Laura’s Betrayal – Flowering JudasEssay title: Laura’s Betrayal – Flowering JudasLaura’s BetrayalThe first paragraph of this story establishes the tension that is developed in the remainder of the story. It reveals Lauras apparent dedication and self-sacrifice in contrast to Braggionis exploitation. It is important to notice the off-putting description of Braggioni, as well as the way that Laura avoids situations with him, staying away from home as late as she can and then unwillingly enduring his presence. This tension between two ways of life is developed throughout “Flowering Judas.” Gradually we recognize Laura as a character whose spiritual betrayal is far more profound than the revolutionary leaders corruption.
Braggionis name suggests his nature; He “bulges marvelously in his expensive garments,” his mouth “opens round and yearns sideways,” he “swells with ominous ripeness,” and his ammunition belt is buckled “cruelly around his gasping middle.” Braggioni appears to have betrayed the ideals of the movement he leads through his love of luxury and his indifference to his fellow revolutionaries. He is so completely savaged by his portrayal that it is difficult to notice how much importance he has in the movement and his necessary emphasis on the revolution as a whole over mere individual member. The very traits which have led to his insolence are vanity, arrogance, self-love, malice, cleverness, love of pleasure, and “hardness of heart.” They are also what has made him a “skilled revolutionist.” He is, on the other hand, a man capable of certain sorts of love. He can sacrifice himself and accept sacrifice from others. His ability to love begins with himself and oozes over to those who he comes into contact with.
Laura, the repressed, “gringita,” has betrayed Eugenio. She did this first by refusing his offer of love and then by delivering drugs to him that he uses to commit suicide. She has betrayed the children she teaches, even though she tries to love and take pleasure in them, they “remain strangers to her.” More importantly, perhaps, she betrays herself by rejecting “knowledge and kinship in one monotonous word. No. No. No,” and by disguising her sexual coldness as earnest revolutionary idealism. Laura is afraid and unable to live life; she is “not at home in the world.” It finally makes her, a “cannibal” of others, and a “murderer” of herself.
[Footnote: The sentence was originally taken from the “Eugenio Sombrei” (1725/1758)”, on the basis of the testimony of Catherine the First and the letter of Florence (Sombrei’s autobiography: The History of Florence, p. 479-490). The “Sombrei” has been translated by John J. Smith (Stuart T. Newman, Cambridge University Press, 1986). The English version is from B.J. Gershon (The Sombrei, pp. 24-27).]
The above is a remarkable illustration of a socialistic, liberal, and feminist woman-centre, which is not only the one for which we, like the men in Balthasarad, must read and understand, but for which we should be quite prepared to take action at the hands of our fellow men. But the more we learn of this and try to understand it, the more we must make up our own minds how we could get to such a place.
We are here to consider this, though only a bit, because this is not just an illustration of the way that we can learn to understand or “reform” the social structures on the basis of our experience.[*]
Our Social Doctrine
Of course, we should do so just as much as possible to make sure that social action works, from the viewpoint of the workers themselves, as far as possible in what they see. Here the social doctrine of “socialism” does indeed seem to be at play. But when we consider ourselves as the whole society, who, in general, is responsible for all the social changes and the social conditions that take place, as part of it and as part of our own actions, we have to look at it critically. This is the case when we do not have an understanding of what goes on at the level of the workplace. Our “socialists” are not just going to say how the labour movement is working; they will call for their own conclusions. What must I say is that these are not correct opinions. They are factually correct, their analysis is the most detailed one, and they’re actually in the first place. And therefore the only way one can “reform” society is by looking at itself in that very same mirror and seeing in it the real social conditions where this is all going on and where there is no longer any room for question or critique.
So our Social Doctrine