Michael Kadish
In the literary works Lazarillo De Tormes and Ghosts, the authors present various characters who represent the Catholic Church. However, by no means do these characters glorify their clerical positions, nor could they even be considered role models. This is shown in Ghosts by means of Ibsen's priest, Manders, who is too indecisive and cautious to act in the wisest or best way, while Lazarillo De Tormes's anonymous author hits four religious leaders: a priest, a friar, a pardoner, and a "prophet," denouncing their legitimacy, honesty, and scruples. These five members of the church are attacked with great success in the books, showing, to readers' amazement, just how much the Church had been unquestioned in Lazarillo's Spain, and in Ibsen's Norway. Both books share a common goal--to dethrone the unquestioned Catholic Church.
In Ghosts, the priest, Manders, is given the position of deciding what is right for the sake of the community. Naturally, the people are worried about his perspective. In the first sequences of the play, Regina warns her father, "No, don't go that way; Mr. Manders is just coming along." This exemplifies the combination of honor, fear, and respect that she and everyone else bestows upon "a man of God." Consequently, Manders's judgment is of great worth. Faith in his decisions quickly proves to be a bad idea, as Mrs. Alving accepts what could be considered the worst possible advice given to her. "We ought not to expose ourselves to a mistaken judgement; and we have no right to do anything that will scandalize the community."
It is because of Manders that Mrs. Alving did not have insurance when a fire broke out. He had told her not to buy insurance, even though when asked if she could afford to rebuild after any damages, her response was, "No, I tell you quite plainly that I could not do so on any circumstances."
Manders should not be trusted. He cares too deeply about what others think. When entering the house, he notices her books. "Do you read this sort of thing!?!" Similarly, when meeting Osvald, Manders makes blanket statements against people in stories due to their living conditions, and declares that Osvald "has never yet had the opportunity of learning what a well regulated home means." When the orphanage burned, the audience learned that the suggestions of a priest are not necessarily divine, especially if other people's petty perceptions are include in the balanced.
The anonymous author of Lazarillo De Tormes is much harsher, however. He creates not only a villainous priest, but also a villainous pardoner, friar, and blind prophet. First, however, Lazarillo's priest, although not foolish like Manders, is still not respectable. In the time of Lazarillo De Tormes, the clergies' lives depended on gifts from the people. This priest took advantage of the townspeople's gifts and is in fact portrayed as being dependent on the them. He was an incredible miser, locking up his food from Lazarillo, while nearly starving him, then smashing Lazarillo_s teeth, when he discovered Lazarillo had taken bread. He borrowed cheese and supplies from churchgoers, never actually having to buy staples. He watched every crumb, and _if there was any house in the kingdom that had right to be free of mice, it was that one, because they don_t usually go where there isn_t a thing to eat._ Manders, in contrast, is concerned with others too much and consequently is poor at giving advise. Lazarillo De Tormes's priest might have been a good advisor, but he put his own finances first and foremost.
The main difference in these two literary works is in the outline of the characters. Manders's character has a good deal of irony. People are concerned about his opinions, but he sees others as his primary concern. People turn to him but merely receive a reflection of their own status. The problem with Lazarillo's priest concerns his privileges, which are abused. No one is hurt, save Lazarillo, or ruined in an uninsured fire, but he nevertheless greedily hordes the donations of the people. He is portrayed as a selfish man, but one who cares about how others perceive him since he does not allow his miserly qualities to be known. He does not care, however, if he is appreciated. While the priest in Ghosts worships others' views and the status quo, Lazarillo de Tormes's priest worships the gold and the bottom line by abusing the privileges afforded him as a priest.
Another character in Lazarillo de Tormes who is astounding at taking advantage of his position is the blind man. Due to many people's belief that he was incapable and an innocent and disadvantaged, he was able to succeed as a thieving con artist who legitimately sold prayers as a blind prophet. A master of his arts, the blind man taught Lazarillo how to steal, to cheat and to con. For instance, due to his blindness, people would not put it over him to be able to discover who stole his sausage, though he soon stuck his long nose down Lazarro_s throat, to smell for the remains of te meat. The author may have been trying to imply that society as a whole underestimates the blind. Hence they can be sneakier than we are aware; and we should not underestimate other_s capabilities. This is brought out the many times Lazarillo was hit by the blind man in the _lessons._
However, it is interesting to point out that the priest, before kicking out Lazarillo, says, "You could not have been raised by anybody but a blind man." Therefore the blind must have had a previous reputation for being untrustworthy, and the book either exaggerated the subject or brought it to light.
The blind man is not the only character in Lazarillo de Tormes based on already existing fears or stereotypes within the church. The remaining two characters, the pardoner and the friar, are similar to their ancestrial coworkers in the old Canterbury Tales. The Pardoner, lacking only the venereal disease, from his ancient associate, is just as a cheat and just as corrupt as his counterpart in the Tale. Granted, the Pardoner in Lazarillo de Tormes is much more creative and also much more likable, he is just as corrupt. Despite his using some very creative tricks, such as creating miracles by burning a cross or bribing a policeman to act possessed, he probably is, nevertheless, based on composite figures combined with an outsider's reaction in various situations.
Similarly, we can assume that the same holds true for the friar. At this period in history, women could enter the friars' dorms--but usually only for advice. The pre-Shakespearean Romeo and Juliet pictures Friar Lawrence_s chemistry lab as a front for orgy sessions. In the Canterbury Tales a line made reference to this. "But then he'd marry them off to a nice local man," suggestingthe priest_s responsibility in agreement to his promescuity.
Throughout Lazarillo de Tormes, however, sex is never mentioned. "She gave me a negro brother" was the closest, although the author was mildly suggestive by the number of frequent visits the African father made to his mother_s house.
When Lazarillo de Tormes reaches the friar, he says he does not wish to speak of the occurrence. This means one of three things. Either they did nothing, and it was very boring, causing him to neglect this part of the story. _One or two other things I_d rather not mention_ might secondly refer to the constant moving around and the need of the shoes, may imply they visited multiple females. Or thirdly, a new theory may be offered. The line "he gave me shoes" may be meaningful. In this era, and until after Victoria's reign, the giving of clothes symbolized love. Since none of his other owners is said to have given him clothes, it may be proposed that Lazarillo de Tormes was simply given the money to buy them. This fact may be coupled with one other suspicion of the Catholic Church. The lack of priest_s marriages has implied rumors of homosexuality. Given that he was bestowed upon with a symbol of love, and forced to go to many places with the friar, a homosexual implication might be a better explanation of why Lazarillo de Tormes does not want to discuss the situation.
Because the various church members and knocked out the protaginist, more than once in the plot, broke his teeth, twice, cheated the public, and had innuendo into, to say the least, a curious lifestyle, the Church as a whole is easily to be considered more disliked in Lazarillo. the most disliked character in either of these works. The author of Lazarillo de Tormes, making a comment on his society by using caricatures, can be assumed to have completed a satire, attacking mostly the Catholic Church. Ibsen, on the other hand, does not attack the Church but instead attacks the universal concept of looking for what the Church deems proper in social manners. The anonymous author of Lazarillo de Tormes attacks most of the Catholic Church, while Ibsen merely tells society to be careful who_s advice to seek.
Bibliography
Anonymous, Two Picaresque Spanish Tales. New York: Bantam, 1964.
Chaucer, Geoffery. Canterbury Tales. New York: Doubleday, 1984.
Ibsen, Henrik. Four Great Plays by Henrik Ibsen. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1981.
