Al fin se paga todo: An Ironic Example of Zayas’s Sense of Justice

Jennifer Wood

Indiana University

María de Zayas y Sotomayor has often been viewed as a feminist writer who seeks to defend women by showing that men are the culprits and women are the victims. In many of her novels, this author seems to question the traditional systems of justice, marriage, education, and the code of honor. She also questions the lack of respect for women and the often violent treatment they are subjected to by men. Using a layered or embedded narrative, Zayas delights the reader and challenges the construct of woman as seen in previous male-authored texts, such as those of Cervantes. The didactic nature of any exemplary novel is apparent here, but with Zayas’s writings we may find a mixed or double message that seems to be related to the feminist critique of several aspects of society often hidden in the text.

It is important to remember that the novels of Zayas were published in two sets, the first consisting of a balanced interplay between female and male narrators, the second group narrated by women only. Sometimes, however, the feminist concerns of the frame story come to overshadow and dominate the interpretations of each individual story. I would like to analyze the treatment of justice in a particular novella of the first group, Al fin se paga todo, that seems to both support and to contradict the feminist perspective laid out in the frame and that, perhaps not coincidentally, is narrated by a male.

In this novella, Zayas presents to the reader a case of justice that could seem unbalanced or inharmonious considering the feminist tone of Zayas’s text and a possible goal of representing women as being worthy of respect. While promising the image of a just society, where all get what they deserve, the actual outcome seems to contradict the narrator’s judgment of the situation and the characters. The narrator insinuates that this exemplary tale will illustrate a moral lesson by clearly designating an immoral or illegal situation that will be resolved in favor of the innocent victims. He implies that the wrongdoers will pay for their crimes or mistakes. However, the results of the text do not support the narrator’s theory of a clear and fair system of justice, whether legal or poetic. Zayas provokes the reader to question whether there is justice not only in this case, but in society.

This case soon proves to be more difficult when it is not clear exactly who is guilty of which crimes, what constitutes a punishable act, and whether the wrongdoers ever pay sufficiently or the victims are rewarded accordingly. The fact that a woman breaks the rules and yet is victorious at the end could be read as an underlying protest against the code of honor and the masculine prescription of ethics. The focus of this investigation will be to show how María de Zayas, by constructing and mixing gendered perspectives and ironic layers of narrative, questions the injustice of the code of honor, especially for women. I will analyze the rhetorical strategies of poetic justice and irony as they are employed in the narrative, while employing a feminist critique of the thematic concerns.

I maintain that an ironic reading of this story does not contradict the overall rewriting of the patriarchal order. I will show that Zayas, by subverting the notion of poetic justice, breaks down gender and genre barriers. She forces the reader, via the imbalance, to reconsider and possibly reconstruct notions of justice, violence, honor, love, and self-worth. This analysis will investigate specifically Zayas’s sense of justice and how it is employed in Al fin se paga todo as an alternative to a traditional resolution. Her message, however, may have a double meaning. I will also propose that Zayas’s system of justice would include women and may consider love as a mitigating circumstance in transgression of the moral law. This particular novel may somewhat optimistically suggest that marriages in which the woman has a choice, and societies in which women have a voice, are more successful. Zayas forces the reader to reevaluate what is just and good.

Before turning to the question of how this alternate or ironic sense of justice develops in Zayas’s novella, I would like to consider some of the more general criticism of Zayas. It is important to keep in mind that a critic’s review of the text will often depend on whether he or she sees the text as a positive or a negative feminist alternative to the male-authored exemplary novels. Critical acceptance of feminist perspectives may vary according to how women writers are perceived in general in any particular epoch. Critics have embraced, rejected, or ignored Zayas’s work for various reasons, but it is interesting that critics seem to need to compare this woman’s work with another male writer, such as Cervantes.

Frequently, as in the case of critics like Ludwig Pfandl, Zayas’s work was considered to be offensive (Boyer xii). In contrast, Peter Cocozzella illustrates that Zayas’s contemporary literary cohorts, such a Lope de Vega, frequently praised her work. Cocozzella sees Zayas’s novellas as somewhat of a regeneration of the sentimental novel, where the psyche of the woman is explored in a more pessimistic manner than in male-authored texts that often idealize the woman (193). Mireya Pérez-Erdelyi compares the work of Zayas with that of Alonso del Castillo Soloranzo, categorizing it as a mix of the picaresque and the courtly genres. This critic shows how the novels focus on the chaotic and changing character of society in the baroque world, where social mobility challenges the old structures of nobility, thus making necessary a critical review of the honor code and the social institutions that enforce morality (15). Thus, Zayas’s questioning of the injustice of the legal systems and marriage could be seen as a natural reaction to a cultural crisis.

José María Díez Borque reads Zayas’s text as a radical feminist rejection of men, yet praises the author for her variety of conjugal models. Al fin se paga todo for this critic is a case in which beauty causes the woman to give in to her lover. Díez Borque interprets this novella as being feminist while remaining faithful to the strict honor code. He cites the presentation of sexual necessities in women as a laudable element (76–77). For Hans Felten also, the most important aspect of Zayas’s literary contribution is her portrayal of eroticism and of active female sexuality. He remarks that “le asegura un lugar importante, no en la sección femenina de la historia de la literatura, sino en la historia general de la literatura” (170). His statement exemplifies the frequent attitude that women’s writing is considered naturally inferior to men’s narrative. We can infer from a critical survey that it is not so much the literary topics that Zayas has revolutionized, but the message, which is a more realistic vision of love, marriage, and the decadence of the systems of justice and honor in baroque Spain.

In Al fin se paga todo, Zayas addresses such subjects as women, sexuality, and the institutions of marriage, justice and honor. The gendered bias of the status quo that causes an unjust treatment of women seems to supersede other concerns in many of the novellas, and Zayas particularly emphasizes the theme of justice here. She creates a female protagonist, Hipólita, who takes the defense of her honor into her own hands. The tale, narrated by don Miguel, is the seventh novella of the first part of Zayas’s collection. Its title alone, Al fin se paga todo, invites the reader to participate in this textual drama. It suggests, ironically, that all will get their just deserts, which is also the title in some English translations.

In order to be able to accurately judge any case, one must carefully review the facts. By reviewing the textual evidence, the reader may be able to glean enough clues to be able to effectively analyze the narrative, and to verify if it supports the pretext of the narrator and/or author. Zayas seems to ask the reader to determine whether everyone does get what he or she deserves at the end. She seems to question implicitly the moral prescription of the narrator by providing contradictory data. It is also revealed that perhaps the logical, reasonable action is not always the correct one for which the women will be rewarded. Destiny and free will are shown to interact. A woman may be punished unjustly, while other times she may act immorally and is rewarded. A possible verdict here is that women who love others and defend themselves are not guilty, according to the case of Hipólita, who is ultimately not punished.

The novella begins by introducing the noble, but not wealthy, don García, from whose perspective the story will be narrated in a rather passive or unobtrusive fashion. He is walking along the streets of Valladolid, when he sees what turns out to be a beautiful, although battered, woman thrown into the street. He comes to her rescue, hiding her in his room where she can recuperate and, later, tell him her incredible story. Hipólita, then, becomes the narrator of her own experience.

This angelic woman reveals how she married don Pedro, at the request of her father. Pedro’s younger brother Luis, however, is the one desperately in love with her and tries to win her favor even after the marriage. Hipólita resists his advances in spite of the fact that he lives next door. She does not remain faithful for long because in the court, where deceptions often begin, she meets a suitor, don Gaspar, with whom she falls in love. The seduction is never carried out, though, because three comically unsuccessful attempts to sleep together while her husband is absent are thwarted by fate. (In one case, Gaspar is stuck in the window frame and must be cut out.) The last rendezvous turns tragic. Hipólita thinks her lover, hidden in a trunk, has suffocated, and calls on her brother-in-law, Luis, to help her dispose of the body.

Upon seeing her attempts to deceive her husband, Luis decides that he has a right to satisfy his desire. Luis decides to seduce Hipólita by a plan of deception and distraction; he sets loose his brother’s horses, and while the husband is out chasing them, Luis assumes his identity. Luis reveals the truth to Hipólita in church the following day, when he uses her own words “Qué frío estás” to taunt her. Later that night, she takes her sleeping husband’s dagger, goes through the attic, and kills Luis to wash away the stain on her honor with his blood. She leaves the dagger and flees to her lover, who robs her and throws her in the street.

At this point, García advises her to enter the convent before going to the authorities. Hipólita then announces her husband’s innocence; he has been imprisoned unjustly for the crime of killing his brother. She refuses to return to the marriage, however, preferring secular life in the convent. A year later, Pedro dies of sadness, and Hipólita, the happy and wealthy widow, marries García, who is perfect except for being poor, and they live happily ever after. Coincidentally, Hipólita’s ungracious lover, Gaspar, is found dead, robbed and killed by his own servant who confesses this before being hung.

Some critics would suggest that this ending leaves the reader feeling uneasy. H. Patsy Boyer states that because of Hipólita’s “dubious moral fiber” the success of the marriage is put into question:

When we ponder what he [García] knows about her character, however, we must wonder what kind of a marriage they will have. The conventional happy ending with marriage as the solution to a woman’s problem, as well as the title itself, appears to be highly ironic. (xxii)

This questionable marriage parallels the questionable system of honor. Unjustifiable happy endings, or the lack of them, in Zayas’s novellas signal a dissatisfaction with the traditional resolutions and indicate a fictionalized version of what institutions consider to be ethical behavior. However, the literal level alone does not determine the text’s meaning.

Boyer comments on the existence of a pervasive irony in the five narratives by men and the five by women in the Novelas amorosas. She proposes that the men’s narratives present women with moral flaws, as opposed to the women’s narratives, in which the female characters are strong, noble, and constant in love, yet are tragically unable to control their destiny. Boyer also concludes that there are stylistic differences in the male’s narratives, which are more polished, intellectual, and literary, and the female’s, which are more ambiguous and ironic, owing to the women’s necessary mastery of deception (xx). This theory would suggest a high level of narrative complexity and of character development often overlooked in Zayas’s work.

Other critics do not see Hipólita as such a tragic figure. Pérez-Erdelyi suggests that she is a dangerously aggressive women, or “mujer varonil,” in societal terms because she transgresses the limits and usurps the masculine role (81). Pérez-Erdelyi, however, reads this androgynous model as positive by showing that not all marriages are based on unjust and cruel subjugation and that good men do exist. Her interpretation of the text would ironically oppose the punishment of the innocent theme, which pervades the pessimistic moments of the novellas.

Paul Julian Smith disagrees with this interpretation on the grounds that it does not explain the violent scenes. He sees the active women, like Hipólita, as counterbalancing the passive and victimized ones, but feels that their vengeful actions merely repeat the masculine value system. He states that

Zayas implies an acceptance of the patriarchal code of honor, and does not question the belief that blood can only be cleansed with blood. Women are thus permitted to adopt a travesty of man, but cannot transgress the law of the dagger and the phallus. (235)

For Smith, Zayas’s text exemplifies Luce Irigaray’s version of women’s discourse, which linguistically challenges the masculine domination of position of power through negation. In my opinion, this analysis does not sufficiently take into consideration the use of irony. Zayas herself seems to be able to manipulate the masculine rhetoric very effectively.

Amy Williamsen refutes this restricted view of Zayas, by proposing that because women were not supposed to avenge their own honor, Hipólita’s action does transgress the patriarchal boundaries. Williamsen proposes that reading the novels ironically will reveal the subversion. She reminds us of how Zayas undermines the Doctrine of Intention, a religious proclamation that raised the intention to commit a crime or sin to the same level as carrying it out, with this novel:

Hipólita admits that she has intended (and attempted) to commit adultery, yet she escapes any official sanctions. . . . That Hipólita, after her open defiance and subsequent manipulation of the honor code lives “happily ever after” shakes the very foundation of the patriarchal system. (646)

The protagonist is perceived in this case as someone who challenges heroically the flawed law.

Hipólita is an interesting character precisely because she stands somewhere between virtue and vice. Is she one of the few bad women who are more numerous every day that the protagonist of the frame, Lisis, cites in her monologue? Is she an innocent victim of the patriarchal economy where men view women as objects of desire, valuable as measures of honor, but no longer desirable when obtained? Or does she adapt to and then manipulate the system, successfully avoiding prosecution for the murder of her husband’s brother? These are questions tjat can be answered by a close analysis of Zayas’s narrative style and by examining her employment of rhetorical tools, such as irony, and her use of poetic justice.

Because genre boundaries were not viewed as being so rigid in Golden Age literature, writers often mixed forms and techniques and María de Zayas is no exception. One of the techniques frequently used as a conceptual center, in the comedia and other dramatic forms, is poetic justice. Zayas’s narratives abound in action scenes that could be now characterized as cinematographic. Her writing style appeals to the senses, and her themes appear to appeal to the intellect and moral faculties. She illustrates her exemplary tales frequently with bloody scenes of punishment and revenge. Al fin se paga todo follows a standard procedure, but inverts the protagonists by having the woman defend her own honor instead of a dual between the men. This is one of many examples of justice, involving crime and punishment, found in the novellas. Zayas’s sense of justice differs from or subverts the traditional conception of poetic justice, which was studied extensively by Alexander A. Parker.

Parker gives what can now be considered the classic definition of poetic justice. Originally it

denoted an exact distribution of rewards and punishments, so that in the latter case the penalty exactly fitted the crime, being neither too lenient nor too severe. It was thus conceived as an ideal form of legal justice. (685–86)

The concept came to mean that everyone got what they deserved, regardless of whether the judgment or consequences were legally correct: “In literature it merely means that ‘poetry’ corrects the injustices of real life by not allowing evil men to triumph or virtuous men to suffer” (686). However, in Zayas’s novella, some victims never are compensated, such as Hipólita’s husband, while some victimizers pay a high price, like the lover. Hipólita can be classified as both victim and victimizer; she may have triumphed or may still await the final judgment at the end. The reasonable doubt created here is revealing.

There are several corollaries that accompany Parker’s postulation of poetic justice. Parker notes that poetic justice blurs the distinctions between comedy and tragedy; was linked to moral or exemplary situations; often did not include kings; and that in Spanish literature, as opposed to English literature, destiny was not to blame, but that this notion clearly illustrated that people’s actions cause specific results (687–95). Poetic justice can also be used as a tool to destabilize conventional social realities (695). For example, arranged marriages that do not work, as in this case, may challenge the status quo, causing the reader to rethink what should be acceptable. This concept heavily factors into Al fin se paga todo. Zayas’s novella, however, could be read as challenging some of the basic precepts mentioned here, especially if her work is read ironically. For example, destiny seems to be quite influential in the development of events. Although Parker discusses justice as a theatrical device, it highly is relevant to the exemplary novels, which are hardly lacking in drama.

In order to show the irony of Zayas’s justice, it is necessary to reach a clearer understanding of irony as it relates to this analysis. Irony tends to complicate the reader’s task. Compound and simultaneous meanings can be signified within the text, leading us to a multi-leveled interpretation. Irony is often divided into a binary system, signified by tension or incongruency between the literal and the symbolic, but it can be differentiated much further. Primarily, a text is ironic if it expresses something other than and frequently in discrepancy with the literal meaning. Irony can be used, for example, to expose “a character’s false or inadequate view of himself or the world at large” (Muecke 91). Irony may also call into question both knowledge systems and the authority of who decides what is right or wrong (Booth 16), as it does in Zayas’s novella with respect to justice.

Wayne C. Booth, in his investigation of irony, provides the reader with clues that could point out the existence of this technique within a text: warnings in the authors voice, often in the title; known errors proclaimed; conflict of facts within the work; clashes of style; and conflicts of belief (53–63). We see all of the devices mentioned above in Al fin se paga todo. By addressing gender issues, Zayas’s text provides a basis for a double or multi-level narrative based on a comparison of masculine and feminine perspectives. This provides a textual space where irony works well because for one public, such as the female listeners, the tales may have one signification and for another group, the male listeners, it may imply something different depending on the interpretations of the groups and individuals. Booth’s clues for locating irony can be used to unravel the contradictions of poetic justice as seen in this novella, especially regarding inequal treatment according to gender.

The idea of reception is also crucial here, since the reader’s background and strategic criteria often affects their perception of the text. Conflicting testimony of eyewitnesses reminds us of the varying ability to process information. Autobiographical narration is no more reliable, as modern psychoanalysis has shown perceptions of the self frequently contradict how others view a subject. María de Zayas, by embedding narratives within narratives, creates such a complex situation where the text can have multiple, possibly equally valid, readings. This novella is no exception. Through interweaving, Zayas sets up the ironic interpretations of justice and transfers to the reader the authority to judge whether Hipólita is guilty.

Al fin se paga todo contains many different perspectives, both masculine and feminine. There are many moments, when this leads to a possible ironic interpretation, and, quite frequently, these are the moments dealing with justice. In trying to determine whether a character is guilty or innocent, the reader or listener must gather the facts given by the narrator. These facts may appear to be straightforward and objective, but everyone has ulterior motives. The primary narrator of the novella is one of the frame characters, don Miguel, who has two goals: to entertain the members of the group and to educate them.

This is also Zayas’s self-proclaimed motive in her prologue. However playfully or seriously this is done can be determined in part by the tone. Don Miguel’s narrative is rather comic despite the violent and tragic elements. For example, the window-frame episode, in which Hipólita’s lover is stuck, could be staged visually in a humorous manner. Also, Zayas creates a tragicomic scene of mayhem and mistaken identities by exploiting a sexual methaphor: The jealous brother lets loose some horses in order to create a distraction so that he can seduce Hipólita while the husband is chasing them.

The mood is not overly pessimistic. After all, the narrator states that García and Hipólita seem to have it all: beauty, wealth, and children. They live happily ever after, while others, such as the double-crossing lover, are punished. This punishment, the physical violence, may seem to be a negative element that could displease the reader. On the contrary, it appears to be a positive factor because it illustrates, supposedly, the moral lesson. Miguel explains that he wrote this, based on a real event, “para que cada uno mire lo que hace, pues al fin se paga todo” (Zayas, Novelas ejemplares 167). The distribution of justice, then, should reinforce the validity of the code of honor. Because it is not certain that it was within Hipólita’s right to defend herself, the moral lesson does not have a strong preventative power.

It is possible that humor and spontaneity are used here to mask the seriousness of the subject matter. The narrator, Miguel, employs an almost flippant tone even while narrating the scenes of death. One possible effect is that the reader feels less sympathy for the characters. After all, many of Zayas’s other novellas consist of greater crises treated in a somewhat more grave manner. Not much information is given about Miguel’s character, so it is not easy to see what his ideological stance would be. Based on the fact that he is a male, it would seem to suggest an opposition to the feminist defense of women, or what could be called a feminine defense by women. By telling the tale, he gives himself the authority to judge this as an exemplary case.

That this novella is the artifice of a female writer is important because this would imply a rhetorical need to create an argument in order to counterbalance the dominant trend of tales narrated from the male perspective with female characters created by them. Zayas seems to accomplish this because Hipólita suffers but then is rewarded, thus suggesting that she is neither an ideal nor an evil woman, but a “real” one. Also, if the reader judges that Hipólita deserves her rewards, this would imply a positive character analysis. The irony in this narrative level, then, creates tension between the feminist perspective of the frame and the masculine perspective of this novella’s narrator suggesting that differences in ethical values and a legal bias based on gender exist.

The inharmonious conclusion may lead the reader to question if it is the narrator’s judgment that failed at the end of the tale or if it implies, instead, a faulty system of honor, where justice can only be obtained at someone else’s expense. The ending’s contradictary nature could imply that while the women usually are unjustly treated by the system, there are exceptions. It also could indicate that there are several options for dealing with inequity.

Al fin se paga todo is narrated from the future husband’s perspective. He describes Hipólita in idealistic terms. Her beauty enchants him so much that even after hearing of her desgracia he still desires her. While the narrator seems to be omniscient, the novella is frequently related as if García were describing the scene. Within this story, Hipólita is then allowed to present her version of the tragic love story. The husband and the lover, although crucial characters in the drama, do not seem to have any voice and are portrayed as being either absent or superficial. What results is a curious mix of testimonials focused on the events leading up to and resulting from Hipólita’s revenge. But whose interpretation of the morality or justice of the case is the most convincing?

Within the novella, Al fin se paga todo, there are more contradictions and contrasts between the masculine and the feminine perspective or voices and, also, ideologies. Zayas entwines two versions of love and desire, which may seem to be unrelated to the concept of justice, but are really the cause of the cycle of events. It should be noted here that Zayas’s use of poetic justice does depend in many cases on fate, destiny, or chance. Not all actions for her are based on cause and effect; many critics have shown how the women of Zayas’s texts are often victims of circumstance and societal or institutional prejudices. For example, they often are unwilling recipients of amorous pursuits and have their spouses chosen for them. These women are required to be defended and judged by men.

In Al fin se paga todo, however, Hipólita, actively and willingly participates in an extramarital seduction as long as she is motivated by love. Her husband, lover, and the treacherous brother are all portrayed as being motivated by desire, not love, which leads them to appreciate and to try to possess the woman’s beauty. Hipólita feels justified in her actions because reason was overpowered by love. She complains of the absence of her husband, and reiterates that she should not be, but is, punished for her beauty. This particular quality makes her suffer. What Hipólita seems to want is someone who will pay attention to her and value her, body and soul. This seems to expand on the eloquent defense of women by Cervantes’s character, Marcela, by showing women not only as capable of rejecting love, but of searching for it. Love, and the mistakes caused by its overpowering of reason, can be justified, according to this interpretation of Zayas’s text.

Does Hipólita feel obligated to return to her husband, who seems willing to forgive her? No, she prefers the convent to an insincere or untrustworthy alliance. After being deceived by her suitor, Gaspar, is she more willing to accept a compromise? At the end of the novella, the narrator tells us that Hipólita not only feels obliged by García’s attention and assistance, but appreciates his physical appearance and his intelligence; she is convinced that he will appreciate her worth as a person, so they are married.

The marriage at the end may imply a rupture in the economy of love, where women are the objects of exchange. Here Hipólita both controls the money and chooses the mate, and the result is positive for her at the end. The marriage and infidelity issues also question the validity of the arranged marriage and the honor code as ways of distinguishing the nobility from the bourgeois class. Lisis laments a loss of the noble idealization of life, yet here Zayas seems to suggest that social change can be a positive factor. She could be illustrating the injustice of the code of honor, which privileges the male’s reputation over the woman’s life. Justice for women entails self-valorization.

In Al fin se paga todo, the protagonist both heroically defends her honor and rather treacherously abandons her husband to seek her lover. Hipólita desires to be unfaithful, and this results in physical abuse and rejection. What is ironic is that she does not consider herself to be guilty. In a style that mimics an autobiography or a confession, she justifies her actions. Apparently for the authorities, this explanation and perhaps her suffering are considered mitigating circumstances because she is exonerated. Even her husband appears to forgive her, although her refusal to return to what was an unhappy or flawed marriage suggests that she knew the potential harm. It is possible that the ironic treatment of poetic justice subverts the patriarchal institutions, including marriage. The marriage theme here is linked to freedom. Free from one marriage, Hipólita does not remain in the convent. Instead, she chooses to marry another man who will reward her for her beauty and soul. This view of a happy and just marriage cannot be ignored.

In baroque literature, and notably in Zayas’s work, many narrative techniques employ dual meanings and can be related to the rhetoric of irony. This is exemplified in many metaphors that capture the erotic tension in the text. The struggle between love and reason illustrate antithetical tension, while the opposition of crime and punishment, guilt and innocence, virtue and vice all suggest the relation of the erotic to the concepts of justice and morality implied by the exemplary nature of the text. Here love is used as an insanity plea negating guilt. Being able to judge someone is a form of power that clearly has to contend with gender hierarchies in this text. The relation of sex and power to language is an important area of literary scholarship and should be further investigated with relation to this particular text.

For this analysis, let it suffice to illustrate some examples of the erotic nature of the text and to explore how these could be read ironically, thus challenging the traditional system of justice. Images of violence are repeatedly equated with attempted amorous encounters. The interplay of the hot and cold motifs could also symbolize the struggle between desire and virtue. These antitheses support the baroque opposition that frames the works: engaño and desengaño. The repetition throughout Zayas’s novellas of scenes in which innocent wives pay for alleged dishonor contrasts strongly with the incident in Al fin se paga todo because Hipólita learns to avoid dangerously imbalanced relationships. In her second marriage, she brings the money, which could indicate that she retains some form of domination.

The sexual or erotic motifs reproduce a traditional “male-authored” language of seduction. This is illustrated in the three attempts by Hipólita to be unfaithful. The first, which takes place in a garden, conjures up images of Eden where woman is held responsible for the fall of man. The second, which coincides with a house fire, is reminiscent of the fires of hell. The third case, in which Gaspar is thought to be dead in the box, connotes a deathlike scene with the box an illusory casket. Love becomes linked metaphorically to death for this woman. In addition, the actual deceit of Hipólita takes place when her husband is chasing runaway horses, which is a much used erotic symbol. All of these scenes occur before Hipólita learns the truth about the injustice of love. She takes justice into her own hands, to avenge her loss of honor yet she lacks judgment when trusting her lover.

Upon realizing her error, she goes to the convent to make amends. The convent, where female relationships dominate, provides her with a haven while she confronts the system of justice. However, for this protagonist, it is not the ends but the means for a strategic restructuring of her life. Hipólita’s husband, then, seems to be the victim, either of fate, his absence or a lack of nobility. The moment where the female protagonist takes the dagger and reclaims her honor is not perceived in the final analysis as a transgression. It is a worthy act for which she is rewarded. She pays for taking the jewels and attempting to run away with her lover with bruises, betrayal, and abandonment. He, in turn, pays for this abuse. Yet, she is still desired by her husband, and later, García. The reader is left wondering if beauty is the reason and whether Hipólita triumphs by luck or will.

I would suggest that in this novella, María de Zayas provides the intelligent woman with a plan of empowerment. Marriage may not always be a negative option as long as the woman can exercise some sort of power. Another message that this text seems to convey is that women must open their eyes and judge themselves and their circumstances. They need not negate their sexuality nor their beauty, although they must be aware of the dangers and misfortune these can bring. What seems to be essential is that women tell their own stories and refuse to be misjudged by men. Elizabeth Ordóñez remarks:

Women in the “novelas” of María de Zayas are repeatedly victims of the misunderstanding of men: husbands, brothers, and women acting in collusion with men misread wives, sisters, mistresses, even friends. They are repeatedly too ready and to willing to believe false stories regarding their women, never checking the sources of the narrative, never doubting the reliability of the narrator. (4)

This statement reminds us, like the women listening to the tales, to check the source before believing the validity of the exemplary lesson.

By taking control of language, Hipólita avoids becoming a tragic figure and instead becomes a kind a heroic women rewriting the patriarchal definitions of love, marriage, and, above all, justice. An ironic reading allows the reader to see the feminist undertones of a male narrator’s tale, written of course, by a woman. It also gives the reader a more balanced perspective of the global meaning of Zayas’s Novelas ejemplares y amorosas. The texts of this writer challenge the subordinate position of women in society and provide an alternative for male-authored visions of women, such as those of Cervantes.

The ending of the second set of novels, the Desengaños amorosos, consists of a much-cited moment in which Lisis, the main character of the narrative frame, gives an eloquent monologue in defense of women and, then, instead of marrying, goes off to the convent. This often is interpreted as a controversial rejection of the patriarchal order (Foa 88). While this feminist message is crucial to the overall interpretation of the text, it does not negate the importance of the particular stories in which women find happiness in love.

To the male reader Lisis suggests this: “Estimad y honrad a las mujeres y veréis cómo resucita en vosotros el valor perdido” (Zayas, Desengaños amorosos 506). She later challenges the women to take responsibility for their own reputation: “¿qué más desengaños aguardáis que el desdoro de vuestra fama en boca de los hombres?” (507). The reader should avoid misreading the individual texts by oversimplifying the contradictions or by applying totalizing ideological strategies of criticism regarding thematic concerns such as justice and love.

Al fin se paga todo is important because, unlike many of the other novellas, it seems to provide possible alternatives to avoiding the injustice of society by taking refuge in a convent. It shows that women may be both good and bad and that writing should portray them as such. The various narrative voices, some complementary and others contrasting, are intermixed and should all be seen as intricate nuances to this complex work that has challenged readers for centuries. María de Zayas y Sotomayor’s Novelas ejemplares do not provide the reader with the answers to the problems of society. Instead, they invite the reader to examine the social institutions for flaws and contradictions. In Al fin se paga todo, she shows how a woman who actively seeks what she considers to be right is rewarded; the notion of just deserts is ironically utilized to protest the injustice of the traditional code of honor that unjustly objectifies women.

Works Cited

Booth, Wayne C. A Rhetoric of Irony. 2nd ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1975.

Cocozzella, Peter. “Writer of the Baroque ‘Novela ejemplar.’ María de Zayas.” Women Writers of the Seventeenth Century. Ed. Katharina Wilson and Frank Warnke. Athens: U of Georgia P, 1989. 189–227.

Díez Borque, José María. “El feminismo de doña María de Zayas.” La mujer en el teatro y la novela de siglo XVII: actas del II Coloquio del Grupo de Estudios sobre Teatro Español, (G.E.S.T.E.), Toulouse, 16–17, noviembre, 1978. Toulouse: U of Toulouse, 1977. 63–83.

Felten, Hans. “María de Zayas y Sotomayor.” Siete siglos de autores españoles. Problemata literaria 7. Kassel: Reichenberger, 1991. 169–70.

Foa, Sandra M. Feminismo y forma narrativa. Madrid: Albatros Hispanofila, 1979.

Muecke, D. C. Irony and the Ironic. Ed. John Jump. The Critical Idiom 13. New York: Methuen, 1982.

Parker, Alexander A. “The Spanish Drama of the Golden Age: A Method of Analysis and Interpretation.” The Great Playwrights. Vol. 1. Ed. Eric Bentley. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970. 679–707.

Pérez-Erdelyi, Mireya. La Pícara y la Dama: La imagen de las mujeres en las novelas picaresco-cortesanas de María de Zayas y Sotomayor y Alonso del Castillo Soloranzo. Miami: Universal, 1979.

Ordóñez, Elizabeth J. “Woman and Her Text in the Works of María de Zayas and Ana Caro.” Revista de Estudios Hispánicos 19.1 (1985): 3–15.

Smith, Paul Julian. “Writing Women in Golden Age Spain: Saint Teresa and María de Zayas.” MLN 102.2 (1987): 220–40.

Williamsen, Amy R. “Engendering Interpretation: Irony as Comic Challenge in María de Zayas.” Romance Languages Annual 1991. Vol. 3. Ed. Jeanette Beer, Charles Ganelin, and Anthony Julian Tamburri. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue Research Foundation, 1992. 642–48.

Zayas y Sotomayor, María de. Novelas ejemplares y amorosas. Madrid, 1814.

___. The Enchantments of Love. Amorous and Exemplary Novels. Trans. H. Patsy Boyer. Los Angeles: U of California P, 1990.

___. Desengaños amorosos. Ed. Alicia Yelera. Madrid: Cátedra, 1983.