El modernismo desde dentro: Discurso de la 'gente nueva' y campo literario en la prensa modernista madrilena (1897-1907).

摘要

This dissertation examines the trajectory of modernist discourse between 1897 and 1907 and its impact on the process toward autonomy of Madrid's literary field. In the late nineteenth century, the failure of the liberal project and of positivism plunged European thought into what has been called the fin de siecle crisis. Spain participated fully in this process, generating a series of protest discourses that rejected the prevailing system. In the arts and literature in particular, this led to a number of trends aesthetically or ideologically opposed to the political system of the Restoration, to bourgeois values, to radical positivism and to realist aesthetics. The material and social conditioning factors greatly hindered the development of the new aesthetics. This caused the young writers to come together as a community of discourse conjoining the plurality of perspectives that characterized them under two basic principles: the defense of literary renewal and the rejection of the established powers. The constant struggle for these two assumptions laid the foundations for a symbolic revolution in the literary field.;I understand modernism as the collective discourse that in the late nineteenth century started to make its way into the literary field and whose impact on it would be crucial in the process of autonomization. My study focuses on the public sphere of modernist discourse. I have examined mainly the modernist magazines published in Madrid between 1897 and 1907 because, compared to the consecrated press, they were the means by which the gente nueva could freely express and disseminate their opinions. Throughout the dissertation I explore the development of modernist discourse to show that it was not immutable, but that it was changing within the literary field. As it was gaining recognition, the modernist writers adopted literary positions that caused confrontations among themselves, leading to the breakup of the original community of discourse. However, they were still sharing the defense of the aforementioned principles, and when they finally imposed them and their discourse was perceived as legitimate by the whole field, a degree of autonomy hitherto nonexistent in the literary world was eventually reached.