Santana-Vallarta

REVIEWS on Las Armas y Las Letras

*Note: I was only able to find one scholarly review on the 2010 edition. The other two are in
reference to the first edition.
Trapiellos book takes a sympathetic look at the Civil War and writers who were often
victims of the necessity of political decisions, particularly of those in the generation 98 camp in
contrast to those who were more committed to the war and its efforts. The ninety-eighters were
of a natural peace, scholastic and speculative, whereas those in the war were more extreme,
taking their craft into the political realm on one end and a creative end in the other, creating a
disconnect in their work as they participated in the extreme ideological expressions of the war.
Because of this, the Spanish literature of the thirties is almost impossible to categorize.

Albert, Claudia and Claudia Barg. Literatura espaola: historia y crtica. Notas: Reseas
iberoamericanas (1995): 66-68. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43116432.

Trapiello overall succeeds in distancing himself politically from his historical subject
matter, giving the same treatment to both Republicans and Francoists, illuminating many
important names in Spanish literature that participated on both sides of the war. The book takes
the subjects on their own terms on how they were radically affected by the war, and Trapiello
supplements this with a wide use of first person quotes and testimonials for over one hundred
writers. In doing so, Trapiello succeeds to break the idea of Republican writers being both
aesthetically and ethically better than their right-wing counterparts, his thoroughness making this
book one of legitimate reference for those studying about the Civil War.

Santana-Vallarta
Blanca, Joaquin Pieiro. Reseas. Historia Actual Online (2010): 226-228.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277183562_Trapiello_Andres_Las_armas_y_la
s_letras_Literatura_y_guerra_civil_19361939_Barcelona_Ediciones_Destino_2010_633_pp.

Trapiellos polemic book gives a look into the microcosm of contemporary mans dramas
and ideals by looking how authors were driven to either one or the other side of the conflict,
forming federations and associations to consolidate their political identity against one another to
the upmost extreme. In doing so, we find both Republicans some even in exile, who contributed
to the massive incorporation of intellectuals into the Republican military, how they did so well
and at times not so well. Literary journals likewise played a major role in bridging this gap in the
culture, a medium through which ideas could get shared and connect writers to others
intellectually involved in the war effort.

Toribio, Jos Manuel Cuenca. Recensiones. Revista de Estudios Polticos (1994): 326-333.
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=27259.

With Trapiello himself calling Las Armas y Las Letras a hybrid of history and literary
criticism, it is a bit difficult to distinguish where one draws the line on Trapiello practicing good
historical work or is embellishing for the sake of narrative. He does, most graciously in the sight
of Blanca, succeed in providing a wide range of first person testimonials and documents to
support his narrative (Blanca 227) and subsequently insights into both the public and personal
lives of the writers he exposes, all the while simultaneously placing them within the political and

Santana-Vallarta
historical context and situation. While doing this, Trapiello often references other authors so as to
create conversation and various angles of critique by which he can more objectively evaluate the
writers he exposs.
The true challenge in all of this, however, is whether or not Trapiello truly distances
himself from his topic. Perhaps he does so politically, as Blanca argues, but is questionable in his
sympathies to the romanticized poets of the 98 generation, whom Trapiello calls naturally
peaceful, scholastic and speculative (67), something which Albert does not let go of. She brings
this sentimentality, confronting the nature of Trapiellos work as he himself is a poet, novelist,
and essayist, taking hold of his literary heritage but dabbling in a practice outside his field,
playing the part of a historian when his work has been in publishing literature and journalism.
Ironically, what Blanca would call the distancing from or imposition of political agendas, Blanca
sees as ambiguity and indecisiveness that lends within this wide study of authors no particular
opinion or agenda, Albert then accusing Trapiello as wanting to have as much talent as Stendhal
to write a novel titled: Neither Red nor Black! (68), a reference to either being on the Left or on
the Right.
Tropios review only serves as an analysis of politics within the subjects of the book
itself, serving to contextualize Trapiellos interests. The questions one is left with then are first,
are those who are unofficially trained but intellectually qualified able or even allowed to do
history, and if that is the case, who are the gatekeepers to historiography? And perhaps more
pressing in light of Albert and Blancas reviews that reveal political tensions, is poetry suppose to
be or not be used as a tool for ones own political agenda, and if it is, why and how is it
beneficial?

Santana-Vallarta