Interview with Julia Ortega (Niamh Byrne)

Under the pseudonym of Niamh Byrne we find an old friend of this blog: Julia Ortega (Barcelona, 1971) strikes again! LGBT rights, social media, class difference, or sexism in education are some of the current topics discussed. Please do not miss out.

SPANISH GAY FICTION: Why did you decide to publish Contigo hasta el infinito under a pen name?

JULIA ORTEGA: This is my first novel set outside of Spain entirely. I use this pen name, which is of Irish origin, from this very year on for all those novels that do NOT have Spain as the main scenario.

SGF: On the dedication page you acknowledge all the people who work continuously to make visible and legitimize LGBT relationships.

JO: LGBT community rights must continue to be claimed today as much as when I started the novel. Back then I was assigned this project—another challenge of mine—, and it finally has come into existence. If I can make Frankie and Gigi win not only LGBT readers’ hearts but everybody’s, I will have achieved my goal.

SGF: Your book portrays a long-distance relationship built through social media. What is your opinion about this new, increasingly more common way of maintaining a love relationship?

JO: So-so. New technologies have made the world smaller, and now people are closer—and more distant at the same time! Let’s say that social networks help those facing actual problems to mix with in their most immediate context. That is the case of Gigi, who was pathologically shy during adolescence and would not in her wildest dreams have dared to approach someone like Frankie. Personally, I think that social networks remove these barriers and make communication easier between apparently incompatible people.

SGF: Frankie believes that opposites attract. . .Do you think the same way?

JO: No doubt. May that relationship last or end over time, that is another story.

SGF: It is very curious that neither Frankie nor Gigi had lesbian experiences before meeting again. Do you have knowledge of other similar stories in real life?

JO: To me, Love has no gender. This is not a question of being lesbian or heterosexual. In this case, we are dealing with bisexuality instead of homosexuality. I do not mention it in the novel, but I would say that Gigi had no kind of sexual experience until her mid-twenties, when her relationship with Frankie begins. This is also quite believable since she is more romantic and, as I said before, she finds harder to mix with others.

SGF: When these class differences happen in a real-life couple, is it harder for the low-class to adapt themselves to the environment of the high-class, or vice versa?

JO: Everything depends on each one’s intentions, their good will to solve certain conflicts. Although today’s class difference is not as noticeable as in past centuries, it remains. The problems are different, but the relationship still means a challenge for both extremes.

SGF: Which one do you identify yourself with most: Frankie or Gigi?

JO: Both. I am much more cynical than Gigi, and that makes me more similar to Frankie. Anyway, Gigi is a dear, one of the few people who still believe in human kindness.

SGF: I remember that in the previous interview we talked about social tolerance towards LGBT community, and you mentioned that there was so much hypocrisy about it. Do you still feel the same?

JO: There is everything under the sun. It may do not have to do with the topic but the beholder. It seems as if only a few people are able to talk about the subject discerningly (i.e., high-profile authors.) And what about us? We cannot have knowledge, an opinion, and if we can, they do not read/listen to us. That is the way it was years ago. Fortunately, things are changing and, yes, I have to thank the social media phenomenon, you see?

SGF: Why did you choose Glasgow and Amsterdam as the settings of Contigo hasta el infinito?

JO: Back then I happened to see both cities as opposing settings reflecting the mood of each of the protagonists somehow. I am not sure but I guess that, as it took a long time to write the novel, my feelings now the book is finished are therefore not the same than the ones I had when I started it. This may be a clichéd view, but what story is not at some point? By the way: unlike the plot of Caprichos del destino, there is nothing autobiographical in this story.

SGF: When I stop to think of the easy-going relationship between Frankie and her ex Dutch boyfriends, my conclusion is: “This would not have been possible years ago.” Do you think that in our society, and especially among younger generations, there is a much laxer view of sexuality?

JO: Much the same: it takes all sorts to make a world. My book is not setting a precedent, seriously. If I describe a very, very, very laid-back relationship among Frankie, Jan and Björn, that is because I have seen similar things in some films, other novels, or even people that I know or have known sometime in my life.

SGF: It seems that you are eluding the most melodramatic ways of romance novels throughout the book. Was it a voluntary decision?

JO: That is because this is not a romance novel. This is a love story, but it deliberately departs from all the (rigid) straits of the genre. I like love stories, but I dislike some—if not all—of the (obligatory) patterns so frequently found in bodice rippers. It also has to do with extension; Contigo hasta el infinito is a novella/novelette. I could not expand on certain aspects which, furthermore, are not relevant and can distance the reader from the main theme: the relationship between the two women.

SGF: Was anyone an inspiration for the arrogant Brianna MacFarland? 

JO: There are so many Briannas around the world, controlling people who want everybody to dance their tune only; people who do not accept other alternative ways of living/loving/feeling. It is not necessarily a question of money or power, though in Contigo hasta el infinito those elements are more recurrent. The outstanding point is that Gigi eventually stands up to her mother and takes the reins of her life. After all, we are not talking about teen love, but a relationship between adults who know what they want.

I have not been inspired by anybody in particular. If you want to put a face to Brianna, I myself visualize Cate Blanchett.

SGF: When Karen learns that her daughter Frankie is a lesbian, her only regret is that she would have liked to become a grandmother herself. The MacFarlands also had other expectations for their daughter. Do you view parents as generally thoughtless of their children’s own aspirations?

JO: Well, here we are back to the topic of the hypocritical society to which you must please, no matter what; always dictating the rules, imposing the standards; it states whom you have to marry, how many children you need to have, their future occupations, and a long et cetera. If someone defies the rules, he is pointed out and not for the good precisely. In the long run, this causes unhappiness, and no parent wants it for their children. “Behave well, and you will be happy and live quietly.” That is the mantra. “Do not rebel, otherwise we all will suffer the consequences.” This seems very much like the 19^th century, but it unfortunately still applies in some families, especially those (like Gigi’s) which, because of affluence or social position, are in the public eye.

SGF: When will Frankie be totally honest with her mother and confess that she is not a lawyer?

JO: We may never see that [Laughs.] Everyone can imagine a continuation in their own way. The story is self-conclusive, so there is no sequel. By the end, the two of them are living their relationship freely, and that really is a happy ending in every sense.

SGF: You describe Ethan as someone who has not enjoyed too much family love just because he is a man. Do you feel that those gender differences in education still occur?

JO: Well, Ethan is a very peculiar character that has not too much relevance because, as I said before, I did not to want to mislead the readers from the pairing Frankie/Gigi. Does he deserve his own novel? Maybe, but I have not considered this so far. I do not rule it out, but it cannot be possible in the short run. And, yes: less and less, but there are still certain differences between boys and girls in respect to education. It has to do with society and parents—the main educators—as well.

SGF: Both the boisterous Hannah, Jan’s last fling, and the young customers of the store where Frankie works are portrayed in a very sarcastic way. At your age, is there something that you would like to preach them?

JO: Not at all. Youth has its peculiarities, and maturity has its own. My descriptions are not intended to be critical, only anecdotal and fun; just a reflection of the current society, but with no condemning tone by a long shot. Hannah’s episode is one of the multiple ways of introducing Jan. Sometimes anecdotes and experiences tell a lot about their protagonists.

SGF: In Frankie’s mouth you put a wish that in the Obama era the film industry will show more homosexual relationships and different types of families. In hindsight, do you think that it happened like that?

JO: I cannot say for sure, but if I were an American film producer and an African-American becomes the President of the United States, I would know that I have to reflect it in some way, as this is not just an ordinary change. It represents an unprecedented historical and social milestone. That must be explained, especially to the younger generations, in order to show them that another freer world is possible. I saw The Princess and the Frog[1] and I loved to see an African-American protagonist in a Disney movie. And, like Frankie, I bet that we will see a homosexual relationship in upcoming animated films.[2] But now we are in the time of Trump. . .

SGF: Can you tell something about your upcoming projects?

JO: OK, it will be a psychological thriller set in USA and published under the pen name of Niamh Byrne again. That is all I can tell.

---

[1] This Walt Disney picture was released the very same year of the first inauguration of President Obama: 2009.

[2] For instance, in 2012 we had the opportunity to see an animated film with a gay (supporting) character on the big screen: Mitch—voiced by Casey Affleck—in ParaNorman (Focus Features-Laika Entertainment)

The Taste of Her Cherry Chapstick

On Lydia Sánchez and Julio Videras’s Cornelia

Yes! As you may have guessed, here in spanishgayfiction.blogspot.com we could not help recalling Katy Perry’s Sapphic hit when approaching this comic book published in 2008: a dazzling story around the whimsical, mysterious pathways to Happiness.

Our friendly protagonist is Cornelia, a 22-year-old student of Fine Arts. She has two jobs, thus she can’t hardly attend in classroom: in the mornings, as a shop assistant in the comic store Friky Planet; by night, as a waitress in a club.

Cornelia lives in an apartment in Barcelona with two girls and a boy. The girls are:

·Laura, a somehow dull and daffy blonde living in Barcelona for 10 years, trying to make her way in the world of acting though she is not lucky enough in auditions;

·and Rocío, a girl-crazy, passionate brunette, who successfully works in a publicity agency. Cornelia’s colleague in the night club, Pablito Danger, a hornball who jumps into each and every single woman, feels a special (and male-chauvinist) morbid fascination for her. His attitude extremely irritates Cornelia.

Cornelia is kind to the others: Luigi, the Italian restaurant owner; the alley cats she feeds up; the weirdo who is always watching through the other side of the store window; Antonio, the deliveryman; the boy intimidated by his mother. . .but particularly to Salva. He is the owner of Friky Planet (Salva calls freaks to the comic nerds); he is also Cornelia’s Prince Charming. She calls him Culito Perfecto—“Perfect Little Ass.” Salva is a 30-year-old scatterbrain, huge fan of comics, roleplaying, horror movies and Italian food. He is continuously asking Cornelia to do extra hours, since Salva is really busy with his other job in a business consultancy.

Today Cornelia takes advantage from her favor in order to get an invitation for lunch in a wok, as well as a stolen kiss. Eventually, Salva stands her up in the restaurant. Nevertheless, in the afternoon she must go back to the store to do her promised duty.

Later in the club, her girlfriends go to see her at the other side of the bar. There, Cornelia recounts her situation with Salva. Rocío suggests that she ignores men and goes lesbian. To brighten up her day, Rocío tells a funny anecdote about how she flirted with a shop-assistant in a lingerie store. Rocío is always sweet and thoughtful to her. To Rocío, Cornelia is nice, pretty and funny, though just a little bit neurotic. She recommends Cornelia to kiss Prince Charming off and try to find the person she can connect with and feel happy and complete. Cornelia admits that Rocío cares about her more than Salva.

Speak of the devil, Salva makes an attentive appearance, with an apology in his lips and a rose in his hand, guaranteeing a rewarding dinner to Cornelia. Rocío is not at all happy with him.

A week later, Cornelia seems to have forgotten the incident. By taking things slow, Cornelia hopes that Salva takes seriously the chance of a relationship: They together walk out, have lunch, go to the movies, do some shopping—Salva also picks Cornelia up in the club after working all night. He finally passes care inspection, so they arrange a celebration date. Besides, Cornelia has asked her roommates to leave the apartment that night for more intimacy.

The door bell is ringing. Rocío warns Salva not to blow it again, otherwise he would be in serious trouble. Salva gives Cornelia a beautiful butterfly barrette that she immediately puts on her hair to add a sparkling touch to her stunning look tonight.

During the dinner the romantic couple makes a toast with water—tough luck!: It starts raining before entering the hot spot where Salva brings Cornelia after. There, Cornelia will find out Salva’s unexpected skills as a lively dancer. When Cornelia goes to the restroom, Salva’s ex-fiancée Lidia suddenly pops up. Lidia had gone off with an American man, leaving Salva practically standing at the altar. But things did not go well, and now Lidia seems ready to get Salva back at any costs.

Lidia does not accept Salva’s refusal, so she decides to come to the fore and kiss him. Salva acts reluctant at first, but later he lets her take control. To top it all, Cornelia comes back and has a major setback to the delight of Lidia. Our unfortunate heroine rushes out of the club, and walks back home in the rain.

Rocío recognizes her from the taxi. She gets off and shelters Cornelia under her umbrella; she also takes off her coat to cover her soaking humbled friend. Once Cornelia has told the story, Rocío advises her to ignore Salva for good. Cornelia starts saying that she and Rocío—the two of them—in others circumstances—But Rocío does not let her finish: she claims that the world would be a much more beautiful place if people worried about searching for love only, no matter the significant other’s gender. Rocío confesses that she has wanted to kiss Cornelia for too long, and she does it. The passionate brunette has dropped the umbrella: neither of them seems to feel the rain. Cornelia finally kissed a girl—and she definitely liked it!!!

Babes’ New World

On Julia Ortega’s bilogy Desde Londres con glamour (“From London with Glamour”):

vCaprichos del destino (“Whims of Fate”), and

v Nuestro lugar en el mundo (“Our Place in the World”)

Sorry so much for the dreamiest, most expectant fans of futurology, but in the not too distant tomorrow (two decades’ time) our planet will definitely not be chock-full of flying cars or any other puzzling, astonishing pieces of junk—At least that is what Julia Ortega puts forward in her recently released couple of novels: a world where people is still texting via WhatsApp through iPhones (Apple Inc. staff may easily relax: their business has a long life ahead); there is also a craze for the same current trendy clothing labels; in political terms, the Western world is still enduring Islamic terrorist attacks, and Israel is the same battleground as we all know it—there is only a significant political change: in Spain, the territory of Catalonia has finally gotten independence. But this is just the background of what the author wants to tell—

In her bilogy, Julia Ortega portrays an unconventional family saga in which women rule at best. Judith Ordóñez, the most rebellious of them all (the most individualistic as well), will face the risky, horrifying effects of free speech firsthand. Judith is a Spanish writer/journalist who settles in London due to the whims of fate. She leaves behind the grievous memories of an impossible love story with another woman, malleable Bárbara, who eventually marries a girlfriend of Judith’s, Michelle. In Caprichos del destino we find out that Michelle’s motives for this marriage are so sick and twisted that she embodies a striking combination between Amanda Woodward and Dr. Kimberly Shaw. That is to say, she is a total soap opera bitch.

In contrast to Judith, her daughter Gillian is a much smoother character, far away from the roar of wars and conflicts. Even her girlfriend and then stepsister Alex(andra) tends to be more spirited than her.

Despite what the first lines of Caprichos del destino may suggest, the truth is that this is not an overt political manifesto. The powerful voice of Judith, role model of feminist, self-sufficient, politically committed, self-made woman, will be silenced all of a sudden, and a dark menacing shadow hovers over the rest of the characters, particularly Gillian. Anyway, this situation will not be the main point in Ortega’s narration; she seems to be more interested in the sentimental side of the story. Thus, in Nuestro lugar en el mundo she focuses on the troublesome romance between Alex and Gillian.

First pally-wally schoolmates, later teen lovers—Alex and Gillian make the perfect lesbian match, getting through hard circumstances, such as family opposition (Josh, Gillian’s alcoholic, former budding film star father, disagrees in the most aggressive way), or the awkward situation of becoming stepsisters when Josh marries Alex’s mother—However, Alex and Gillian’s affective ties are quite weaker than imagined: Alex goes to New York for a wonderful job opportunity, and this forced separation opens this so-happy-so-far couple’s eyes to new horizons—

On one hand, Gillian feels tempted by Sam—a male colleague teacher engaged to Olimpia, a bossy hag—, who falls for her the very first moment that he looks at Gill in her astonishing Prada costume. On the other hand, Alex wins the heart of Saffron Adams, an American pop star whose sexual identity has never been revealed to the public—not even to her scary, conservative mother, who suspiciously resembles any of those arrogant Belles of the South fanning themselves proudly (how else?) in Margaret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind. Out of sight, out of mind—so Sam and Gill unexpectedly get pregnant, while Alex experiences a little hell in her life because of Saffron’s bad-influence friends—though happily recovers from an almost fatal overdose in the end.

Despite disregard, treachery, and deception, Alex and Gill finally make peace, and Alex expresses her wish to see Sam and Gill’s daughter Maerwyn grow up. After all, she is the baby’s auntie.

And if you are missing the ineludible presence in any proper chick lit piece (i.e., the heroine’s gay friend)—then let me introduce Saffron’s friends Eric and Rowan; as charming as pleasant, with a pinch of superficiality, they accurately personify the stereotypical gay couple who is there in the bad times to comfort.

As narrative style is concerned, Ortega’s speech is interestingly delivered: in each chapter, one of the characters tells the story from their viewpoint. This device is especially hilarious when it is Gill’s turn; her debates with her own conscience are foolishly insane.

Feminism, lesbianism, committed literature, politics, family troubles, romance, sex, alcoholism, notoriety, drug abuse, assault, pregnancy, terrorism, situation comedy, soapy plots—each and every single issue, significant or small talk, is present in this funny mixed-up two-volume patchwork set in a future where the woman is the boss—and all the men are merely supporting players.

Interview with Javier Sedano

Javier Sedano (Torrelavega, Cantabria, 1961) has talked to spanishgayfiction.blogspot.com about his first novel, Tras las puertas del corazón. The reader will find in this interview the pleasure of a contentful conversation, discussing issues such as nudism, sexuality, protest theatre, lack of values, hippie-style life, the historical development differences between Spain and the USA—Hope the reader enjoys Sedano’s speech as much as I’ve done.

SPANISH GAY FICTION: Tras las puertas del corazón has many speeches. But perhaps one of the most obvious is its defense of naturism. Up to what point nudism is important in your life? Do you think that it tends to be misunderstood? Many people—especially gay people—view nudist locations as strictly sexual meeting places.

JAVIER SEDANO: Nudism is a way of living in harmony with your environment, and that is the way I enjoy it whenever I can. It makes me feel alive and free, and of course those who have not been in contact with nudism tend to think that this is a way to be provocative and show off—far from reality, indeed.

And your last statement is true. Many gays find in nudist areas another place for sexual encounters, something that cannot be prevented. That was one of the reasons that led me to write Tras las puertas del corazón among many other motives: showing nudism as a normal thing that has nothing to do with sexuality.

SGF: If I am not wrong, Tras las puertas del corazón was your first novel. How was the experience not only to write it, but also to find a publisher?

JS: It was my first published book, but I had already four books completed and was writing the second part, Preguntas sin respuesta (“Unanswered Questions”). The experience was exciting, as I was facing a long, major story for the first time. The idea of publication came from my friend Raúl, who was the first one that read the novel and told me keenly that I had to send it to a publisher.

Odisea[1] answered before a month’s time. They found the story very interesting, and some months later the novel showed up in bookstores.

SGF: Your full name is Francisco Javier García Sedano. Some of your novels are published under the name of ‘Javier Sedano,’ and others by ‘Frank García.’ What are the reasons of choosing one name or another?

JS: Let us say that those books by Javier Sedano are more conventional, more romantic; novels where I immerse the characters in historic moments of our society, and the language is more precise. On the other hand, those by Frank García are more erotic and sassier as style is concerned.

SGF: Alex is a Spanish guy who travels to the USA in the mid-1960s, and lives through a series of experiences certainly impossible for him if he had remained in Spain. How much of your experience is there in Alex’s story? And how much of fantasy about the way you would like your life should have been is there in the life of Alex?

JS: I gave to my characters—not only Alex—the best of me. There are many true moments of my life and the lives of people who have surrounded me in the best moments of my existence. I gave to every one of them a part of my personality and then, of course, the freedom of fantasy that enriches all the characters even more. Regarding situations that I would have liked to live, they would not be Alex’s precisely, but Ray’s. Ray enjoys that restless spirit in me. The freedom to do whatever he wants and offer all his best to the others—I have never achieved that, nor even got closer to this.

SGF: Would you say that the hippie movement in the USA is for you the closest thing to an earthly paradise in contemporary history? Do you think that this philosophy is still alive in our times?

JS: The hippie movement as such was not so idyllic. They sought to live in harmony with life, with nature, with the environment wherever they were in and, above all, respect to your neighbor and the cause of peace. Anyway, as I see it, there was one problem: drugs. And in answer to your second question, I feel that this philosophy of life could be perfect and, in fact, there are some colonies and small towns recovered where many young people are living this way. The return to Nature…It would be perfect to live all together, creating a community without drugs, since I believe that they do well to no one.  

SGF: If I had to criticize the plot of the novel, it would be in relation to Ray’s and Alex’s roles as fathers. I still have reservations about the reasons why they kept themselves in the shadow of the lives of their children. It is just astonishing that two guys that give off so much love moved away from their own children. Use this moment to defend their motives, Javier...

JS: Neither of them is proud of this separation, this distance, but it was a way to show the readers how many mistakes you can make just by saying, “I will be there tomorrow…,” “Next week by all means we will meet…,” and so many other things over your life. If you realize, in this novel there is much criticism on social conventions and even situations we all have gone through or seen others making mistakes easy to solve if we take our time for ourselves.

SGF: I find curious that in your descriptions of open relationships jealousy rises up never. To what extent do you think that this is viable beyond fiction? Do you think that an open relationship where jealousy never arises is possible? Have you ever lived such a relationship?

JS: I am the sort of person who thinks that there is no room for jealousy if there is sincerity from both sides in a relationship. Jealousy is caused by mistrust and lack of self-confidence from oneself. If a half of the couple hides a situation, whatever it may be, from the other—in the novel this is also taken into account—, it must be done what I believe it is fair between two reasonable people: find the moment and talk about it. (It happens between Ray and Alex in one scene by the lake). And yes, I have lived a similar situation and it worked; the problem was that we had to break up for reasons that had nothing to do with jealousy. Today we are great friends.

SGF: Speaking of the sexuality issue…Ray and Alex are bisexual. Some people take for sure that bisexuality does not exist: you are straight or gay, but never both at the same time. The truth is that, though Ray and Alex can love women, they never love women as much as they love each other. Do you think that one can love with the same intensity both a man and a woman? And do you think it is possible a communal living as Ray and Alex making up a foursome with their wives who, by the way, love each other as well?

JS: In this novel I had the problem of trying to picture all kind of feelings and emotions that human beings can ever feel, as well as our ethical and moral codes. According to many readers, I achieved this. That was the main goal, and bisexuality—so punished by straight and gay people—had to be highlighted, just to show that love has nothing to do with labels, and you can certainly love a man just like a woman, or even love a man and a woman at the same time. Why not? I knew a relationship similar to Alex and Ray’s some years ago.

SGF: Alex’s story is clearly divided into two parts: the first one happens in the USA and the second is set in Spain. Both seem to work like the yin yang theory. It is obvious that the positive events take place in the first part, and the reader bumps into the most dramatic side of the story in the second part. Alex himself finds out his dark side as well. Did you have in mind this yin yang philosophy when considering the two-part construction of the novel? Could the reader consider a political reading of your choice?

JS: I feel that my characters live hard situations in both parts of the novel. We must bear in mind that the reason why they pack their bags and go to Spain is, in my opinion, one of the most shocking moments of the whole novel, though it is true that they will face the greatest difficulties in Spain. These are social and mainly emotional clashes. If you stop to think, you will realize nothing happens for the hell of it and, on the contrary, their lives will be in constant struggle with everything around them. They are two very lively beings, living day-to-day. But as I said before, I wanted to show all the human feelings, good and bad, and among the bad ones there are anger and hate, which blind Alex in a particular moment.

SGF: What do you remember of Spain in the Transición period?

JS: I was very young, but I remember some crazier years when everything taught as wrong in the past was viewed as something natural then. Many people were afraid of this. It was a vivid cultural, social, and political time. As Alex says, the winds of freedom blowing in Spain were the same as the ones they had got to know in the USA years before.

SGF: One of the aspects that I find most remarkable is that a great part of the narrative is based on conversation, which is unhurried, thoughtful, and respectful. Did you do this as an example of what should happen in real life, as a way of defending a positive attitude in the exchange of opinions in a world where this feature does not seem to be in vogue precisely?

JS: Yes, in my novels I want to give a great importance to conversations, as each and every one can express the way they are, think and feel. As you say, most of today’s problems actually arise out of the fact that people do not talk; they do not sit down and speak calmly and, worst of all, they do not listen to the others when they are speaking.

We could say we live in the Age of Individualism, something that has been very stealthily instilled in us and we are unaware of this. We can see people who are not speaking but yelling everyday on TV. Politicians do not listen, but even insult each other. Courtesy, greetings…all that is rot in oblivion. Everyone wants to impose their law and way of thinking, and even people on the streets or terraces do not chat, but text message.

SGF: You can also guess some didactic intention in many of these conversations. Nelson Mandela said: “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Have you ever considered that Tras las puertas del corazón may change the reader’s life philosophy?

JS: It was unintentional, though other people have told me the same. Tras las puertas del corazón is a novel straight to the heart of the reader’s brains. I sought to make flesh and blood creations, not ink and paper ones. I wanted to show the reader positive values that we are losing in favor of pointless criticisms, desire for power, unachievable ambition, contempt for contempt’s sake, despising what is surrounding us…Above all, human beings are able to achieve their goals without needing to step on anyone; on the contrary, the point is sharing.

SGF: It is quite odd that a gay couple does not endure homophobic attacks throughout their relationship during the 1960s, 70s, 80s, 90s…Homophobia appears occasionally in two moments of the novel: the mention of the Stonewall riots, and as a feature in the character of Laura. Keeping Ray and Alex’s love story clear of homophobic conflicts, was it a voluntary choice from you? If that is so, why? 

JS: I did not delve into the issue of homophobia as I did not feel it was necessary in the story, though it is subtly mentioned. I was sure that the time for a deep treatment in a stark, shocking novel would come up someday, as it happened when completing the trilogy with Corazones en libertad (“Free Hearts”), where the main topic is homophobia.

SGF: Ray and especially Alex are really committed to the theatre world during their stay in both San Francisco and Barcelona. Long time ago, theatre was a means of making the audience socially aware, protesting against abuses of power, breaking the social mold. What is your relationship with theatre? Do you think that there is still this sort of theatre, or is it pretty light in our time?

JS: I discovered theatre when I was a child, along with my mother, through  “Estudio 1” on TVE;[2] I later had my amateur efforts when I lived in my hometown, directing short plays by me or some friend. This is one of those passions, together with cinema, that I am always willing to live intensely whenever I can.

And in answer to your second question…Yes, that independent drama defending a theatre closer to the audience, created by small companies and performed in small theaters, is back. The economic crisis has stimulated imagination again, and today there is no need for a big theater to see a good play. There are wonderful plays in small theaters.

SGF: What are you working on now? What are your most immediate projects?

JS: Now I am promoting my new novel, Al filo de la pasión (“On the Edge of Passion”) an erotic novel. The female protagonist, high class thirtysomething Carmen, a passionate, intelligent, beautiful woman, meets León, a 20-year-old boy anxious to discover sexuality in full. The two of them will live the most intense sexual experiences, with continuous surprises throughout the story. It is published through Amazon, and under the pen name of Javier Sedano. [You can buy the novel here.]

In a few days Macho Alfa (“Alpha Male”), a gay erotic novel, will also be published—through Amazon as well—under the pen name of Frank García in this case.

Apart from that, I am working on a play, and very soon I will start a series project shared with a friend, an extremely modern comedy.

---

[1] Odisea Editorial: Spanish publisher devoted to LGBT-themed literature.

[2] TVE: Televisión Española (“Spanish Television”): this is the public national TV channel in Spain; “Estudio 1”: a very popular TV series, showing from 1964 to 1984, in which a celebrated play—national or international—was performed in each episode (e.g., Reginald Rose’s Twelve Angry Men, José Zorrilla’s Don Juan Tenorio…). This program format was recovered in modern times, though unsuccessfully.

Interview with Paloma Pedrero

Here you have an interview with Paloma Pedrero (Madrid, 1957) discussing her play Lauren’s Call…, as well as essential issues such as education, sexuality, relationships, social prejudices, and her next projects. I keenly invite you to enjoy the wisdom of her speech.

SPANISH GAY FICTION: Maybe what attracts me most about Lauren’s Call… is the title. Why did you choose Lauren Bacall among all the stars of Hollywood’s Golden Age? Did you consider her the epitome of femininity? Or, on the contrary, did you find her ambiguous?

PALOMA PEDRERO: She was very feminine and also very masculine. She had both sides.

SGF: By the time the play was first staged, the power of its language was highlighted. Nowadays we are used to listen to the actors expressing this way on the boards but—by then, was it a daring speech?

PP: In 1985, a woman speaking about male sexuality with a really female look was revolutionary. I think today it is still revolutionary.

SGF: What encouraged you to write a play dealing with sexual ambiguity as not only a personal problem but also a social one? Is it an issue you still find interesting?

PP: Yes, I still do find it interesting, for we still behave under very strong social prejudices. I feel we are educated to be heterosexual. But—what if not? I believe that, if we were freer, we would enjoy many more possibilities in relationships. We could play different roles in the heterosexual relationship and make it more creative. There would also be more bisexuality, which means wide outlooks and experiences.

SGF: Did José María Rodríguez Méndez’s play Flor de Otoño (“Autumn Flower”), premiered a few years before, have any influence when you wrote Lauren’s Call...? In your opinion, what is the difference between your approach to transsexualism/transvestism and Rodríguez Méndez’s play, or any other play of that time?

PP: Honestly, I do not think so. The play by the great author Rodríguez Méndez deals about male homosexuality. Lauren’s Call… raises another issue. It discusses the limits that society puts on human relationships, especially marriage. I think that a couple has to be first and foremost the story of a great friendship…Sexuality should not be the center point, but communication, tenderness, understanding—The acceptance of the other’s differences, even his/her pathologies. In order to enjoy a calm and long-lasting relationship, a couple must create, reinvent itself as something unique. Society is still castrating in this sense, setting strict rules that emerge from old, untrue ideas. For example, the way each sex must behave in the relationship. This leads to continuous failure in marriages.  

SGF: Do you remember the premiere of the play?

PP: Just imagine…My first premiere as the author, as well as the female lead, in a hostile context. I really did not know at the time the huge responsibility I was taking, the risk I was running. Anyway, I think that, if I had realized, I would have done the same. I also did not know play and staging could generate so much controversy. I viewed Lauren’s Call… as a great love story, performed with great affection by all the artistic crew. However, the critics and some part of the audience reacted with hostility towards us. I just could not believe it then. I later understood what had happened.

SGF: They say that it was quite controversial in Spain back then. It has been several decades since the premiere, and the play has still been producing. What is the audience response in our days? Do you think the play is still shocking for the majority?

PP: I think it depends a lot on the staging. If I were the director today, surely it would still be shocking. There are so many things we do not know—dare to face—that we even do not talk about them.

SGF: And abroad? What is the reaction to Lauren’s Call… in other countries?

PP: As I have mentioned before, I think it has always depended on how daring the mise-en-scène is.

SGF: Certain negative criticism the play received on the premiere denotes not so much a problem with your work as a playwright but rather some hostility towards the homosexual issue. The play was premiered in Madrid in the mid-1980s—Would you say that there was still a vast homophobic social mindset at the time?

PP: Yes, and it still does exist. But, as I said before, Lauren’s Call… in 1985 did not focus on Pedro’s homosexuality. Alberto Wainer, the director, made a broader, richer interpretation. Why can’t this couple love each other, as this is the case, and be happy? It could be possible if we accepted love in different ways.

SGF: I consider this play is ahead of its time. So ahead that it seems to me that today’s society has still not absorbed its moral teaching. Let me explain—I still see parents who bring up their little children doubtlessly certain that their sexual behavior will be heterosexual when they will grow up. Boys will meet girls, girls will meet boys—They never think about the fact that their offspring may have a different sexuality since childhood. I think that is the reason why, the time they grow up and come out or admit they feel trapped in someone else’s body, some parents still find it so hard to accept. What is your opinion on this matter?

PP: This is a very complicated issue. We would need a congress to talk about this and would not achieve final results. But yes—I do feel we still have not improved at all. People believe that tradition (the usual…, the learned behavior) is the right thing. The normal thing—And this is false. Mankind has lived and written with crooked lines. What is normal? There is no normality. There are different humans with different bodies, genes, substances, brains—That is why behaviors cannot be the same. For example, how can you find normal that half of humanity has set itself up as superior to the other half? There are so many things that we do not know. We live in ignorance, but delightfully, when the only thing that makes sense in life is making a path of knowledge and consciousness. In order to do that, we must leave opinions and prejudices behind and start by looking at ourselves, with no fear to know us. This is the only way we can see the others, accept them, understand them, and even love them.  

SGF: The play leaves a bitter taste indeed. The understanding and generosity that Rosa displays at the end imply a great sorrow and sacrifice—If you had written this play today, do you think that you would have written the same ending?

PP: I would make Rosa realize that it is possible, that Pedro could go to the Carnival party alone and she could sleep in peace and joy. Or she could also go to the party. In the 1985 version, this is suggested. Rosa, when she is left alone, puts on Bogart’s hat and tries to play and accept. But I still might be unsure by then—as she was—Today, even with the same words, I would make her realize that it was possible she could transform herself.

SGF: Do you see Rosa and Pedro, each in their own way, as victims of strict education on sex roles in the past? Could it be made a political interpretation, taking into account that this play was staged in full democracy after several decades of dictatorial regime?

PP: Absolutely. They are victims of that strict, castrating education. But today’s education has not changed as much as we feel. It is still strict and castrating. I have recently published an article in La Razón[1] in this regard. Here you have, just if you want to include it:

“Education”

by Paloma Pedrero

More laws, few considerable changes. We always do the same without thinking twice, not daring to let the true thinkers take the reins of such an essential issue. Almost all of us agree that education is the basis on which mankind rises up. The world to come is growing in the school: an ignorant place, seized by foolish power struggles, or a space where its inhabitants are working to become wiser and better. So, to make this path we must teach our children (apart from Maths and English) to know themselves in order to know the others; to leave prejudices behind, to understand and respect other ways of behaving and feeling. For a good teaching, you have to set love first. That feeling must cover the classroom, the playground, the gym—To respect deeply and let the teachers be independent. Practice what you preach. Teaching the hardest thing for the human: being free, thinking by one’s self, running risks, making efforts to find one’s talent. Transmitting your pupils that every joy comes from one’s own effort. Educating is a sublime act, since good people result from good teachers. People who understand that knowledge is a lifetime task. That is why education must be reconsidered from different angles, less materialistic and more focused on vocation.

Science, indeed—But together with Poetry and Spirituality. The school as a place where you can find the gift that allows to give our best to the others and the world. There will be no room for male chauvinism, mistreatment of the different, or the shame of any kind of violence.[2]

SGF: In the original staging, in which you had the leading role, the so-called fourth wall was used as a mirror. According to the play, both Rosa and Pedro get naked before the mirror. I mentioned before the homophobia issue but, what about nudes? The Spanish audience, after the Destape[3] age, was ready to see clothless players on the boards? Or was it a controversial issue as well?

PP: It is always a controversial matter. Nudity is a very touching thing.

SGF: What are your projects? What are you working on?

PP: My play Ana el once de marzo ("Ana on March 11")[4] has just premiered. Now I am doing some research to write a monologue about Mary Wollstonecraft, a British feminist writer born in 1759. Her intelligence and courage were really impressive. Her life was impressive too.

---

[1] This is one of the most popular Spanish newspapers nationwide, in which Pedrero usually collaborates.

[2] This is my translation into English. You can find the original text in Spanish here.

[3] Destape (“Nudity”). After Franco’s death, the Transición Española (“Spanish Transition”) began, a period of political regeneration resulting in the current parliamentary monarchy. At that time, government censorship became more relaxed, and the Spanish audience could thus see actresses (and some actors) totally naked in films, as well as on stage, for the first time. This trend is popularly known as el Destape.

[4] As the reader can easily guess, this play is contextualized in the 3/11 train bombing in Madrid ten years ago. It was the fiercest terrorist attack in Spanish history.