Ibid., 74.

«Ricardo Gullón and the Novels of Galdós», Anales Galdosianos, III (1968), 166-8.

Obras completas de don Benito Pérez Galdós, V (Aguilar, Madrid, 1942), 596 a. All quotations are from this edition.

«Whatever the objective value of his schemes for reform may be at the outset (and I personally rate them as purely external and marginal) they are speedily burlesqued by their association with the initials M-I-A-U, which Villaamil accepts and justifies in increasing desperation, eventually identifying it with the INRI which Christ bore above the Cross» (op. cit., 167).

Op. cit., 89.

Op. cit., 71-2. It will have been apparent from the above that I cannot accept the interpretation here given of Luisito as a symbol of the new Spain born of the Revolution of 1868.

All references to Miau and the author's other works are taken from Benito Pérez Galdós, Obras completas (Madrid: Aguilar, 1950), V, VI.

The following studies are the most thorough examinations of Miau: Joaquin Casalduero, Vida y obra de Galdós (Madrid: Gredos, 1961), pp. 93-97; Casalduero focuses his attention on the discrepancy between appearances and reality without relating this factor to the total structure of the novel. Gustavo Correa, El simbolismo religioso en las novelas de Pérez Galdós (Madrid: Credos, 1962), «La crucifixión de Villaamil en la novela Miau», pp. 118-34; Correa's analysis rests on the premise that Luis really converses with God and, therefore, when Villaamil commits suicide, he is rejecting the trascendental solution to his problem. Sherman H. Eoff, The Novels of Pérez Galdós (St. Louis: Washington University Studies, 1954), pp. 29-30; Eoff studies many of the motivational aspects of the protagonist but largely ignores the secondary personages and the symbolic-structural facets of the novel. Ricardo Gullón, Galdós, novelista moderno (Madrid. Taurus, 1960), «La burocracia, mundo absurdo», pp. 261-88; Gullón considers many of the themes and elements of Miau that I do, but arrives at a final conclusion antithetical to mine: he believes there is no explanation of why Villaamil fails to be reemployed, and that, therefore, Galdós seeks to give us a Kafka-like vision of an absurd, inexplicable bureaucratic world. Antonio Sánchez Barbudo, «Vulgaridad y genio de Galdós: el estilo y la técnica de Miau» Archivium, VII, i-iii (dic.-enero 1957), 48-75; this study illuminates important factors of language, humor and point of view in Miau, but Sánchez Barbudo sees the episodes involving Victor and Abelarda as digressions rather than integral parts of the total structure (p. 59). Robert J. Weber, The 'Miau' Manuscript of Benito Pérez Galdós: A Critical Study (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1964), 155 pp.; this analysis is the most extensive and thorough so far attempted, yet Weber's conclusions are the opposite of mine. By ignoring the psychological dimension of the personages, he reaches the conclusion that Galdós' humor and symbolism serve to ridicule the protagonist and that the ultimate meaning of Miau is a condemnation of Villaamil's excessive self-concern (p. 67).

Other studies which do not treat Miau as an artistic entity but contain analyses of important elements of the novel are: José Carner, «La España de Pérez Galdós», Filosofía y Letras, México, V (1943), 75-84, 215-22; Carner examines the relationship between Luisito, his dreams, and Villaarnil, and concludes as we do that there is no traseendentalism in this aspect of the novel (p. 217). Michael Nimetz, Humor in Galdtis (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1968), 277 pp; in this very useful book, Nimetz reveals a crucial factor in Galdós' technique: the humor of familiarity (p. 152), but the writer regards Victor as nothing more than an instance of romantic arbitrary evil (p. 36). Francisco Ruiz Ramón, Tres personajes galdosianos (Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 1964), «El arranque infantil de la vocación», pp. 250-52.

For a bibliography of all studies of Miau, see the subject index of my book: Theodore A. Sackett, Pérez Galdós: An Annotated Bibliography (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1968). My study of Miau differs fundamentally from the others in its critical approach; none of the cited examinations bases its conclusions on an analysis of the dynamic relationship between the protagonist and all of the other personages, and none considers the symbolism and structure of the work in terms of that relationship.

This aspect of narrative technique has been illustrated in Antonio Sánchez Barbudo's excellent study: «Vulgaridad y genio de Galdós: el estilo y la técnica de Miau» Archivium, VII, i-iii (dic-enero 1957), 48-75.

In Torquemada en la cruz, one of the protagonists, Cruz del Águila, referring to her brother Rafael's desire to live by his fixed idea of the overriding importance of family honor, tells him: «Se vive de las ideas generales, no de las propias exclusivamente, y los que pretenden vivir de las propias exclusivamente suelen dar con ellas y con sus cuerpos en el manicomio.» (V, 996) It seems clear that Galdós, then, considers Villaamil to be insane, at least in the social sense outlined by Cruz.