Book Review: Tempo para entender: História comparada da literatura portuguesa

Alves, Hélio J. S. Tempo para entender: história comparada da literatura
portuguesa. Colecção "Da Literatura." Casal de Cambra, Portugal:
Caleidoscópio, 2006. 201 pp.



Prof. Hélio Alves's volume of studies is both a rich source of
valuable insights on well-known and lesser-known authors born in Portugal
or living in it, and a puzzling attempt to re-tell the history of
Portuguese literature. In its totality, this relatively brief volume
claims the need for "tempo para entender", i. e., that it is time to
overcome certain biases based on ideas of national identity, on the
implicit requirement that "Portuguese literature" be written in the
Portuguese language, and on the "canonization" of certain central authors,
especially those who, like Camões, Eça de Queirós, and Pessoa, are
eminently "exportable" on the world literary scene. As a result, Prof.
Alves provides a re-periodization of Portugal's literary history, which,
while based on reasoned motives, still appears problematic to this
reviewer. For example, the period he calls "Modernidade" extends from 1611
to 1825, while the period from 1826 to the present is vaguely termed
"Revoluções." Unfortunately, the most recent author treated in this
alternative vision is António Nobre, principally his poetic volume Só
(first edition 1892).

As another facet of his re-working, Prof. Alves champions
(justifiably, in many cases) a series of authors who, in his view, have
been eclipsed by towering national or international figures, por example,
1) Gil Vicente, 2) the Renaissance humanist Cataldo Sículo (who, though
living in Portugal, wrote extensive poems in Latin); 3) the Baroque poet
Vasco Mouzinho, and 4) Camilo Castelo Branco. The only problem with these
vindications is the necessity Alves feels of making them equal to, or
greater than, better-known figures. For example, the insightful analyses
of Gil Vicente's farces and of Mouzinho's narrative poems are marred at
certain points by unnecessary comparisons with Shakespeare, a playwright
who wrote in genres and who lived under cultural circumstances that makes
these direct comparisons problematic, to say the least. The lamentable
tendency to erect a small number of "masterworks" and "genius authors"
should not lead to an implicit diminishing of their importance in order to
"make room" for the critic's favorite authors, however unjustly neglected.

While one may have serious difficulties with Alves's periodization
and methodology, as well as with the somewhat misleading subtitle "História
comparada da literatura portuguesa," it is undeniable that the volume
demonstrates a far-reaching knowledge of many European literatures and
contains some very impressive case studies. Alves does some very fine
analysis of structure and temporality in Gil Vicente's "Auto da Índia."
Even more remarkable is his necessarily brief, but suggestive analysis of
narrative voice in Bernardim Ribeiro's enigmatic Menina e Moça. In more
modern periods, he does an insightful comparison of two novels which, each
in its own way, combine narrative complexity and social analysis with
carnavalesque satire: Camilo's A brasileira de Prazins and Gogol's Dead
Souls (which Alves cites in the original Russian).

Although the volume cannot be recommended as a thoroughgoing revision
of Portuguese literary history, its "mergulhos" into specific authors (in a
comparative context) make very rewarding reading and could serve as models
of textual analysis.

David J. Hildner

University of Wisconsin-Madison