DOUBLE PERSPECTIVE IN TWO WORKS OF JORGE AMADO

I. The greater degree of ironic detachment with which Jorge Amado has approached action and characters in much of his latter-day fiction has been most pronounced in the works that emphasize the relativity of truth. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the two novelettes of Os Velhos Marinheiros. I Both "A Morte e a Morte de Quincas Berro D'água" and "A Completa Verdade sobre as Discutidas Aventuras do Comandante Vasco Moscoso de Aragão, Capitão de Longo Curso" deliberately leave the reader with considerable doubt as to the reality/irreality of the events they narrate. This they achieve primari1y through the use of such ironic devices as multiple narrators, unreliable narrators, contrapuntal internal reduplications and double perspectíve.? Of these, the Iast-narned has perhaps received the least attention. I should like to examine it briefly here in order to establish some of its types and functions within Amadian fiction, laying specia! emphasis on its sociological ramifications. But first a word is in order about the general nature of double perspective as seen by severa! prominent literary critics. Their views will serve as a grid against which to assess the role of double perspective in the present works.


I.
The greater degree of ironic detachment with which Jorge Amado has approached action and characters in much of his latter-day fiction has been most pronounced in the works that emphasize the relativity of truth. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the two novelettes of Os Velhos Marinheiros. I Both "A Morte e a Morte de Quincas Berro D'água" and "A Completa Verdade sobre as Discutidas Aventuras do Comandante Vasco Moscoso de Aragão, Capitão de Longo Curso" deliberately leave the reader with considerable doubt as to the reality/irreality of the events they narrate. This they achieve primari1y through the use of such ironic devices as multiple narrators, unreliable narrators, contrapuntal internal reduplications and double perspectíve.? Of these, the Iast-narned has perhaps received the least attention. I should like to examine it briefly here in order to establish some of its types and functions within Amadian fiction, laying specia! emphasis on its sociological ramifications. But first a word is in order about the general nature of double perspective as seen by severa! prominent literary critics. Their views will serve as a grid against which to assess the role of double perspective in the present works.
n. Double perspective is cornmonly known by various names: "dual focus," "binary characterization" and "bipolar narration," to list a few. But, whatever the term employed, it does not appear to have a large critical bibliography of its own. Indeed, one is often obliged to consult such topics as "irony" and "arnbiguity" in order to find the slightest mention of the technique. Northrap Frye makes one such mention in his discussion of mythoi, or archetypal plot formulas. He detects in the quest phase of tragedy an ironic undercurrent of victory within disaster, often revealed by a double perspective in the action. By way of exarnple, he cites Milton's Samson Agonistes, in which "Samson is a buffoon of a Philistine carnival and simultaneously a tragic hera to the Israelites, but the tragedy ends in triumph and the carnival in catastrophe.t'" In his recent book entitled A Rhetoric of lrony, Wayne C. Booth provides a~~itional insights. He differentiates deliberate ambiguity produced by a "doubled Slon" from what he calls "stable irony," noting that the formei defies univocal IUterpretation while the latter demands it. Furthermore, he adds, where there is a doubled Vision"neíther perspective is ever as fully realized in itself as it might have been without the cOnstraints of the other.l'" In support of this contention, he recalls the perceptual roblems created by optica! illusions, such as those made famous by Wittgenstein and Ombrich and those seen throughout the art of M. C. Escher." A third view of double perspective is that of Sharon Spencer, who in her study Space, Time and Structure in the Modern Novel observes that the creation of two conflicting viewpoints within a single text often forces the reader to reconcile the discrepancies by inventing a third, synthetic perspective. Thus, while the two versions of truth may seem to cancel each other out, they may actually cohere at a higher level." Finally, a fourth approach may be inferred from some of the remarks Roland Barthes has addressed to the topic of ambiguity. He discerns in every work of fiction a series of dilatory devices used to create and maintain suspense, of which the equivoque or double meaning is among the most important.
Dubbing this phenomenon the "herrneneutic code," he notes that its primary function is to delay the resolution ofthe various enigmas posed by the text. But, the code may also be viewed in its own right as a type of "countercommunication." Thus, in Barthes' opinion, the equivoque is more than just a means of interfering with the univocality of the text; it has meaning in and of itself." Double perspective, insofar as it is ambiguous, may be saíd to fulfill a similar role.
To sum up, then, double perspective, as seen by the critics, is often associated with the irony of victory within tragedy, with ambiguous, mutua11y inhibiting points of view and with an implicit third perspective, which the reader is called upon to synthesize. Moreover, if we may be permitted to extrapolate, it conveys its own inherent meaning, independent of the two countervailing meanings that it holds in equilibrium.
IIL Double perspective is for a11 intents and purposes first employed by Amado in "Quincas." ln addition to highlighting the subjectivity of conflicting versions of truth, it serves to comically underscore existing differences in class values and priorities. The petit-bourgeois family of the late, lamented Joaquim Soares da Cunha, alias Quincas Berro D'água, considers his autumnal sowing of wild oats to be an embarrassment, his life having ended for them the day of this abrupt departure frorn "polite society" several years earlier. When confronted with the fait accompli of his actual death, they are only too hapyy to lay him to rest with as little fanfare and expense as possible and without any further humiliation for themselves. To his skidrow companions -and to Quincas himself -however, his life only began when at the age of fifty he abandoned wife and family, thus repudiating the drab reality of Joaquim Soares da Cunha. His belated devotíon to a liberated existence has elevated him in their eyes to the status of a folk hero. And with his passing their lives have been impoverished.
J oaquim-Quincas is thus endowed with a dual identity -one for each social class. lndeed, much of the ironic humor and social satire of the work stems from the direct confrontation of these two diametrically opposite points of view -the one more materialistic, the other more spiritual. While the early and final chapters deal separately with the reactions of both parties, one of the later episodes -the wake scenejuxtaposes the two "famílies" and their confl icting social values, as if to represent a symbolic enactment of the class struggle. Decked out in the garb of a bom burguês, Quincas is barely recognizable to his humble associates (p. 48). To Vanda, his daughter, Joaquim in death had seemed finally to submit to her iron will and, by extension, to that of her dead mother, whom he had abandoned. She had at last succeeded in erasing hís defiant smile; no longer did she "imagine" hearing his earthy expletives arising from tíie open coffin. But, with the arrival of the four "vagrants," he seems to have regained his stubborn rebelliousness, the conternptuous smirk on his lifeless face having strangely reappeared (p. 49).
The ful! force of Amados biangular portrayal of Joaquim-Quincas is not felt , however, until after the withdrawal of the Cunha farnily frorn the wake. The focus now shifts away frorn the conflicting social ethics implicit in the dual identity to the very question of whether J oaquim-Quincas is actually dead -as had been presumed -or merely "playing possum" to humiliate his snobbish relatives. The reality of his every "action" and "reaction" is thus rendered ambiguous by the novelist. This is accomplished in part by the narrator's repeated use of such expressions as parecia, pelo jeito and evid~ntemente to qualify the description of the "decedent"'s apparent attitudes and feelings.
The several utterances ascribed to Berro D'água toward the end of the wake, though if true plainly indicate that he is still alive, may also be interpreted as hallucinations induced by the convenient drunkenness of the four remaining mourners. Yet, it is never completely c1ear which of these interpretations the reader is expected to accept. An additional quantum of ambiguity is generated by the narrator's use of double-entendres and his description of Quincas' movements with verbs that connote voluntary action. Thus, during the drunken romp toward the waterfront to which the four companions drag the would-be corpse, Quincas is equivocally described as being "satisfeito da vida" (p. 59), "num dos seus melhores dias" (p. 60) and "no melhor de sua forma" (p. 63). It is further noted that "Quincas quase corria, tropeçava nas pedras" (p 62), that at one point he tried to trip his comrades while sticking his tongue out at passers-by (p. 60), and that finally "Quincas se pôs de pé" (p. 65) before "diving" into the sea, Thus, the arnbiguity is gleefully maintained.
Perhaps the major bone of contention to separate the dichotomous views of Joaquim-Quincas is the manner, time and place of his extinction. Although the narrator sets out to unravel the mystery, in the end the decision as to where the truth lies is c1early left up to the reader. If, as the Cunha family contends, the demented patriarch expired quietly in a filthy cubic1e on the Ladeira do Tabuão, than logically the account of those who c1aim to have seen Quincas plunge into the surf of AlI Saints' Bay of his own free will is but a canard concocted by a band of drunken miscreants. If, on the other hand, Quincas was still alive throughout the wake and subsequently joined his comrades for a Iinal fling before taking his own life in the waves, then it is safe to surmise that the entire "death scenario " was merely an elaborate scheme to have the last laugh on his haughty kin. The only other alternative -death and resurrection -is at once the least logically Possible and the most symbolically satisfying." For, if we admit the possíbilitv of Quincas' magically transcending death to preserve his cherished freedom, then we have already gane a long way toward invalidating the kinds of hypocrisy and petty materialism thaj so provoked his angry rebellíon. Yet again we are never told which one of these realities to accept; the narrative remains open-ended.
In any event, both the hero's twofold identity and the arnusíng controversy sUrrounding his death serve prirnarily to set forth in a non-threatening, seemingly disinterested fashion the fundamental economic divergences that underlie the two COntradictory ethoi in questiono Thus, by employing a double perspective, the author succeeds in effectively conveying his ideological message whi!e also managing to entertain his readership. IV. A second, and equally artistic, form of double perspective emerges in "Comandante." Vasco is seen by his retinue of admirers as a swashbuckling hero of the seven seas; he is drawn by his detractors as a grocery heir and flagrant hoaxer. Vested interests motivate the positions of both parties. The former seek to preserve in Vasco what they feel to be their own just parcel of greatness, while the latter endeavor to aggrandize themselves by exposing the "master mariner" as a phony.
Vasco, however, is not the only one in the story to receive a binary characterization.
Two characters, Carol and Dorothy, are supplied with at least three persona!ities apiece. By one of Vasco's accounts, Caro I is an opium smuggler in the East lndian seaport of Makassar (p. 106), while in another she is represented as Sister Carol, a devout Asian missionary (p. 290). Yet, according to Chico Pacheco, she is in reality the proprietress of a noted Salvador brothel (p. 141). Again, if one can place any trust in the Captain's tales, Dorothy, a passenger on one of the many ships under his command, succumbed to yellow fever after renouncing both husband and fortune to spend her !ife with the seafaring hero (pp. 105-07, 289-90). If, on the other hand, Chico is telling the truth, Dorothy is a kept wornan kidnapped by Vasco's friends in Bahia so that she and Vasco rnay be able to carry on a passionate leve affair (pp. 143, 174-80). Still a third alternative, appearing in one of Vascc's alleged dreams of grandeur, pictures Dorothy as the alluring spouse of the Bahian Secretary of Transportation, who has come to dedicate a rai! line constructed by the renowned "Doutor Vasco Moscoso de Aragão, engenheiro civil" (p. 166).
Despite the double perspective of "Quincas," the decedent's two identities are not presented as mutually exclusive realities, but as successive periods in his !ife.The only real dispute over the objective truth, then, centers on the circumstances of his untimely death. Barring some sort of miraculous resurrection, one must choose one account ar the other, or else provide a viable compromise. With Vasco, however, each version of his past existence seemingly precludes the other. He is either a seasoned sea dog ar a postunng landlubber -but not both.
Or so it seems, at least, until he is called upon to take cornmand of a captainless ship bound for Recife and points north. Oddly enough, throughout this "inítíation ordeal" the two realities appear juxtaposed in Vasco's thoughts and staternents, as though they formed a harrnonious continuum. He is at once the Aragãozinho of grocery farne and the intrepid conqueror of the briny deep, a frequenter of Salvador's Pensão Monte Carlo and a habitué of Oriental cabarets, an acquaintance of the Bahian Governar and an on-the-spot defender of the Portuguese Crown epp. 231, 236,247,250,252,283,292). Not satisfied with only two antithetical options with which to mislead his read ing audience , the novelist thus has further clouded the picture by mischievously hinting at a third, hybrid thesis, which seerns to raise as many questions as it purports to settle.
It might be argued that one convenient way to represent the resulting structure of "Comandante" would be in lhe tripartite scherna of thesis > antithesis > synthesis." Yet , this is true only to a limit ed degree. For, although thcre occurs in the end an interpenetration of thesis and antithesis, the very fact that this is done primarily to further confuse the reader means that the synthesis must remain only partially actualized.
Only the least controversial elements of the conflicting first and second perspectives are hornogenized to form the third. There is never any attempt to explain away the sharpest points of disagreement, for they cannot be explained away. The relevance of Booth's claims appears to be mixed. On the one hand, his assocíatíon of "doubled vision " with arnbiguity seems to ignore the non-rnutuallyexclusive type of dual focus, such as that which centers on Quincas' dual identity. On the other hand, given this limitation, his content ion that both perspectives will necessarily be f1awed by the need to interlock wi th one ano ther seems to be borne out by the remaining two cases. Taken alone, neither of the two strictly realistic alternatives for explaining the disappearance of Quincas' body is free of internal contradictions. Each has had to sacrif'ice something to achieve the illusion that both are plausible. If we accept the version of those who claim that the body was stolen, are we then to dismiss as hallucinations or lies the various words a nd actions attributed to the would-be decedent even before his companions' ar rival? If we are convinced that Quincas was simply playing a practical joke, how can we account for the undertakers apparent failure to detect this? Much the sarne is tr ue of "Comandante." For, as we have seen, the author's attempt to recoricile the opposing versions in a third, mixed perspective is at best half-hearted and stops well short of smoothing ali the rough edges. And this would appear to be as rnuch the result of the internal inconsistencies of each perspective as it is of the fundamental divergences between the two perspectives.
As regards Spencer 's findings, they too are most applicable where ambiguity is involved. There is no pressure on the reader to forge a compromise reality from the two identities of Quincas, for they are díachronic -not synchronic -in nature. Nor does one preclude the validity of the other. Yet, in the case of Quincas' death, quite the contrary is true. lnherent in the open-endedness of the opposition is a demand for resolution in a third perspective, pravided one does not opt for one of the first two. It is the reader who must supply this synthesis. "Comandante" is a bit more complicated. It would appear on the surface that Amado, seeing the need for a third, conciliatory perspective, has anticipated the reader by meshing the two realities in the final section of the novelette. Thus, the synthesis would appear to be more explicit than implicit. But, as we have seen, the existence of a true third perspective is more illusory than real. Hence, a continuing need for the reader to perforrn the synthesizing operation.
Barthes' comments lend additional focus to the preceding views. We have noted that in using a double perspective as a vehicle to convey the irony of victory within disaster Amado is actually violating his supposed neutrality. Further, we have observed that the equivocal presentations of Quincas' death and Vascc's identity are based on mutually inhibiting binary perspectives. And, finally, we have seen that in both works the contradictions between thesis and antithesis tacitly encourage the construction of a synthesis. ln light of Barthes' assertion that there is adeliberate meaning, or countercommunication, in the very equivocality of an equivocal statement, it is not unreasonable to regard the above characteristics as integral components of the author's message.
Thus, on the one hand, Amado appears to be calling attention to the futility of trying to recover the truth frorn either of the two conflicting perspectives. For both contaín serious internal inconsistencies. On the other hand, he seems to be suggesting that even the reconciliation of the two into a cohesive synthesis may be difficult -at least if we expect to eliminate all points of disagreement. For, as in the Hegelían dialectic, any such synthesis will itself necessarily become another thesis with its own innate contradictions and need for resolution in another synthesis. What is more, no two syntheses will be exactly alíke. Faced with the open-endedness of the two tales, every reader will attempt to reconcile the incongruities in a third perspective. But, in the end, even this perspective will prove to be partial, to the extent that it is influenced by hís/her personal biases. Thus, every reader in effect will create his/her own version of the truth.
VI. The sociological implications are not difficult to draw. By associating the conflíctíng perspectives in the two works with opposing social classes or community ethics, Amado seeks to show that no single class or ethic is capable of unilaterally satisfying hurnan needs. Difficul t though ít may be to attain, only a synthesis of some sort can provide a workable solution for societys problems. And no two solutions will be identical. Each will inevitably be influenced by the pre-existing tendencies and partialities of the society in questiono .