(El Matadero) Análisis “The Slaughteryard” (El Matadero) is a short-story by Esteban Echeverría (1805-1851). It was extremely influential to Latin-American literature and brought new literary elements to the continent that were unseen in Latin America folklore and literature. "The Slaughterhouse brought European elements of romanticism and introduced the idea of using literature as a form of sociocultural reflection. That means basically using literature to write about the state of things around you. This means using literature to critique politics, culture, and society; this was absent in its complete form in Latin American until "The Slaughteryard" and helped expand the possibilities of literature in Latin America. Echerverría wrote the story in exile and it was eventually published in 1871; it is most known for its vivid metaphors, grotesque violence, and harsh critique of the Federalist regime of Juan Manuel Rosas. Its principal themes revolve around religion, politics, and civilization and barbarism. Characters Judge The Judge (El Juez) appears at the end of the story. He is a representation of Rosas' justice and only seems to be on his side in all cases. He represents Rosas' establishment. Unitarian He also appears at the end of the story and represents civilization, reason, and courage. He ends up dying at the end of the story when the Judge is about to torture him. Matasiete He is a quiet guy, but he seems to be actively violent in the story. He seems to be handy with his ax and knife in the story. Summary The story takes place during a turbulent period in a suburb outside of Buenos Aires. It takes place in the years after the May Revolution in Argentina. Rosas is the leader of Argentina and the story starts with a flood that lasts for 15 days. The flood had a dreadful impact on the economy of Argentina and causes a famine that is hurting a lot of people; the slaughtered in the story is forced to close because a lack of meat, and can no longer feed the people in the suburb. The lack of meat occurred during la cauresma, which is a celebration in which Catholic Christians recognize in anticipation for the Easter; the celebration alongside the famine helped encourage a rise in the prices of everything, and many people are going without. The actual story begins sometime before this crisis. Rosas, known as El restaurador (the restorer) sends some steer for the people in this suburb. However, the reaction of the people is not pleasant. Through Echeverría's unique writing style, we see these starving people act savage-like to get the food. They fight each other and even go after the guts of the steer, not waiting for it to be processed. In the midst of all of this, one of the steer escape and indirectly cause the death of a child who is decapitated in the process. The people realize that the child died, but are more concerned with the steer than the dead child. The savage-like people in this suburb end up catching the steer and kill it. At the end of the story, we see what is in my opinion the most important part. A young man comes by the suburb on a horse and is identified by the locals in the area as a Unitarian. Most of the people in this suburb are supposedly federalists. Some people in the area stop him and question him. The people who are questioning the Unitarian are portrayed as savage-like and intolerant. They insult the Unitarian and interrogate him. The Unitarian, during all of the interrogation, defends himself and what he stands for, not giving in to remarks of the people. At the climax of the story, we see the appearance of the judge who comes in to try this Unitarian. Before the authority gets the chance to torture him, he dies an epic and symbolic death, dying of rage and holding on to his pride. Key Themes There are a number of key themes that are highlighted in this story: Civilization This is probably this most important theme in this story. Echeverría presents a story where the people of the suburbs, the federalists and their followers, Rosas, the judge, and all of his establishment are portrayed as savage, violent, and irrational. They act savage like, violent, and irrational. The treatment of the Unitarian and their response to the death of the child most represents their lack of “civility” which the author portrays well. On the other hand, we see that the Unitarians are presented in a pleasant manner; the Unitarians in the story are portrayed as rational, humble, faithful to their cause, and innocent. One could even argue that they are defenseless. Socio-political By this, I am saying that the story is a direct critique of the Rosas regime and the social aspects of Argentina during his Regime. The story attempts to portray the reality of Argentina under the dictatorship of Rosas. During this period, the economy and overall status of Argentina is turbulent; there a great amount of inequality that is affecting the poor the most. At the same time, the wealthy are enjoying lavish lifestyles. We see that Echeverría reflects on the poor education of Argentina by the irrational follower in this story. The Federalists in this story, the poor supporters people, are ignorant and lack education. The story also represents a sense of religion in the story as the church has an intimate role in the story. Anticlericalism Echeverría takes another stab at the establishment of the church in Argentina during the regime of Rosas. During this celebration of la cuaresma, the church prohibited the consumption of meat for everyone. However, the church was not strict with government officials and clergy members; they could eat as much as they want without an issue. It is important to remember that in the midst of all of this, people are starving. So while church officials and the bureaucracy continue to consume meat and live modestly, the common people of Argentina are suffering from famine and a lack of resources. Format and Style The short story is dominated by a very descriptive, naturalist, and colloquial language. The violence and brutality that occurs throughout story is written in a manner that is very detailed and gruesome. The story has a lot of metaphors with nature such as the flooding that occurs in the beginning of the story; this helps build suspense for the reader and show the precarious conditions of Argentina under Rosas' administration. We also see a lot of colloquialisms that were spoken by the common people of Argentina (around Buenos Aires) during the 19th century. The use of the Spanish voseo is prevalent throughout the story. The work is also very polar, meaning that there seems to be no in between the political divisions. Everyone seems to be either Unitarian or Federalist. There is no moderation. Personal opinion I read this for a graduate college course and found the story to be interesting, but unrealistic. It is full of a lot of colloquial language that isn’t always fun to translate when the language when the language that is being spoken is vulgar or informal. Reading this in Spanish isn’t exactly fun when the author uses overly vivid descriptions simple. I felt like I was spending way too much time deciphering the description of water in the first part. For me, the language really put me at a distance and I didn't really connect with the story. Maybe it was too descriptive. Additionally, I think that the people in the story seem to be painted in an overly simplified picture—they are very static. They don’t actually seem to be very human when you think about it. Everyone is white or black; there is no gray. There are the federalists, who every one of them, each and every one of them are all bad, evil, and savage. None of them are good. They all support Rosas 100%. Then there are the Unitarians who are all 100 % good; none of them are bad. They are the true saviors of the country. It is a really simple way to paint a picture of the world. Other than the descriptive language that Echeverría gives, I found the story to be somewhat dry and fabricated. Let’s be fair and argue that is was an aspect of the literature in the 19th century in Latin America. During this period tt is slowly developing and becoming more complex. If we look at it from the eyes of a 21stcentury critic, we might be a little too unfair. Still, it is an interesting story and I would recommend it to anyone who is looking for an elaborate description of someone dying.
