I have to admit I was thoroughly entertained by the division on Luis Buñuel after the new piece of information (the excerpt from his wife’s book) was revealed to us. This man raised in a Jesuit school under patriarchal norms of 1900’s Spain was himself upholding patriarchy in his own home and marriage despite his rather “progressive” commentary as depicted in his films. With this in mind, Tristana becomes a great piece to dissect when considering how we separete the art vs the artist.

Tristana begins as soon as the titular character, Tristana moves in with her uncle, Don Lope, who is her next closest relative and guardian. She is exposed to a new norm of being a woman of a certain class, for example when she spills cleaner on the floor Don Lope tells her Saturna should be the one cleaning instead. Interestingly enough, Don Lope is of a class that does not need to work because of his wealth. However, this wealth is significantly diminished yet he can not work because of how it will come off to other people within his circles. Here Buñuel offers a perspective on the bourgeoisie once again, noting what little they contribute to society, merely existing because of their inability to contribute anything of meaning. Interestingly enough, Saturna’s name is a directly related to Saturn, the Roman god of wealth and time. In traditional astrological interpretations, Saturn as a planet is related to the idea of reaping what you sow. Considering this, Buñuel is (once again) not shy of what he thinks of class depictions; the working class sows, the upper class trots along (the english meaning of Lope). Tristana deals with living under the jealous control of her uncle, who also becomes her husband, and what unfolds is a story of a woman trying to navigate freedom vs control under male domination.

Tristana struggles with creating her own identity, but throughout the film we can observe her transformation using the lens of Jungian archetypes: the Maiden (innocence), the Mother (nurturing, sexual identity, wife) and eventually she turns into the Crone aka a sort of “wicked witch” woman. Though Buñuel himself was a textbook patriarch in his personal life, it is interesting to see how he portrays his female characters as having what is considered a full transformational life. If Tristana had never been exposed to a sexual identity via Don Lope as a catalyst, she would forever be stuck in her “Maiden” archetype. She would be sheltered, living without real consequence, and would never have been initiated into the next phase “Mother”, which removes her from living without real meaning, such as the rest of the bourgeoisie. Tristana actively rebels against the patriarchy: she has multiple lovers, is unmarried, plays piano, and treats Saturna, her housemaid, as an equal. The Maiden archetype is a role given to women unwillingly, and we see this through Don Lope’s treatment of Tristana: nothing that happens to her is anything she willingly welcomes such as her relationship with him. Her love affair with the artist initiates her into a new phase of autonomy as she finally chooses something (or someone) for herself. However, when Tristana becomes disabled and therefore reliant on the assistance of men for her wellbeing, we have to consider what statement Buñuel is making here. He has in the past symbolically castrated (and literally: Tristana’s leg, for example) his female characters when they reach a level of identity that they have chosen (Djin in Death in the Garden for example, being literally shot down. Throughout the film she is very much making it known she is in charge of herself). Tristana’s desires change from her wanting to play piano (creative freedom) to her wanting to escape Don Lope’s house (domestic freedom). Perhaps Buñuel is drawing out whatever he observed in his own wife through Tristana, both are caged birds. Tristana finally becomes the Crone, embodying a woman who now has the wisdom and experience of life to either be a wise sage or an authoritarian. Tristana chooses the latter, and brings Don Lope to his death bed. The Crone also symbolizes endings, and in this sense, Tristana has completed a full cycle if Don Lope truly did die. Buñuel not giving a clear answer on whether he lives or dies brings the audience into a greater question: is Tristana finally free?

Tristana is a case study on Buñuel grappling with his personal and public beliefs. Through employing Fernando Rey as these machismo characters upholding patriarchal codes, he has been able to poke fun at the establishment as well as himself. We see Buñuel’s internal struggle with letting a woman have freedom but not too much, as well as being the domineering presence in a household. Don Lope is in fact a pathetic character to witness; he does not want to work and he contributes little to society. Yet he is necessary to uphold the social hierarchy because the alternative is socialism, which perhaps is his whole point.