Damned by Despair

by Tirso de Molina, Frank McGuinness (Translator)

Obsessed with his own salvation, the hermit Paulo dedicates himself to ten years of prayerful penance. When his faith wavers, the ever-watchful Devil seizes the moment to convince him that he shares the fate of one Enrico, a notorious Neapolitan gangster destined for damnation. Swearing vengeance, Paulo lashes out against God and assembles a band of rival outlaws.

I'll match Enrico in mad badness. So, we're damned, both of us, are we? Then I'll be revenged on the whole world.

And yet, even as their villainous crimes escalate, the possibility of redemption hovers over the two men, perhaps within reach.

A fast-paced adventure story embracing bandits and beautiful women between glimpses of heaven and hell, this subversive and at times riotous exploration of faith and the transformative power of love races across the Italian landscape, relishing the unpredictability of fate, an extraordinary array of characters and their very real dilemmas.

Sinner I am - pray for me.

Damned by Despair , written in 1635 by the great Spanish dramatist Tirso de Molina, is brought to vivid life in Frank McGuinness's new version, which premiered at the National Theatre, London, in October 2012.

Genres: Classics, Plays

112 pages, ebook

First published January 1, 2012

About the author

Sus padres eran humildes sirvientes del Conde de Molina de Herrera. Luis Vázquez, en su «Gabriel Téllez nació en 1579. Nuevos hallazgos documentales», en Homenaje a Tirso, L. Vázquez, ed., Madrid: Revista Estudios, 1981, pp. 19–36, documenta que nació en 1579. Blanca de los Ríos sostuvo que Gabriel fue hijo natural del Duque de Osuna, alegando una partida de nacimiento prácticamente ilegible y hace nacer a Tirso en 1584. Pero esa tesis carece de fundamento y hoy está completamente desacreditada, ya que de ser cierta Tirso habría necesitado dispensa papal para entrar en la Orden de la Merced. Además, el Duque de Osuna era entonces muy viejo y se encontraba acreditado en Nápoles. Por otra parte, ninguno de sus enemigos contemporáneos le achacó jamás ese origen.

Tirso de Molina fue un discípulo ferviente de Lope de Vega, a quien conoció como estudiante en Alcalá de Henares; toda su vida defenderá la concepción lopista del teatro. El 4 de noviembre de 1600 ingresó en la Orden de la Merced y tras pasar favorablemente el noviciado tomó los hábitos el 21 de enero de 1601 en el monasterio de San Antolín de Guadalajara. Se ordenó sacerdote en 1606 en Toledo, donde estudió Artes y Teología y empezó a escribir; ésta fue la ciudad donde vivió más tiempo, y desde ella hizo viajes a Galicia (en 1610 ó 1611), a Salamanca (en 1619) y a Lisboa.

En 1612 vendió un lote de tres comedias, y se cree que ya había escrito antes una primera versión de El vergonzoso en Palacio; de 1611 es La villana de La Sagra; de hacia 1613, El castigo del penseque y la trilogía de La santa Juana, y de 1615 data Don Gil de las calzas verdes; todavía este año estrenó en el Corpus toledano el auto Los hermanos parecidos. Ya por entonces, si bien cultivaba también temas religiosos, sus sátiras y comedias le habían granjeado problemas con las autoridades religiosas, lo que lo llevó a retirarse entre 1614 y 1615 al monasterio de Estercuel, en Aragón. Quizá por ello apenas figura en el Viaje del Parnaso de Cervantes.

Entre 1616 y 1618 estuvo en Santo Domingo, en cuya universidad fue profesor de teología durante tres años y donde además intervino en asuntos de su Orden. Esto le permitió conocer numerosas historias de la Conquista que usaría más tarde en sus obras. De vuelta ya en 1618, se instaló en Madrid, donde entre 1624 y 1633 aparecieron las cinco Partes de sus comedias; estas «profanas comedias» causaron un gran escándalo, de forma que el 6 de marzo de 1625 se reunió una de las Juntas con que el Conde-Duque de Olivares pretendía reformar las costumbres con el siguiente orden del día:

El escándalo que causa un frayle merçenario que se llama el Maestro Téllez, por otro nombre Tirso, con Comedias que haçe profanas y de malos incentivos y exemplos. Y por ser caso notorio se acordó que se consulte a S. M. de que el Confessor diga al Nuncio le eche de aquí a uno de los monasterios más remotos de su Religión y le imponga excomunión mayor latæ sententiæ para que no haga comedias ni otro género de versos profanos. Y esto se haga luego.
Así que se tomó la resolución de desterrarlo a Sevilla, donde residió en el Convento de la Merced, edificio que actualmente ocupa el Museo de Bellas Artes de la ciudad. En la dedicatoria de la Tercera parte alude a esta persecución, que no logró desalentar su vocación poética:

Gusano es su autor de seda: de su misma sustancia ha labrado las numerosas telas con que cuatrocientas y más comedias vistieron por veinte años a sus profesores, sin desnudar, corneja, ajenos asuntos, ni disfrazar pensamientos adoptivos. Tempestades y persecuciones invidiosas procuraron malograr los honestos recreos de sus ocios...
En 1622 participó en el certamen poético con motivo de la canonización de San Isidro, pero en 1625 la Junta de Reformación creada a instancias del Conde-Duque de Olivares le castigó con reclusión en el monasterio de Cuenca por escribir comedias profanas «y de malos incentivos y ejemplos», y pidió su des

Reviews

[Eleanor · Rating 3 out of 5]

A minute slay. Honestly surprised that I did not hate this. The play itself actually has some interesting ideas on good and evil, and is surprisingly sassy at parts. Celia slayed left and right, this would have been better if she had had much more stage time. I feel like there was lots to discuss about this play, and it had a multitude of interesting themes beyond religion, though the religion was also interesting too. It some interesting things to say about the desire for salvation, hypocrisy, and treatment of people determined by your own idea of where they will end up in the afterlife. There are some questionable/simplified morals but we can't have it all :').

However, the fault of this play really lies with the translator. It is perhaps not the worst translation I've read, but I would not go as far as to say it is good either. First, as a whole, I do not think this play translates that well across time periods, let alone language, without at least some reinterpretation. While relevant themes do peek through, it is heavily religious, and in a sense that feels like it comes from the 17th century. I feel like Frank McGuiness could have done something with that to highlight the lasting relevance of this play, otherwise...why translate it for the modern reader? Also, his choices of language were....not the best. While there were some pretty metaphors, there were some sentences that, while understandable for the reader, were not really grammatically correct in English. Plus, I just felt like he did not think about the musicality of the language at all. First of all, the flow was just bad between what felt archaic and what felt modern. It was like his half hearted attempt at modernising the play was throwing in some jarring modern terms and calling it a day. And even within more cohesive sections, sometimes he would select words that did not feel like they suited the tone of the moment whatsoever. For example: during a dramatic death scene, a character says '[spoiler character name] and God are the best of mates. / Beg the lord to forgive you.' I just question what tone that McGuinness was trying to achieve here, because while perhaps he wanted the play to have a more modern feel, nothing about the values was updated to sit alongside that. It made the reading experience jarring and I don't think it did good service to the legacy of this play.

[rebeca ravara · Rating 4 out of 5]

THIS MIHT BE THE FIRST COMP LIT BOOK I LOVED.

so funny. so good. imagery off the charts. luvd it

[aliya · Rating 4 out of 5]

guys….. I WAS SO CONFUSED IN THE BEGINNING BUT… around page 30 it all took a turn and i am pleased to say that i enjoyed this play. (3.5 rating btw). it made me laugh but also think a lot. it was nice!!!!! it was nothing crazy nothing insanely good but i’m giving it extra cred cause for once i don’t hate a comp lit play???

[Maddie · Rating 4 out of 5]

read this for class and, controversially, enjoyed it. maybe i loved it bc it was exactly what i was looking to get out of a module called Good and Evil, but it scratched that itch for me. not the most complex look at fate and predestination ever but still a fun book to discuss.

[Nicole Entin · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this in a sitting at the Reference Library, so I wish I had more time to dig into this text, but that’ll have to wait until September. Some interesting implications in philosophy (free will is always a classic) and even psychology (reactions to the disturbance of a fundamental core belief), though the religious themes of temptation, salvation, and mercy are certainly the central aspects of the play. Sort of neither here nor there, I feel like the translation must have been geared towards the particular 2012 National Theatre production it was used in, but an attempt at creating a sense of timelessness and thematic universality so often results in unsatisfying ambiguity – as it did here.

[Erin · Rating 3 out of 5]

*3.5*

Super quick to read, has funny moments and overall was a good time. I think the messaging is not very subtle and sometimes drama like that gets a bit repetitive but it wasn't too bad. The translation/version is off-putting at times but overall I think it's a decent play which poses some really thought-provoking questions and isn't afraid to challenge the religious status quo.

[Nick Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had not heard of Tirso de Molina. That might not be true – he created Don Juan so I probably had heard of him at some point, but I have no recollection of hearing about him. I know there was a thriving Spanish theatre at the same time as Shakespeare and his pals were entertaining London, but I know little about it. Compared to the contemporary English works Damned by Despair is streamlined and pacey, but I suspect that has more to do with Frank McGuinness than de Molina. McGuinness, using a literal translation by Simon Bredon, has adapted the work into modern English verse, much in a jaunty colloquial style (Bob Marley is even echoed at one point), moving registers when more serious things are being discussed. A tale of sin and redemption: Paulo is a hermit living a holy life in retreat, but the Devil tricks him into believing his salvation is wrapped up with that of Enrico, a Neapolitan thug (I won’t try to explain the mechanics of this) – the irony is that Paulo travels towards damnation while Enrico finds salvation. As an early Twenty-first Century Northern European atheist (and a Protestant atheist at that) these themes don’t really speak to me, although they have a certain historical interest. And this adaption was made for a production at the British National Theatre, so I wonder how the modern British audience responded to the religious drama. As we might expect from a work from the early Seventeenth Century, the authority of God, fathers and the State tend to be mutually reinforcing. If we don’t respond to the play’s religious fable, I’m not sure what is left – although I imagine scenes such as the one where angels take a soul to heaven could be played as kitsch...although I hope not.

[emily · Rating 2 out of 5]

Can't quite tell whether the moral is satirical or not in this play/translation. So you can just do anything and then repent and it'll be ok? That might be a primitive reading, but that's what in interpreted this ending as saying to some degree. Or is it mocking the concept?

Is the moral not to be carried away by ideas and wait patiently to see the entire picture? Or is it that we shouldn't be self-serving? Like, Enrico does a lot of his sins for his father's wellbeing, and Paulo does his for hedonistic pleasure.

I wonder how much of this is true to the original translation. How much did McGuinness add here? I have a theory that this could be commentary on the Troubles, but I'm just unsure. I think my opinion of this play and translation would probably change depending on this. I guess I'm not a particularly objective person for an English student.

[Bailey Tolentino · Rating 2 out of 5]

flop. I feel horrible for the people who paid to sit thru this play.

[Caspar "moved to storygraph" Bryant · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'd be surprised if it's anybody's favourite 2.5- but interesting nonetheless. Happily, Kierkegaard is relevant to an awful lot of it.

Does it survive the years? There's a haphazard attempt at modernising the language which is undermined by the play's own narrative. But why revive the play? One struggles to read it as particularly cutting to the present moment. Redemption is a fun idea to play with but I think the play needs a more radical re-interpretation.

Not an unenjoyable experience.

[Shelbi · Rating 2 out of 5]

yeah i am