). Este, de manera similar a como lo había hecho con el poema anterior, le pide al lector que refiera la “alucinación” que tuvo cuando visitó el cementerio de su aldea natal, junto al Mediterrráneo, en primera persona. Aquí Martínez responde de diferente manera diferente a como lo había hecho en el poema anterior, no transcribe el texto de “Le cimetière marin” de Paul Valéry en francés. En lugar de esto coloca una imagen encuadrada del negativo de la fotografía del poema de Nerval, “El desdichado”, y la rodea de comentarios que hace sobre sus bordes; el más llamativo dice: “LA TUMBA DE LOS SIGNOS”. Aclara abajo, que, al ver el anverso y el reverso de esa página, el lector puede observar el poema en su “inmediata textualidad”. El “espesor de esos signos desnudos”, dice Martínez, “…destruyen cualquier intento de interpretación respecto a una supuesta: “Profundidad de la Literatura””(30). 
    Esta nos puede parecer una afirmación nihilista, en la que el poeta niega trascendencia al texto literario. Martínez, sin embargo, persigue otro objetivo, sueño máximo del Surrealismo: desea atravesar las barreras del lenguaje, ir más allá de la Literatura. Afirma la materialidad del signo. Quiere llegar a una surrealidad que sea expresión del impulso psíquico liberado, tal como lo proponía Breton.
     Termina esta sección con “PEQUEÑA COSMOGONIA PRACTICA”. Tardieu pide que construyamos un mundo coherente a partir de Nada, “sabiendo que: YO – TU y que Todo es POSIBLE” (33). Martínez propone dos soluciones: en una un sujeto pierde el objeto de su deseo y resuelve la situación identificándose con el objeto deseado y perdido, y en la segunda, un sujeto se está por matar por una mujer, lo piensa y, en lugar de matarse, destruye una imagen de la amada, resolviendo así el problema. Esta última es una proyección de lo que hace Martínez: se enfrenta a la Literatura y ataca su imagen.

       En la segunda parte del libro, Martínez le presenta cinco problemas a Jean Tardieu. A la inversa de lo que sucedió en la primera parte, ahora es él el que pregunta al poeta francés, al que tuvo oportunidad de conocer en persona cuando visitó París en 1992, poco antes de morir (Roblero 71-4).

       Martínez divide su cuestionario en varios temas: la identidad, el espacio y el tiempo, la parapsicología, una confusión cotidiana, el lenguaje y un problema transparente. Formula sus preguntas en el mismo tono humorístico y burlón que empleara el francés en sus “problemas y trabajos prácticos”. En “LA PARAPSICOLOGIA” le plantea: “Tardieu. Usted fue un gato y tuvo una dueña. SE QUERIAN MUCHO. HAN PASADO CIEN AÑOS DESDE ESA ULTIMA VIDA. Ahora Usted es la dueña y ella es su gato. ¿CÓMO HACEN PARA RECONOCERSE?” (37). Para contestarla haría falta recurrir a un humor e ingenio surreal similar al que él mismo utilizó en sus respuestas a Tardieu. Los ejercicios se van volviendo un juego, donde cada uno de los jugadores debe superar al otro.

      En las secciones siguientes del libro: “TAREAS DE ARITMETICA”, “EL ESPACIO Y EL TIEMPO”, “LA ZOOLOGIA”, “LA LITERATURA”, “EL DESORDEN DE LOS SENTIDOS”, Martínez combina lenguaje verbal e imagen visual. En “TAREAS DE ARITMETICA”, utiliza imágenes de Marx y Rimbaud, prendas de vestir, nombres de animales, temas históricos y objetos culturales en lugar de números, en sus ejercicios de suma, resta, división y multiplicación. Por ejemplo: “Una golondrina + La Revolución Francesa = Las Obras Completas del Marqués de Sade”, y “Otello – La luna = El Sol Negro de Nerval” (47). Al “cuantificar” animales, como la gaviota, junto a hechos sociales, como la revolución, y creaciones literarias, como las obras de Sade y Otello, Martínez lleva la situación surreal al plano del absurdo.

      En la sección “EL ESPACIO Y EL TIEMPO” de su libro Juan Luis Martínez nos propone varios ejercicios. Introduce las obras de un autor admirado por los surrealistas: el matemático y escritor inglés Charles L. Dodgson, o Lewis Carroll, como intratexto. Carroll había escrito libros de ficción y de lógica matemática. Martínez emplea personajes de Alice´s Adventures in Wonderland, 1865, como el gato de Cheshire, y plantea ejercicios y juegos de lógica, que encuentra en Curiosa Mathematica, 1888 y The Game of Logic, 1887 (Suárez Mayor 61-71).

      Carroll era un escritor sumamente particular: vivía en dos universos, en el de las matemáticas y en el de la literatura. Era un matemático al que le gustaban los juegos y los personajes fantásticos que desafiaban la lógica. Mantenía una visión dual y humorística de las cosas y esto fascinaba a Martínez. El sujeto moderno es un sujeto escindido, en conflicto consigo mismo y con el mundo. Martínez da a las ideas de Carroll un lugar en su libro. Son para él ideas productivas.

       En “UN PROBLEMAS HEMISFERICO” transcribe un texto homónimo de Carroll, “A Hemispherical Problem” (Suárez Mayor 71-2). Presenta al lector una reproducción de un mapa del mundo dividido en dos planos y le hace el siguiente planteo: “Un hombre viaja alrededor del mundo lo bastante aprisa para que el sol esté siempre sobre su cabeza; toma la salida un lunes al mediodía, al cabo de veinticuatro horas volverá a hallarse en el punto de partida. ¿Dónde constata que el día se llama ahora martes? ¿En qué momento de su viaje el día ha cambiado de nombre?” (57). El texto problematiza la relación del sujeto con el espacio y el tiempo, y enfrenta el mundo imaginario con el mundo sensible.

       En “EL TEOREMA DEL JARDIN” nos muestra la fotografía del padre de Jean Tardieu, Victor Tardieu, y la compara con la fotografía de Jean siendo niño, tomada en un jardín que había mostrado anteriormente en la página 36. Su objetivo es revelar “parte de esa extraña relación que pudiera existir a veces entre el espacio de la ficción y los personajes de la vida” (65). Le propone al lector que imagine que “el afuera del jardín” se prolonga “en el adentro de este libro”. Explica que ese jardín no existe fuera de las páginas del libro, y que al cerrar el libro se cierra el jardín y se borra la distancia que existía entre los dos personajes.

     En la sección siguiente, “LA ZOOLOGIA”, la escritura de Juan Luis Martínez cambia. Sale del formato pseudo-científico que había mantenido en las secciones anteriores, donde un hablante impersonal planteaba problemas, hacía preguntas y proponía respuestas. En esta sección aparece un sujeto poético y organiza los textos en estrofas. En “EL ZOOLOGICO IMAGINARIO” habla de varios animales que “no son de este mundo”, como las “Gyraffas”, los “Eleffantes” y los “Dromeddarios”, a los que representa con figuras geométricas superpuestas: un cuadrado, un triángulo y un círculo. Dice que para escuchar sus gritos, él debería cambiar de nombre y llamarse “(Jxuan de Dios Marttínnez)”. Poco a poco “los Niñños”, que están encerrados en las jaulas de los “Monnos”, van perdiendo conciencia de lo que una vez fue “La misteriosa selva africana” (70). El mundo geométrico va reemplazando el reino animal.

   En “EL ANIMALFABETO SE MUERE/DUERME SOBRE SU PROPIA SOMBRA/ORILLA” Martínez presenta una fábula sobre un animal imaginario. La voz que cuenta se dirige a los “Niños de este mundo o del otro”, aludiendo con sorna al poema de César Vallejo, “España, aparta de mí este cáliz”, en que el poeta peruano hablaba a los “niños del mundo”, en momentos en que España estaba sumida en la Guerra Civil (73). El sujeto describe un “animal” que se la pasa todos los días escribiendo y “construyendo bibliotecas” y expresa sus sentimientos en las lenguas de los diferentes animales: maúlla, gruñe, rebuzna, etc. Se persigue su propia cola y juega con su sombra, y “no sabe si está muerto o duerme”. Todos los animales de esta sección resultan monstruosos e imaginarios.

        En el poema “ICTHYS” toma como tema el símbolo cristiano del pez. Coloca sobre la parte superior de la página un anzuelo real, cita diferentes versículos de la Biblia y emplea varias lenguas. Está escrito como un contrapunto entre una voz poética y un “Quorum”, especie de coro o voz grupal. La voz poética aclara que “EL SUBLIME PESCADOR ES EL CRISTO DE LA MANO ROTA a cuyo anzuelo aún nos resistimos”. El texto tiene un final grotesco: el coro canta en inglés un aviso de propaganda que ofrece aparejos de pesca en Florida. Al pie de la página pega otro anzuelo (75).

        En el poema siguiente nos refiere la historia de “LA PROBABLE E IMPROBABLE DESAPARICION DE UN GATO POR EXTRAVIO DE SU PROPIA PORCELANA” (76). Le sigue una bibliografía sobre el tema, que incluye un supuesto libro suyo sobre la historia oculta de los gatos, y un problema o ejercicio sobre “EL GATO DE CHESHIRE”, donde introduce como personaje al gato del libro Alice in Wonderland, de Lewis Carroll.

   “LA PROBABLE E IMPROBABLE DESAPARICION DE UN GATO POR EXTRAVIO DE SU PROPIA PORCELANA” es una fábula humorística. Está organizada en estrofas. En esta el gato de porcelana observa con curiosidad la porcelana que lo representa. La porcelana y el sujeto gato se piensan mutuamente, y comprenden que uno depende de la mirada del otro, y que si dejan de pensarse, desaparecen.

       Este poema lúdico encierra una meditación sobre el problema de la subjetividad del artista. El proceso de reflexión da su identidad a la obra de arte. El autor proyecta su subjetividad en el objeto creado, y este a su vez comunica la subjetividad del creador al observador o lector. Forma y percepción se condicionan mutuamente. El arte es una experiencia intersubjetiva.

    En el texto siguiente, “EL GATO DE CHESHIRE”, Martínez nos plantea un problema relacionado al anterior. Se trata de un ejercicio “lógico” basado en un episodio del capítulo 8 del libro de Carroll, Alice in Wonderland, en que el Rey y la Reina discuten sobre el gato de Cheshire. El gato, en el libro de Carroll, conversa con Alicia y mantiene una sonrisa enigmática constante. Cuando se va, su cuerpo desaparece poco a poco. Lo último en desvanecerse es su sonrisa.

     En “EL GATO DE CHESHIRE” el Rey, irritado, ordena al verdugo que decapite al gato. El verdugo sólo ve su cabeza, ¿se puede decapitar una cabeza sin cuerpo? Martínez le presenta al lector varias opciones para que elija. En algunas el texto aparece tachado, puesto en duda. Las opciones alternan entre el ser y el no ser (78).

  Titula al próximo texto “6 LECCIONES (NO LOGOCENTRICAS) DE AMBIGÜEDAD SURREALISTA CON LAS PIEZAS ANATÓMICAS PARA ARMAR LA MITAD DE UN ELEFANTE”. Distribuye en la página las seis lecciones. Diferentes personas han encontrado en distintos lugares, a lo largo de los años, varias partes del animal. El autor propone al lector que haga un dibujo para comprobar si efectivamente ha logrado completar la mitad de un elefante (79).

    Este juego de apariciones y desapariciones termina con varios ejercicios sobre el perrito Fox Terrier, llamado “Sogol”, inversión de logos, que desaparece en la intersección de dos avenidas. En uno de los textos, “FOX TERRIER DESAPARECE EN LA INTERSECCION DE LAS AVENIDAS GAUSS Y LOBATCHEWSKY”, el autor pide al lector que averigüe cómo encontrarlo (81). Le presenta al lector varias hipótesis lógicas, que no resuelven el problema. Concluye que el animal desapareció en una “fisura” en un espacio regido por la geometría no-euclidiana, que tiene curvatura negativa, y sólo les queda aguardar que regrese por sus propios medios desde esa “otra dimensión” al cruce de las Avenidas (Suárez Mayor 77). En la página 83, Martínez vuelve a la misma situación anterior, pero cambia el valor de los términos, de positivos a negativos, y cuestiona la desaparición del perrito. La “no-solución” que nos propone en “FOX TERRIER NO-DESAPARECIDO NO-REAPARECE EN LA NO-INTERSECCION DE LAS NO-AVENIDAS (GAUSS Y LOBATCHEWSKY)” es que “Sogol no regrese jamás desde esa otra no-dimensión donde jamás desapareció, pero cuya entrada y salida seguimos encontrando en la intersección de las avenidas Gauss y Lobatchewsky.” (83).

    En la sección siguiente, “LA LITERATURA”, Martínez trata varios temas que lo preocupan: la página en blanco, la relación entre el lenguaje y el silencio, el lenguaje y el no lenguaje, y los lenguajes entre sí. En el poema “EL CISNE TROQUELADO” alude al célebre soneto “Le vierge, le vivace et le bel aujourd´hui” de Mallarmé. En su poema Mallarmé había introducido como personaje a un cisne, símbolo del poeta, preso del invierno, inmóvil sobre un lago, que recordaba sus vuelos y se lamentaba de su decadencia. El poema de Martínez tiene tres partes: “(La búsqueda)”, “(El encuentro)” y “(La locura)”. El poeta agrega a la noción mallarmeneana de la página en blanco y a la figura del cisne, la idea del troquel. El troquel es un molde capaz de reproducir un modelo, y en el poema es símbolo de la escritura. Martínez mantuvo con esta una relación conflictiva y ambigua. Su libro es difícilmente reproducible y ha tenido contadas ediciones.

      En el comienzo de “EL CISNE TROQUELADO” explica al lector que la página se repliega “sobre la blancura de sí misma”(87). Abre el “documento cerrado”. Es parte de un proyecto imposible: “la compaginación de la blancura”. Esa página contiene “La Escritura Anónima y Plural” a la que acecha “El Demonio de la Analogía”. Su “dominio” es la lectura de un signo entre los cisnes o a la inversa, de un cisne entre los signos. En la tercera parte del poema, titulada “(La locura)”, el sujeto poético se encuentra con “el troquel”, el instrumento capaz de acuñar un signo, “el troquel anónimo de alguno que es ninguno”. El poeta presenta, en francés, la analogía del cisne/signo de Mallarmé; dice:

Le SIGNE/CYGNE blanc de le CIGNE/SIGNE Mallarmé (87)

El troquel del cisne equivale para él a “el no compaginado nombre de la albura”. La página tiene su revés, imagen metafórica que reaparece en todo el libro y se materializa en las transparencias. El poeta dice que la página es una “ficción de sí misma”. La literatura parece estar encerrada en una red de espejos; no sabemos cuál es el original y cuál la copia.

      Al final del poema el poeta se dirige a sí mismo; dice: “(¿Swan de dios?)/ (¡Recuerda Jxuan de Dios!): (¡Olvidarás la página!)”. La identidad queda entre paréntesis, cuestionada. El yo poético divinizado olvida, es débil. Y concluye el poeta: “el agua borrará tu nombre”. El sentido de su mortalidad angustia a Martínez. Sabemos que en su vida real estuvo cruelmente signado por una grave enfermedad (Roblero 70). En este poema elegíaco nos revela cuál es su búsqueda como escritor. Es el texto de su obra que más se aproxima a un “arte poética”.

   En “OBSERVACIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA EXHUBERANTE ACTIVIDAD DE LA “CONFABULACION FONETICA” O “LENGUAJE DE LOS PAJAROS” EN LAS OBRAS DE J.-P. BRISSET, R. ROUSSEL, M. DUCHAMP Y OTROS”, Martínez se enfrenta a un tema que le preocupa particularmente: los lenguajes y la comunicación. Discute “los lenguajes de los pájaros” en relación a las obras de varios autores asociados al Surrealismo, entre ellos Russell y Duchamp (89). El canto de los pájaros crea una multitud de lenguajes que el autor considera una verdadera “confabulación fonética”. En su última “observación” afirma que la naturaleza, para verificar si se establece la comunicación, no se vale del “canto de los pájaros/ ni su equivalente, la palabra humana”, sino del “silencio”, “convertido en mensaje”. El silencio es para él “un signo, un momento del mensaje que la naturaleza se dice a sí misma”. A través del silencio la naturaleza puede “verificar si el circuito funciona”.

       En los textos siguientes de “LA LITERATURA”, Martínez escribe sobre el nombre y la divinidad, en “LA GRAFOLOGIA”, donde dice que el serrucho que corta la madera trata de decir “(Jxuan de Dios”), pero sólo logra pronunciar las sílabas entrecortadas de su apellido, Martínez; el silencio y la ausencia de obra, que amenaza al escritor, en “LA LOCURA DEL (AUTOR)”; la separación material del yo y el mundo, en los dibujos de “MEDITACIONES SOBRE RENE MAGRITTE”; la búsqueda del signo absoluto, ideal utópico mallarmeneano, en “LO QUE (EL AUTOR) HA LEIDO ACERCA DE UNA FLOR”; el significado o mensaje del texto, en las “TAREAS DE POESIA”, donde, imitando las bromas de Tardieu, crea un poema en un lenguaje inventado incomprensible y, a continuación, le da al lector un cuestionario, donde le solicita que explique el sentido del poema.

     Al final de esta sección nos encontramos con el personaje de Delia. Martínez aclara que el nombre no designa a una mujer determinada, es un anagrama de “IDEAL” (102). Delia sabe, dice, que la vida tiene un ritmo secreto, que abarca el mundo de los libros. “DESCRIPCION DE UNA BODA IDEAL” es un poema-fábula sobre la boda de Delia (104). En la boda el fotógrafo literalmente disecciona el cuerpo de Delia, y el novio lo “reconstruye”. La historia concluye con los recién casados retirándose a una pequeña habitación, donde la esposa hace las alabanzas del tamaño del sexo de su esposo.

    La última sección del libro se titula “EL DESORDEN DE LOS SENTIDOS”. Introduce personajes históricos, entre ellos Napoleón y Hitler. Reproduce la foto de una gran piedra suspendida, llamada “Perfil de Napoleón”, cuyo contorno recuerda a los visitantes la figura del Emperador francés (110-111). Presenta luego una foto de Hitler dentro de un recuadro. Llama a esta composición “ADOLF HITLER Y LA METAFORA DEL CUADRADO”. Dice que Hitler sufría de vértigo y sabía que su caída era inminente. Su viaje de la foto hasta la página del libro muestra que después de perder el poder cayó en el cuadrado de la foto, y que tanto el tiempo como el espacio tienen “su ley de gravedad” (113).

    En el texto siguiente: “TANIA SAVICH Y LA FENOMENOLOGIA DE LO REDONDO”, toma como personaje a una víctima del nazismo. Tania Savich era una niña rusa que sufrió el sitio cruel y prolongado del Ejército Alemán en Leningrado durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial y murió de tuberculosis a los 14 años. Martínez opone el cuadrado de la fotografía de Hitler al círculo familiar en que vive la niña. Explica que en el círculo hay “…un centro de orden que protege la casa contra un desorden sin límites” (114). Tania estaba convencida de que la existencia era “redonda”.

      Martínez continúa su discusión sobre la percepción y las figuras geométricas con dos “investigaciones”, como las llama, sobre “las burbujas en la superficie del café contenido en una taza” (112). En la primera, observa que las burbujas de café se desplazan del centro a las paredes de la taza. Argumenta que lo hacen porque no tienen “Noción de Infinito”. En nota, aclara que el hombre, a diferencia de la burbuja, “será o deberá ser siempre el centro del Infinito”. En la segunda parte de las investigaciones, argumenta que las burbujas “no tienen existencia objetiva”, más allá de nuestra conciencia. Es nuestra percepción la que da objetividad aparente al mundo que nos rodea. El espacio y el tiempo, afirma, no existen en sí mismos (115).

      Concluidas las secciones, nos presenta varias “NOTAS Y REFERENCIAS”. Utiliza esta parte del libro para polemizar con las secciones anteriores. Dedica dos “notas” al “gato de Cheshire”. La sonrisa del gato, desvaneciéndose, dice, nos dejaba en un estado de extrañeza y temor (122). En la sonrisa del gato se unían “ser y expresión”. Buscaba descubrir su trágica “realidad”. Era una sonrisa dirigida hacia el adentro y el afuera. La sonrisa, explica el poeta, recordaba al hombre “EL CARÁCTER PRECARIO DE SU REALIDAD” (123).

     En la “NOTA 5”, discute el texto sobre el lenguaje de los pájaros de la sección LITERATURA. Martínez emplea dos escrituras contrastantes: una analítica y explicativa, en la que afirma que tanto los pájaros como “algunos escritores” se expresan de la manera más irracional posible: a través del silencio, y otra poética, en que nos cuenta cómo los pájaros intentan escapar del árbol del lenguaje y buscan desentenderse del silencio y de sí mismos (126). Tratan de “desescucharse” y “reingresan al silencio”. Estos pájaros, dice, “son cantados por el canto” y “cantan al revés”. Su canto es “el lenguaje transparente de su propio ser”.

      El lenguaje traza un círculo mágico alrededor de la especie a la que pertenecen y de la que no pueden escapar. La subjetividad y el ser determinan la realidad. Dice que los pájaros y los poetas, “mudos de vergüenza se tragan en silencio su propio desencanto”, y aparentan una profundidad que no es tal. La literatura que finge profundidad es engañosa.

    Martínez nos propone en este texto una tesis idealista y formalista a un tiempo. Coincide con la idea del libro que tenía Mallarmé, al que cita. Los pájaros tratan en su canto de combinar notas para generar sensaciones o emociones, y su significado último es indescifrable: “deconstruyen el silencio” (126).

    En la “NOTA 9” crea un contrapunto con el texto “EL OIDO” de la sección “EL DESORDEN DE LOS SENTIDOS”, en que sostenía que el “oído era un órgano al revés” que escuchaba el silencio (108). En la nota, toma como personaje al gran compositor alemán Beethoven, que había sufrido de sordera. Discute su posición política: Beethoven, a diferencia de Hegel y Goethe, había criticado a Napoleón por haberse coronado Emperador. No tenían la misma idea de lo que era la “libertad”. Para Beethoven, dice Martínez, la libertad era el principio que estructuraba “la vida común de los individuos” y rechazaba cualquier tipo de tiranía y de orden estatal absolutista (130).

      En la “NOTA 10” dialoga con su texto sobre “el espectro de Napoleón” de la sección “EL DESORDEN DE LOS SENTIDOS”. Aquí elucubra que Napoleón estaba consciente de que era “un mito”. Quizá, dice el poeta, Napoleón haya sido realmente un mito y, aún más, “una mistificación”, organizada para que creyéramos que Napoleón existió alguna vez (131). El vínculo entre realidad y mundo imaginario es frágil, no podemos estar seguros de cuál de los dos prevalece sobre el otro. El ser humano, desde esta perspectiva idealista, cercana a la que sostuviera Jorge Luis Borges, puede ser sólo un sueño y no sabemos quién sueña a quién (Martín 7-21).

     En la “NOTA 11” hace otro comentario histórico, esta vez sobre Hitler y Tania Savich: dice que a pesar de la crueldad del Ejército Nazi en el sitio de Leningrado, donde perecieron un millón de rusos, entre ellos la pequeña Tania, la ciudad sobrevivió. En la “NOTA 12” Martínez propone a Hitler una “solución” para su problema. Este, en un texto anterior, había quedado atrapado en la “metáfora del cuadrado” (113); el poeta le muestra ahora la portada de una obra del filósofo Hobbes, en que éste promete revelarle a sus lectores “un método para cuadrar el círculo” (133).

       Termina su libro con un apartado final, al que titula “EPIGRAFE PARA UN LIBRO CONDENADO: LA POLITICA” (135). Introduce como personajes a los miembros de una familia. Escribe una muy interesante fábula sobre su “desaparición” en una casa. La casa es una alegoría de lo que la vida representa. En el poema-relato, el padre conversa con los distintos miembros, incluidos los animales, que se han extraviado en la casa. En la primera estrofa habla con su hija de cinco años, en la segunda con su hijo de diez, en la tercera con los dos gatos de la casa, en la cuarta con su perrito fox-terrier, “Sogol” (anagrama de Logos). Los personajes no pueden encontrar la salida. El padre les advierte que tengan cuidado, que la casa no es lo que parece, y al menor descuido habrán “perdido toda esperanza” (137). En la última estrofa el padre reconoce “para sus adentros”: “- Ahora que el tiempo se ha muerto/ y el espacio agoniza en la cama de mi mujer,/ desearía decir a los próximos que vienen,/ que en esta casa miserable/ nunca hubo ruta ni señal alguna/ y de esta vida al fin, he perdido toda esperanza” (137).

      La casa-mundo, tal como la presenta el poeta, es un laberinto del que no podemos salir. El ser humano vive encerrado en su conciencia. Su única realidad es su lenguaje. A diferencia de Breton, que creía en la posibilidad de la revolución social y se acercó primero a Marx, y luego a Trotsky, a quien visitó en México, atraído por su idea de la Revolución Permanente, Martínez niega el materialismo, y ve la actividad política con pesimismo (Taminiaux 52-66). En uno de los últimos textos del libro, “LA ESTRUCTURA DEL PENSAMIENTO POLITICO”, dibuja una serie progresiva de ratas, del uno al diez, que ejemplifican ese pensamiento. Las ratas van una tras otra, obedientes, siguiendo un orden monótono. Al final, pone un comentario de rechazo en inglés: “Drat the rats!”, que podemos traducir como “¡Al diablo con las ratas!” (139).

        En la última página nos presenta un collage alegórico y burlesco, al que titula “LA NUEVA NOVELA: EL POETA COMO SUPERMAN”. En este aparece un dibujo de Superman y su novia. Ella está en sus brazos, desnuda. Martínez recortó sus cabezas y las reemplazó por las fotografías de Marx, como Superman, y de Rimbaud, como la novia. Abajo hace un comentario irónico, y se incluye a sí mismo como personaje: explica que Superman se hizo famoso gracias a su “doble” identidad, primero como periodista y, luego, como un poeta chileno que renunció a su nombre, y se muestra “como un ser tímido y agresivo, borroso y anónimo” (147). Superman, dice, satisface las “nostalgias” del hombre moderno que, aunque se sabe limitado, sueña revelarse como un “personaje excepcional”, como un héroe “cuyos sufrimientos están llamados a cambiar las pautas ontológicas del mundo”.

     En la contratapa de la obra, nos encontramos con una superficie cuadriculada. Martínez le pide al lector que pruebe de dibujar en ella una casa y encontrar una ruta de escape para su familia. Quizás el lector pueda lograr lo que él no pudo. En la solapa de la contratapa aparecen preguntas y respuestas de hablantes que tratan de definir qué es la realidad; al pie de la solapa transcribe una frase de Breton: “Todo es real”. El mundo onírico es parte de ese todo.

       Si en LA NUEVA NOVELA Martínez ataca la noción tradicional de realismo, en su libro siguiente, LA POESIA CHILENA, cuestiona nuestra idea de poesía y ataca al género mismo. No encontramos en LA POESIA CHILENA poema alguno. Nos presenta un objeto libro, que reúne textos, imágenes y cosas. Incluye un saquito de tierra chilena y el acta de defunción de los poetas más célebres de Chile: Mistral, Huidobro, de Rokha y Neruda. Su actitud desacralizadora expresa su deseo de revolucionar nuestra noción de literatura. Propone una literatura radicalmente nueva, que no exprese la realidad sino lo que Breton llamaba la surrealidad: el poeta puede liberar sus impulsos psíquicos más creativos, sin atarse a forma alguna.

       Luego de publicada LA POESIA CHILENA en 1978, Martínez no vuelve a publicar un nuevo libro. Fallece en 1993. Durante esos largos años, en que sufre una grave enfermedad renal, sus lectores esperan en vano un nuevo manuscrito. Sus compañeros de generación: Zurita, Maquieira, Vicuña, siguieron publicando. Combinaron su actitud experimental con una posición más ecléctica. Zurita emergió como un gran poeta nacional, con una poesía neo-épica que crea un puente con la poesía chilena de la naturaleza de Neruda y Mistral. Muchos lectores agradecemos esto, pero para los Surrealistas como Breton y como Martínez desdecirse del extremo experimentalismo era traicionar sus principios. Breton criticaba a los que lo hacían y expulsó a varios del movimiento (Breton 89-111). Martínez prefirió el silencio. Para él el silencio hablaba, y era en sí una suerte de manifiesto. Había tocado un límite y no se podía ir más allá sin desdecirse.

      Martínez intentó salir de la literatura, romper la cárcel del lenguaje. No escribió poesía lírica, ni basó su expresión en el uso de figuras poéticas, como la metáfora, que prodigaban otros. Tampoco hizo del yo poético el centro de su escritura. No cultivó una gran imagen de autor. Puso en duda la identidad del poeta, la fragmentó en varios yo. Atacó cada uno de los principios en que se basaba y se basa el arte de la poesía. El Surrealismo buscaba ir más allá de la literatura. La poesía era para ellos el centro de la creación. Se manifestaba como un impulso psíquico ilimitado. Era energía humana pura, libre. El poeta podía acceder a la surrealidad y expresarla en diversos lenguajes. Así lo hacía el personaje cómico de Tardieu que inspiró a nuestro poeta, y con quien dialogó en su libro: el filólogo loco, descubridor de lenguas, el Profesor Fraeppel.

      Un apartado especial en este capítulo de la historia de la poesía contemporánea que protagonizó Juan Luis Martínez lo merece la recepción que tuvo su obra. Sus libros no son fácilmente reproducibles, ya que incluyen el pegado en la página de objetos fabricados, como anzuelos, y el agregado de materias naturales, como la bolsita con tierra. Prácticamente no han circulado. Son libros secretos. Sin embargo, han llegado a esos lectores ávidos que son los críticos y los han inquietado. Fruto de esa inquietud, de esa preocupación que generó Martínez son los numerosísimos artículos, libros y tesis escritos sobre su breve obra. ¿A qué se debe esto? ¿Qué planteó Martínez que tanto nos preocupa? Yo creo que Martínez trató sinceramente de encontrar el modo de sacar a la literatura de su ámbito y meterla en la vida. Había sido la promesa vanguardista. Era el vellocino de oro que buscaba el Surrealismo. Quizá en el algún momento creyó que lo lograba, pero luego seguramente intuyó, como todos nosotros, que no era posible. Simplemente porque no se puede salir de la literatura. El personaje simbólico de “LA DESAPARICION DE UNA FAMILIA” que quiere salir de la casa y no lo logra somos nosotros. No podemos salir de la casa del lenguaje. El deseo vanguardista de salir de la literatura es utópico. Es una utopía irrealizable y como tal fracasó. Jamás lograremos salir de la literatura, de lo cual yo en particular no me lamento. No concibo el mundo sin literatura. La obra de Martínez, sin embargo, nos lanzó una señal: había otros lenguajes posibles que la literatura debía explorar. Las vanguardias, efectivamente, lograron mostrarnos y comunicarnos eso.

      Los lectores contemporáneos de siglo XXI vivimos en un mundo diferente al de 1978: la autopista cibernética ha logrado un tránsito casi irreal de discursos y lenguajes. El mundo del Profesor Fraeppel ya no nos parece tan disparatado. El discurso monológico de muchos poetas del pasado resulta cada vez más difícil e improbable. Los lenguajes entran en contacto entre sí aunque no queramos. La heteroglosia del habla, antes la excepción, se vuelve la regla. Vivimos en un presente y nos aguarda un futuro en el que proliferan los discursos, las formas artísticas interactúan, aparecen nuevos lenguajes y se llega a nuevas síntesis. Un mundo que anticipa la crítica, que se le parece: interdisciplinaria, heterodoxa, dialoguista. En este presente la obra de Martínez nos alerta de un suceso importante. La división de géneros no se sostiene. La especialización de los lenguajes tampoco. Todo se renueva y se combina, en un proceso abierto de transformación, cuyos frutos finales aún no han madurado. Sin embargo, todos los aguardamos con gran esperanza.







Bibliografía citada





Breton, André. Manifiestos del Surrealismo. Buenos Aires: Editorial Argonauta 2012.

Traducción, prólogo y notas de Aldo Pellegrini.

Brodsky, Roberto. “Callarse es una cosa, pero el silencio es otra”, Juan Luis Martínez,

POEMAS DEL OTRO… 75-78.

Carroll, Lewis. Lewis Carroll: Complete Works. New York: Barnes and Noble, 2007.

Kirkpatrick, Gwen. “Desapariciones y ausencias en La nueva novela de Juan Luis

Martínez”. Revista de Crítica Literaria Latinoamericana No. 50 (1999):

225-34.

Mallarmé. Poésies et autres textes. Paris: Librairie Générale Française, 2005.

Martín, Marina. “Borges, perplejo defensor del idealismo”. Variaciones Borges

13(2002): 7-21.

Martínez, Juan Luis. LA NUEVA NOVELA. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Archivos, 1977.

---. LA POESIA CHILENA. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Archivos, 1978.

---. POEMAS DEL OTRO. POEMAS Y DIALOGOS DISPERSOS. Santiago de Chile:

Universidad Diego Portales, 2003.

Pérez, Alberto Julián. Revolución poética y modernidad periférica. Buenos Aires:

Corregidor, 2009.

Rioseco, Marcelo. “La poética matemática de Juan Luis Martínez”. Revista

Iberoamericana 232-233 (Julio-diciembre 2010): 855-74.

---. Maquinarias deconstructivas. Poesía y juego en Juan Luis Martínez, Diego

Maquieira y Rodrigo Lira. Santiago de Chile: Editorial Cuarto Propio, 2013.

Roblero, María Ester. “Me complace irradiar una identidad velada”. Juan Luis

Martínez, POEMAS DEL OTRO. Santiago: Ediciones Universidad Diego

Portales, 2003. 71-74.

Suárez Mayor, Zenaida. Palabras ya escritas. Relecturas de La nueva novela de Juan

Luis Martínez. Santiago: Ril Editores, 2019.

Taminiaux, Pierre. “Breton and Trotsky: The Revolutionary Memory of Surrealism”.

Yale French Studies 109 (2006): 52-66.

Tardieu, Jean. Œuvres. Paris: Éditions Gallimard, 2003.

Weintraub, Scott. “La copia es el original: la problemática de las obras póstumas de

Juan Luis Martínez”. Latin American Literature Today No. 4 (2017). Web.









Publicado en:


Alberto Julián Pérez. “Juan Luis Martínez: cómo salir de la literatura”. Revista Mediaisla 4-5 (Año XVI). Septiembre - Octubre 2019. Web.

martes, 6 de agosto de 2019

Gauchito Gil


      Alberto Julián Pérez ©



Antonio Mamerto Gil Núñez was born in Estancia La Trinidad, a cattle ranch close to the town of Mercedes, or Pay Ubre as he called it, on the 15th of December of 1844. His father, a native gaucho[1] from the Goya area, was a cowboy there. His mother, a China [2] with a Paraguayan mother and a Correntino[3] father had been born in a town close to the border with Paraguay. She was a very beautiful criollo[4] woman, with dark eyes and straight, black hair, which she wore in braids. His father took her from her home to Pay Ubre, where he had work. He was a very respected man in the area. He distinguished himself in the rodeos, was a good horseman and drew the animals with the whistle and the lazo in the harshest of terrains.
Antonio, who had inherited the dear face of his mother and her very dark eyes, stayed with her at the ranch when his father went out to work. His brother, six years older than he, accompanied his father to the rodeos and the brandings of cattle. His mother addressed Antonio in Spanish and in Guaraní. He understood the indigenous language, but was unable to speak it well.
The year 1850 was a difficult one in Corrientes. The civil war was unending. The combat continued and the gauchos followed their leaders. If they did not, they were labeled as cowards or lazy. The paisanos[5] took pride in their courage and would not stand a single stain on their reputation.
His father left to fight in the war and did not return. He was killed in a confrontation with the soldiers of an entrerriano[6] commander. The mother was left alone with her sons on the adobe ranch. The Patron, Don Indalecio Santamaría, upon learning that the gaucho Gil had not returned from the war against the entrerrianos, asked his wife to help them, as was the custom. Don Indalecio always protected his people in difficult moments. To the oldest son, who was still young but as strong and able as his father, he assigned work in his ranch as a cowboy. His wife, Doña Catalina, took in the Gaucho Gil’s wife to work in their house. There she helped in the kitchen and cleaned. They gave her a room in the living quarters next to the main house of the ranch, so she could live close to her son, with the service personnel. Her eldest son lived in the galpón, a shed, with the other cowboys. Antoñito, who was a humble and tranquil boy, ran errands and helped where he could. When he did not have homework to do, he played by himself in the corridor of the ranch.
The main house of La Trinidad was big. More than thirty people worked there. Also three Black slaves, a man and two women, served in the house. The patrón’s woman, who had three children, brought a teacher from the city of Corrientes to teach them how to read and write. In the mornings, after breakfast, the teacher would sit down with the children in the corridor or underneath the tree branches in the patio, and taught them the alphabet, how to spell, and how to write. Antoñito looked on with curiosity and interest. Doña Catalina, upon seeing this, asked the teacher to teach him as well. Antoñito, who was sharp and intelligent, was able to learn to read and write with great ease, even before the other children. They became envious and accused Antoñito of all sorts of things so that their mother would punish him. They told her that he often stole their candy and hit them. But the lady of the house did not believe them and looked upon him with sympathy.
In ’51 the news arrived of a pronouncement by Urquiza. The owner of the ranch was a federal and the situation worried him greatly. The Unitarians conspired against the country.  Governor Rosas had kept the French and the English far from the border, corralled in the old city of Montevideo for many years. Don Indalecio was a successful rancher and had become wealthy under the politics set forth by Rosas. Every year, he would drive his animals to the south and sell them in Buenos Aires to the saladero industry, that prepared charqui, beef jerky, for the slave markets of Brazil. He also sold cattle hides, that he embarked in the port of Corrientes. Every few months his loaded wagons carts would make their way there. The man left for Buenos Aires with his cowboys to defend Rosas, following a friend who was a commander and did not return for many months.
When he returned, they learnt that many people had died in the struggle. Rosas had been defeated in Caseros and had fled the country. General Urquiza, from Entre Ríos, was the new head of the Confederación. Many Brazilians and other foreigners were coming into the country. Soon afterward, the teacher who taught the children returned to Corrientes. No other teachers came to the ranch. There were times in the afternoons when the patron’s wife would sit beneath the tree branches with the children and had them read the Bible aloud. If Antoñito was there, she asked him to read. He preferred the Book of Genesis and the Gospel of Saint John. He read with a clear voice. Unlike the other children, he didn´t make mistakes. He pronounced carefully, giving proper emphasis to each phrase.
Antoñito’s mother continued working in the kitchen. She was an attractive woman, wooed by the gauchos. They flattered and complimented her, but she never responded. She finally accepted the advances of Juan Prieto, a proud gaucho who mounted a bursty horse, and got drunk whenever there was a dance. It bothered him that the child was always between him and the woman. He told her that the boy was too attached to her and that he needed to become a man. He was already eleven years old. He had a cowboy friend who could take him out to the countryside, where he could learn to work with the animals and become a gaucho.
They sent him to Pancracio, a cowboy with a head band and long hair, who was famous for his skill with the knife. Pancracio became fond of Antoñito, taught him to tame horses, to drive cattle, to brand, to butcher, and to skin. He also taught him how to fight with a knife in the manner of the gauchos. In the country each one needs to know how to defend himself. He referred to him as Gauchito, little Gaucho, instead of Antoñito. “Gauchito who?” someone asked him. “Gauchito Gil,” responded the young man. And the name stuck.
Every now and then, Gauchito Gil returned home to visit his mother, who had gone to live on a ranch with the gaucho Juan Prieto. Once when he arrived, he learned that she was pregnant. He was to have a little brother. The baby was born premature and died soon afterward. His mother lost so much blood while giving birth that she, too, died afterward. El Gauchito loved his mother deeply and her demise caused him great pain. They buried her in a cemetery in Pay Ubre. At sixteen, he was an orphan.
Sometime later, the patrón sent Pancracio with a shipment to Corrientes and el Gauchito went to work as a helper to a hunter who lived in the wetlands. His name was Venancio. He hunted birds and sold the finest of feathers, which were highly prized and valued. Almost none of the gauchos owned a firearm. This was a weapon only for the rich. They hunted with traps and bolas[7]. Gauchito became a skilled hunter. He could use the bolas to capture ducks in the air. In the marshes they travelled by canoe.  They would spear large fishes and eat them roasted. They slept in a choza de junco, a reed hut, they had built. Gauchito fell in love with the landscape, with the sounds, and with the starry nights. Venancio had been raised along the border with Paraguay and spoke very little Castilian Spanish. He almost always talked to him in Guaraní. Gauchito understood him and responded in Spanish.
At the age of eighteen, Gauchito decided to go back to the Estancia. He told Venancio he wanted to be on his own and bid him farewell. He returned to La Trinidad, where he had been raised and told the patrón that he was looking for work. Soon afterward, Don Indalecio sent for him. A friend of his had died in a great battle at Pavón Creek, in Santa Fe, and his wife, who was now a widow, needed help in her ranch. Don Indalecio knew that Gauchito was a sharp and intelligent young man. He gave him a letter of introduction and sent him to La Estrella, close to Mercedes.
The widow received him. She was a woman of about thirty years of age, beautiful, with a stout body. Her name was Estrella, like the ranch. Her husband had named the Estancia in her honor. From the very first moment, el Gauchito drew her attention. He was a small young man, with a child’s face. He looked young for his age. After asking a few questions, she offered him a job. The foreman put him in charge of a number of animals. He was a good horseman and knew how to select and divide the cattle. He led them to the watering holes and to the grasslands.
One day, by the campfire, a big gaucho made fun of him. The others laughed and Gauchito was offended. He challenged him to a fight and drew his knife. The man took out his and they began to fight. The foreman interceded and disarmed them. He told them that by orders of the patrona, Doña Estrella, fights were prohibited and made them whip.
The gauchos drove the cattle with the rebenque [8], and the lazo. El Gauchito preferred the boleadoras. Since he was short, he would tie them across his chest instead of across his waist. He said that it was more comfortable. The foreman would send him after the run away cattle. He would immobilize them with a single throw of bolas. Once, while they were in the plains, he captured a wild boar.  The other gauchos celebrated his feat. They feasted on the boar meat cooked over the open flames. They cut it up, fastened it to an iron cross, drove the cross into the earth, covered it with a mountain of espinillo[9] branches that they had gathered, and made an enormous bonfire. After a few minutes, they extinguished the fire. The meat was ready.
At the age of twenty, he grew a mustache so he could seem older. He had a round, kind face and penetrating eyes. Many considered him to be effeminate and looked on him with derision. Like a good Correntino, he respected the customs of his land. He carved upon his sternum a tattoo with the image of San La Muerte[10] with the tip of his knife. San La Muerte protected him from vermin when he found himself alone in the dangerous wilderness and in the swamps. There were ocelots, snakes, and alligators. Those faithful to San La Muerte also believed that he defended them from the dangers of war. The civil confrontations devastated the region. They frequently came to look for people for some skirmish. El Gauchito had not gone to war yet, but he knew that at any moment it would be his turn.
At night, if he was not far away or on a cattle drive, he would return to the ranch. He slept in a shed with a high roof, among the other cowboys. On moonlit nights, he would go out and contemplate the fields. Doña Estrella liked to sit in the corridor of the house. The woman observed the Gauchito and began to take an interest in him.
At times, when she saw him at night, the woman would call out to him so they could talk. She asked him about the things in his life. When she learned that he knew how to read, she asked him to read the Bible to her.  She asked him to come in, and he read to her by the light of the lantern. This scene would go on to be repeated frequently. She would invite him with cognac or gin. The Gauchito, who was very timid, did everything she asked him to do. One day the inevitable happened. The woman, who wanted him, caressed and kissed Gauchito. She then took him to her bedroom, where they made love. He was an affectionate and passionate young man. She fell in love with him. El Gauchito let her take advantage. As time went on, he hardly slept in the shed anymore. The other gauchos began to envy him. They found out that he had had intimate relations with the patrona.
Soon after, two of Doña Estrella’s brothers arrived at the ranch. For a few days Gauchito did not come close to the house. One of the brothers dressed in military uniform. The other dressed in city clothes. They lived in Corrientes. Days later Captain Alvarado came to visit. He was a suitor for Doña Estrella and was an influential man, an official in the Army, and Chief of Police in Mercedes. He was about forty years old, tall, and had a military demeanor. He was a friend of the governor, and everyone in the region feared him.
The Captain started to visit frequently in the afternoons. Once, the lady asked Gauchito to brew mate[11], and there he was able to see him close. He did not know why Estrella’s brothers had come to the ranch. He worried that they could be trying to take advantage of her because of her wealth.
When the brothers left, everything returned to normal. The Captain would visit her every so often in the afternoons and they would go horseback riding, or she would invite him for lunch. They also enjoyed drinking mate together in the corridor of the house. They would spend time alone in the interior of the house, but the Captain never slept at the ranch.
            Doña Estrella became infatuated with the young man. She would invite him to the house in the evenings. She liked to bathe him in a tub, to perfume him, and then take him to bed and mount him. El Gauchito was fair-skinned, hairless, and his body was smaller than hers. Doña Estrella caressed him, played with his moustache, and told him she loved him. El Gauchito began to fall in love with her. He had never before been with a woman.
            The other cowboys looked with envy at the relationship between Gauchito and the patrona. Someone informed the Captain of the rumored night visits between the young cowhand and the widow. Some time later, the military brother of Doña Estrella returned to the ranch. He stayed for days. He told her that the war was approaching. Apparently, the two discussed how business of the ranch would go. The Captain soon arrived and sent for Gauchito. He told him that bad times were coming and that he was to hide in the country with a herd of cattle. Doña Estrella agreed. There was a war on, and they didn’t want all of their cattle to be confiscated.
Gauchito, along with the other gauchos, took the cattle to a distant pasture range. There they spent several months. When they returned to the ranch, Captain Alvarado received them. Gauchito was not able to see Doña Estrella. The Captain informed him that he was going to live in a post somewhat far away from the house, and that he was not to abandon it without his authorization. The young man, who missed his lover, prowled about at night in the surroundings of the ranch house. He tried to come near, but two policemen confronted him. He covered his face with a kerchief, took out his gaucho knife, and faced them. He injured one of them and escaped. The next day, the Captain came looking for him with two policemen and arrested him. He was accused of trying to rob the house and of injuring one of the policemen. Gauchito denied that it could have been him. The Captain ordered him flogged and staked to the ground. He left him there one day under the hot sun. When she found out, Doña Estrella came to speak on his behalf. She said he was a good cowhand and should be pardoned. The Captain knew that he did not want to compete with the young man. He ordered that he go far away and never return to the ranch. He was still a suspect of attacking the policeman. If he returned, things would most likely not go well for Gauchito.
The government was recruiting men for the war against Paraguay. The Gauchito saw this as an opportunity to prove himself. It was 1866, and he was twenty-two years old. He went to Corrientes and was assigned to the infantry. The war was fought in the wetlands, and he knew that kind of terrain. Military life was not what he expected. He had to spend so much time at the camp, waiting for orders. He got bored. He made a few friends. They were mostly all gauchos like him. The officers rarely spoke to them, since they came from the cities along the coast.
There was one soldier who was different from the rest. He always walked around with a file folder. He would put it down where he could and begin to draw. He would make sketches and drawings of the camp and its surroundings. He would also draw other soldiers, in different positions. He would place a pencil before him to measure the size of things and to calculate distances. They called him Cándido. He fought at his side in the battle of Sauce. At the battle of Curupaytí, he was badly injured and lost his right arm. El Gauchito observed as they took him to the army hospital. The injured man recognized him. He told him that he would never again be able to draw or paint. El Gauchito answered that if he were truly a painter, he would learn to paint with his other hand. The young man gazed at him appreciatively.
The men from Buenos Aires complained about the climate. It was hot and humid, and there were so many insects. The soldiers became ill. They had to fight in the worst of conditions. Curupaytí was a true slaughterhouse. They were ordered to advance through the swamps against enemy positions, but they were never able to succeed. Those who died were left behind, half buried in the marshes. During battle, el Gauchito got lost. When night arrived, he hid in a more elevated and dry terrain. Tired, he fell asleep. He was awoken by the noise of oncoming men. They spoke in Guaraní. He learned that they were Paraguayan soldiers. He took his rifle and readied his bayonet to defend himself. He remained very still. They came within a few meters of him but did not see him. They said they were the men of Captain Ayala and that the Argentineans were almost defeated. In the morning he was able to go back to his regiment. The battle lasted a few more days, and much like the Paraguayans had said, the Argentineans lost.
But they were too many. The months went by and the war started to turn in favor of the Argentinean side, and its allies, the Brazilians and the Uruguayans. An Officer journalist arrived at his Regiment. He was a Captain. He had fought in Sauce and in Curupaytí, where he had been wounded. El Gauchito was curious when he saw him read and write. One day he approached him so he could observe what he was writing. The captain asked if he understood what he had written down. El Gauchito said yes, that he knew how to read. The captain was surprised. Most of the gauchos were illiterate. El Gauchito told him he had learned to read at the ranch of his patrones, where his mother worked as a cook. The captain introduced himself. He was Captain Mansilla and wrote for La Tribuna, a newspaper in Buenos Aires. He also had military duties as a Captain. He asked if he would like to help him. El Gauchito answered that he would. He asked him to make clean and clear copies of his chronicles. El Gauchito had a very neat handwriting. He worked on a campaign table, next to the Captain’s tent. He spent hours at his task, almost artistically rendering each letter. Mansilla asked him if he had read books. El Gauchito responded that he had only read the Bible. Mansilla asked if he had ever read any other books. El Gauchito responded that he had not.
He became inseparable from the Captain and followed him everywhere. Mansilla asked him to read aloud the newspapers that arrived from Buenos Aires. He was against the government, did not like the president, and continually criticized the direction the war was taking. The chronicles he wrote analyzed the situation in a negative and pessimistic tone.
His Regiment did not go anywhere for several weeks. Mansilla got bored of life in the camp. They at last received orders to advance their position. The entire Regiment marched and positioned themselves closer to the enemy. They built up embankments to protect themselves from enemy fire and dug out trenches. Mansilla had a great sense of humor and liked to play pranks and tell jokes to his troops. The hours were long, and there wasn’t much action. The Paraguayans had few munitions and hardly fired at them. It was a war of nerves. The spent their time observing the enemy and waiting.
Mansilla proposed to make a charge against the enemy with their bayonets, but his superiors argued against it. The Captain was furious when he returned and climbed onto one of the embankments. He started waving his arms. The Paraguayans shouted at him. The Argentineans responded. A few Paraguayan bullets bounced around the fortification. His soldiers yelled at him to get down before he got wounded. He started to laugh loudly. He lowered his pants and showed his ass to the Paraguayans. All of the men started to laugh. That afternoon ended without incident.  Mansilla was now the hero of the camp.
A few days later, they advanced on the position the Paraguayans had held and evicted them. They had to mount a frontal assault against the enemy. There were many casualties. The Gauchito witnessed as a Paraguayan soldier charged at him. He managed to step aside at the last moment and impale him with his bayonet. As he died, the Paraguayan looked at him in the eyes. He was a boy of no more than fifteen. El Gauchito held the boy’s head up and watched him die in his arms. He kept on fighting, but that night he could not forget the look of the dying young soldier.
The war continued in its course. His Regiment was decimated little by little. Less than half of the men remained. He was wounded in one of his shoulders and was sent to the rearguard. He was tended to and bandaged by women who considered themselves nurses and stayed there until he regained his strength. When he returned to the front, Mansilla was no longer there. They had ordered him to return to Buenos Aires.
The next month, his Regiment was sent to Corrientes and was stationed in the city. His unit remained there for several months, until the end of the war came. They discharged everyone and gave them a few pesos with which to return to their homes. When Gauchito arrived at Pay Ubre, he learned that Doña Estrella, the patrona, had married Captain Alvarado. He had retired from the police and now managed the ranch. The Captain received the news of Gauchito’s return with displeasure. He suspected that something had happened between him and his wife.
The Gauchito found work in a ranch where he tended to some animals. He led them to the pastures and to the watering holes. He had a good horse and would ride him in the afternoons after work. He was tempted to go by the ranch of Doña Estrella, but he did not do so. It was not easy for him to once again become accustomed to the life of a cowhand. The war had changed him. He had nightmares at night. He saw the eyes of the boy he had killed with his bayonet and died in his arms. He would awaken in anguish.
One day, the police came looking for him in the ranch where he worked. It was the year 1871. They told him they didn’t want him there. Those were difficult times, and there were cattle rustlers everywhere. It was in his best interest to leave. He understood, but he did not do as he was told. Some time later, he found out that in Corrientes there was a revolt against the government. The Chief of Police arrived at the ranch and told everyone that soon a Commander would come to recruit soldiers for the civil war, and that they should prepare themselves to fight. El Gauchito felt that he had nothing to gain by joining and that, realistically, he did not want to fight in another war. To him, all men were brothers, even if they lived in different provinces or countries. That night he had a dream. He saw Christ, bathed in a white light. He had the face of an adolescent. In Him he saw the eyes of the young Paraguayan soldier, whose life he had felt drain from his body as he held him. God spoke to him in Guaraní and told him that man should not shed the blood of man. He told him to pray to San La Muerte for protection.
The next day, a squad of soldiers arrived. The Commander explained that they were azules liberales, blue liberals, and were opposed to the autonomista party. He ordered everyone to get ready, for they would take them all to join the fight. They were forced to heed to these orders and follow them. They made a big dragnet in several ranches. They didn’t even ask the cowboys on which side they were on. They were obligated to go with them. The gauchos were all Federales. They had always seen the liberals as enemies. Two gauchos came to speak to him. They agreed to flee that evening and to escape toward the swamps. They would not find them there. The Gauchito was familiar with the area and knew how to survive in that terrain.
He escaped with the other two. They were deserters and had to live as fugitive gauchos. They got lost in the wetlands of Iberá. They made a hut on an islet and stayed there. One of the gauchos was Francisco Gonçalves, a mestizo, son of a Brazilian and a Correntina mother. The other one was Ramiro Pardo, a criollo. They spent many months fishing and hunting in the marshes, waiting for the war to end and for there to be peace.
Francisco had a Bible in his saddle. He did not know how to read. When he found out that Gauchito did know, he asked him to read the Gospel to him. Every day he would read aloud and the others would listen. They were especially interested in the Passion, when Christ is handed over and crucified. They said the world was full of traitors.
At least a year had gone by, and the Gauchito dared to leave their hideout in search of news. He made his way to a populated area and stopped at a pulpería, a general store. The owner told him that the war had ended. He bought yerba mate and gin. He noticed some booklets resting on a barrel. He took one and leafed through it. It had the title El Gaucho Martín Fierro. It was in verse. The owner explained that it had been written by a journalist from Buenos Aires and that he sold them for a few cents. He bought one. He told the shop owner that he was a hunter and that he had hides and feathers to sell. He asked if he was interested in buying them. The other said yes. The Gauchito promised to return with a load of these goods.
 He went back to the swamps. His companions were exhilarated to learn of the end of the war. They could peacefully dedicate themselves to the hunting of otters and herons. They loved the book that Gauchito brought back. From then on, they preferred it to the Bible. Every afternoon, the Gauchito would read a few stanzas of El Gaucho Martín Fierro to them. They had heard many times singers improvise songs by the bonfires or in the general stores. At every ranch, there was always a guitar for anyone who wanted to sing a few songs. But they had never heard such beautiful verses. They would ask him to read the stanzas time and time again. They also discussed the contents of the book and asked each other questions.
They agreed that the gauchos had been happier in the past than they were at that moment. Many of their countrymen had their own place, their own cattle, and their own tropilla[12]. They worked in the ranches, and no one bothered them nor chased after them. “Those were different times,” said Francisco. “That was the time of Rosas.” El Gauchito remembered that the Captain always used to say that there were no more criollos left and that because of the government, soon there would be no gauchos left. After the fall of Rosas, the bad times came. Francisco said that a Commander took away his father’s land. Ramiro’s father had been persecuted. A Sargeant wanted to steal his woman from him. They had sent him to the frontier of Cordoba to fight in the forts. His mother had gone to live with the man and Ramiro was sent far away to work as a boyero, a cowherd.  He never again saw his mother.
Everyone liked that Martin Fierro defended himself. He was a real man. It was the army that was a disgrace. The officials were thieves who made life miserable for the gaucho. When Gauchito read the verses in which Martín Fierro deserted they all identified with him. They also celebrated the part in which he fought against the squad and when Sergeant Cruz stood by him. For them, friendship was a sacred thing; a gaucho should never abandon another gaucho, especially if he was in danger.
They remained together for a few more months. They hunted aquatic birds and saved the feathers. They also trapped otters and other wild animals and preserved the hides. Every so often, el Gauchito went to the general store, with the horses loaded. He would return with money and news. They would split the money and hide it in their belts. In 1874 there was yet one more civil war. These were turbulent waters. His two friends thought it would be a good time to return, mix in with the people, and open new roads for themselves. The police was distracted and occupied with the situation. The Gauchito preferred to stay a while longer and asked Francisco to leave the Bible. The other agreed. He didn’t know how to read anyway. They said their farewells. The two headed to the southern part of the province.
Before the gauchos Gonçalves and Pardo arrived at Goya they were detained by a squad. They were accused of being thieves and cattle rustlers. They had no trial. When they found out they were deserters, they decided to execute them. One said they should be taken to Goya and killed there. But they didn’t want to go through the trouble of taking them prisoners. They shot them by the side of the road. The Gauchito never found out that his friends had been killed. He continued to live on his little island, in the wetlands. He felt so alone. His spiritual life grew. He read El Gaucho Martín Fierro and the Bible. He spent a lot of time meditating.
In the afternoons, when the sun was going down and the sky was filled with red, he would lie down on the ground and concentrate on a spot at the center of his forehead. He started to have visions. He would speak with San La Muerte. Its skeletal figure would appear to him and tell him that he protected him and watched over him. The Gauchito answered that he was not afraid to die. He wanted to see God someday. He felt that everything he had experienced in his life was a preparation for something else. At some point he would have to go back to the place he had left behind, and by that time, he would be an entirely different person. The adolescent Paraguayan whom he had killed during the war appeared to him also. The Gauchito promised him that he would never again spill the blood of another man. Finally, in 1875, he prepared to leave his refuge.
He carried with him the money he had saved from the sale of feathers and hides. He was neatly dressed. He had shaved his beard but left his mustache. He carried with him a facón, a gaucho’s knife, with a deer horn handle, which was highly estimated. His boleadoras were tied to his chest. He was a consummate hunter, and he would not die of hunger as long as he had his bolas. He stayed away from the places where he had lived or those that he had visited frequently. When he was convinced that he had not been in a place, he would approach the area. He stopped by a ranch and asked for hospitality. He found out that the countryside was less populated than before. There were many adobe houses in ruins. These were not good times for the gauchos. He took with him his red poncho, and when they asked him if he was a federal, he would not lie. He told them he was, like all poor people, a defender of the gauchos.
One time he arrived at a ranch and found a desolate situation. A gaucho, his wife, and two sons lived there. One of the sons was very sick. He was consumed by fever. His body was covered by sores and pus-filled tumors. He had been unconscious for days, and they expected him to die that evening. Moved by compassion, Gauchito kneeled before his cot and touched his forehead. Then he put his hand over the sores and tumors. He took out the Bible and began to read chapter nine of the Gospel of Saint Matthew. When he reached the part where Jesus cures the sick, the sick child opened his eyes and sat up in his bed. His parents stepped back in fear. The child stood up and asked for water. They brought him water, he drank it, and told them he was hungry. The father slaughtered a lamb and roasted it. They asked the Gauchito to spend the night at the ranch. By morning, the child’s skin had healed. There were no signs of the sores or tumors. He was smiling. The Gauchito announced that he would be continuing on his way. They did not want to let him leave. They did not know what to give him. The man told him to take one of his horses. El Gauchito rode on a dapple-gray horse. He said he did not need another horse. He was just glad that the child was doing well.
He left. He did not fully understand what had just happened. God had intervened. He had cured, using him as an intermediary. He had accepted him as His own vessel. He had given him a power. He was bewildered. He arrived at a small forest and decided to spend a few days there. He neither hunted nor ate. He drank water from a stream. He fasted for a week. He spent the day lying beneath the trees, meditating. He read the Bible. In the late afternoons, he would go for walks. Spiritually strengthened, he decided to continue on his way. He asked for work at a ranch. They gave him a team of young horses, some wild, some unbroken, so he could tame them. He was a good horse-breaker. He heard a voice telling him not to beat them. They were creatures of God, and they would understand if he simply spoke to them. He decided to obey the voice. He did not punish the animals. He spoke to them. The horses seemed to understand him. He took away their tickles and their fears. He embraced them. The animals would rub against his chest. He would then ride them, and the young colts would behave like tame horses that had been used to the saddle for a long time. He made them walk without the use of a bit. He would apply pressure with his legs at the ribs, and the animals obeyed. A cowboy asked where he had learned all this, and if he had lived among the Indians. He responded that he had not, that he had simply learned how to do it. Afterwards, he put the bits in the horses’ mouths and let others ride them. The animals responded well.
He continued on his way and went to another ranch. They offered him work as a laborer. He accepted. He again started to have visions. One time, next to a watering hole, Christ appeared to him. He told Gauchito that he was, like himself, a lamb. He asked him not to be afraid, that He would receive him in his Kingdom. The lamb had come to the world to wash away man’s sins and to redeem mankind.
One day, when he returned to the ranch, he saw a carriage from the city at the house of the patrón. He asked the other gauchos what was going on. The doctor had come. The wife of the patrón was very ill. She had a severe pain on her left side. It was appendicitis. In the morning they took her out to the corridor of the house. Everyone came near to see her. Her skin was yellow. The doctor announced that nothing could be done. By the afternoon, the woman was unable to speak nor to swallow anything. The doctor told them to find a priest because she was going to die, that they should give her her last rites. They sent out for a man who passed himself off as a priest and who at times gave mass. As this was going on, the Gauchito sought to see if God would grant him a favor. He approached the woman and began to pray quietly. The others didn’t realize what he was doing. He asked Christ to save her, and San La Muerte not to take her away. After ten minutes, the woman opened her eyes. She told everyone she had had a vision. A white dove had come from the heavens and had deposited drops of dew in her mouth. They thought she was delirious. The woman sat up in bed. They asked if she was still in pain. She said no, that she was fine, that nothing hurt. She asked why they had all gathered there, and she got up. The Gauchito returned to his sleeping quarters and thanked God. No one understood what had taken place, but Gauchito knew it had been Christ who had interceded and who had conceded his supplication.
Days later, he left that work place and went out into the wilderness. He stoped under a tree and fasted for a week. He asked himself what this all meant and wondered what he was going to do with his life. Why had he been selected by God, and what did He expect of him? He told Christ that if he was to be a vessel whose blood would serve to wash away sin, to please take him, that he was in His hands. It was 1877, and the Gauchito was about to turn 33 years of age. He had lived all those years escaping from one thing to the next. The only love he had ever known was the widow’s love. He had been to a few fiestas and dances, but he rarely approached any woman. He saw in each one something that remained him of his beloved and backed away.
Finally, he decided that it was time to return to the village when he was raised. He wanted to visit the grave of his mother. He knew it was dangerous, but he prayed, and thought that God would tell him when it was his time. On the 6th of January of 1878, he went to Mercedes for the celebration of the Day of the Kings. He told himself that he wanted to see the people of his village, but in reality, he wanted to find out about Estrella. He thought that she would be a mature woman now, but he still loved her. He went to mass and then he headed to the fiesta. They served empanadas[13] and wine. Soon the guitar players started to play country music. The people were cheerful.
In the evening, he went to the cemetery to visit the grave of his mother. That night he slept there, covered with his poncho. The next morning he returned to the village and went to a tavern to drink caña, a local rum. He wanted to get the news. Suddenly he felt a hand take his arm. He turned to see the gaze of the former Chief of Police, Estrella’s husband. “I knew you would return,” he said. He pointed a gun at him and ordered el Gauchito to accompany him. They went to the police station. “Lock him up,” he told the Chief of Police. “He is a thief and a deserter.” The Gauchito spent the night in jail. He thought that perhaps this was the last night of his life.
On the morning of the 8th of January, the Chief of Police took him out of jail and delivered him to a squad that awaited him. “Take him,” said the Sergeant. “He is a thief, a cattle rustler, and a deserter. You know what to do.”
The Justice of the Peace was at the Police Station at that time and tried to intercede. “If he has committed a crime, he must be judged,” he said. “We must follow the rule of law.”
The Chief of Police looked at him scornfully. “You must think you are President Avellaneda,” he said sarcastically. “There are too many gaucho bandits in this land.”
“I’ll go to the Governor,” the other responded. “Enough innocent blood has been spilled. His crimes must be proven.”
They tied his hands and took him. After traveling two leagues, the Sergeant stopped the squad. The policeman dismounted next to an algarrobo tree. The Sergeant made him get down from the horse and stood him against the tree. He ordered his men to get their rifles ready. “Why are you going to kill me, Sergeant?” asked Gauchito. “I have committed no crime. I am unjustly persecuted. You are going to shed innocent blood.” The Sergeant removed his shirt and left him bare-chested. On his left side, there appeared the image of San La Muerte. They aimed. The Gauchito looked directly at them. The firing squad lowered their weapons. They declared that they could not fire against San La Muerte because they would condemn themselves. The Sergeant, enraged, threw a lazo over one of the branches of the algarrobo tree, tied his feet, and hung him head down.
“Don’t kill me, Sergeant. I am innocent,” he repeated. “Don’t listen to the Chief of Police. Listen to the Justice of the Peace.”
At that moment, Gauchito had a vision. A child appeared, covered in bandages, descending from the sky. He had the same eyes as the Sergeant. He understood that he was his son. The Sergeant took out the knife with the deer horn handle that he had kept from Gauchito and got ready. The Gauchito realized that his time had come. He thought of his vision. God wanted to tell him something. He had sent him a message. He finally understood. “Sergeant,” he said. “Your son is ill and is about to die. After you have killed me, pray for my soul. The blood of an innocent will wash away sins. Pray for me and your son will be saved. Invoke my name and I will cure him. I will also forgive you for spilling my blood, because it is the will of God. Invoke my name and your miracle shall be granted.”
The Sergeant looked at him with derision and told him not to worry, that his son was all right. In an instant, he cut his jugular. The Gauchito bled out rapidly and died. They lowered him from the tree and left him to one side. The Sergeant did not want to waste any time burying him. He was worried about what that man had said about his son. They covered the body with leaves and branches. The Sergeant ordered his men to return to the Police Station. He said he had something important to attend to. He left at full gallop toward his adobe house. As he arrived, he could already smell the tragedy. His wife received him, crying. His youngest son, ten years old, was gravely ill. He could not breathe. She told him he was dying. The Sergeant finally understood.
He got on his knees beside the bed where his son lay and began to pray. He invoked the name of Gauchito Gil and asked the dead man to forgive him his crime and for his innocent blood to wash away his sins. When he got to his feet, his son opened his eyes and started to breathe normally. He called the mother and asked her to bring something to eat. The Sergeant took his horse and returned at full gallop until he reached the algarrobo tree where they had left the body of Gauchito.
He removed the leaves that cover the cadaver and embraced him. He took the red poncho that he had been wearing and put it at the side of the body. He kneeled before him and asked for forgiveness. With his facón, he began to dig a grave at the base of the algarrobo. He took an espinillo branch and made a cross. He kissed the forehead of Gauchito and placed his body in the tomb. Over his chest, he placed the two books they had found on his saddle when they first apprehended him, the Bible and El Gaucho Martín Fierro. He crossed his hands over these books. They would help his soul in its journey. He covered him with dirt, put the cross in its place, and tied the poncho in its arms. He made a fire, and with a piece of coal wrote: “Gauchito Gil.” He crossed himself, mounted his horse, and returned to his ranch.
Upon his return, he confessed to his wife everything that had taken place. He told her that he had spilled the blood of an innocent. That God has punished him and had made his son mortally ill. That he invoked the blood of Gauchito and God had forgiven him and saved him. The Gauchito had granted a miracle. The woman believed him. She was very religious. They decided to make a peregrination on foot to Gauchito’s grave. Three hundred meters before reaching the algorrobo tree, the Sergeant got down and walked on his knees while he prayed. His wife walked beside him, thanking the soul of the deceased. They made a bonfire and stayed by the grave all night.
The Sergeant returned to his work the next day and told his men what had happened. They were people of deep faith. They believed that if the Gauchito would grant one miracle, he would grant others. One of the men had a mother who suffered from dark spots on her skin. He believed it was leprosy. The policeman took his mother to the grave of Gauchito and began to pray. He asked for him to cure her. Two months later, the spots had disappeared. The Gauchito had granted another miracle. In Mercedes, the news of what had happened traveled fast.
The 8th of January of the following year, at the one-year anniversary of his death, the police officer and his wife decided to visit his grave. They weren’t the only ones. There they saw the family of the Sergeant. Soon others began to arrive. Around thirty people came together. They took red flowers and placed them over the grave. The Gauchito’s red poncho was withered and worn because of the wind and rain. The Sergeant took another red poncho and nailed it to the trunk of the algorrobo, in front of the grave. Afterward, he directed the prayers. He asked forgiveness for having spilled his blood, and begged him to protect them all. He asked that his innocent blood wash away all of their sins. After this, they ate, drank, and that night they returned to Mercedes, strengthened in their faith.

                                                                                    Translated by Rolando J. Díaz





[1] Gaucho: A native cowboy of the pampas in South America; considered of mixed Spanish and indigenous ancestry.
[2] China: a local country woman.
[3] Someone from the Province of Corrientes in Argentina.
[4] Criollo, in Argentina, is a person native from the region. She or he can be a white, or a mixed blood individual.
[5] Paisano: a rural man.
[6] From Entre Ríos, a Province in Northeastern Argentina.
[7] A hunting weapon, comprised of three ropes, weighted at the ends, used by gauchos to capture animals by entangling their legs. Also known as boleadoras.
[8] Rebenque: whip
[9] A tree native to the region, whose branches are filled with thorns (espinas).
[10] Holy Death.
[11] A highly caffeinated herb tea popular in Argentina.
[12] A certain number of saddle-horses (6-12) at the service of the gaucho.
[13] A fried turnover made with meat.