# The Seven Madmen, Innocence and Idiocy Los siete locos · Roberto Arlt · Part Two Source: https://1732studios.com/books/arlt/ingenuidad-e-idiotismo. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/arlt/ingenuidad-e-idiotismo.json. Audio: https://audio.1732studios.com/arlt/.m4a. El cronista de esta historia no se atreve a definirlo a Erdosain, tan numerosas fueron las desdichas de su vida, que los desastres que más tarde provocó en compañía del Astrólogo pueden explicarse por los procesos psíquicos sufridos durante su matrimonio. The chronicler of this story does not dare to define Erdosain, so numerous were the misfortunes of his life that the disasters he later set off in the company of the Astrologer can be explained by the psychic processes he suffered during his marriage. > Redundant object pronoun: River Plate Spanish often doubles a person object with both the pronoun and the noun: «definirlo a Erdosain» literally puts both «lo» ('him') and «a Erdosain» on the same verb. The «a» is the personal «a» that marks a human direct object; the extra «lo» is the Buenos Aires habit of foreshadowing it. English just says 'to define Erdosain'. Aún hoy, cuando releo las confesiones de Erdosain, paréceme inverosímil haber asistido a tan siniestros desenvolvimientos de impudor y de angustia. Even today, when I reread Erdosain's confessions, it seems unbelievable to me that I should have witnessed such sinister unfoldings of shamelessness and anguish. > Enclitic pronoun on a finite verb: «paréceme» is «me parece» ('it seems to me') with the pronoun «me» attached to the end of the verb instead of in front of it. This enclitic placement on a conjugated verb is archaic and literary today; Arlt uses it for an elevated, almost old-fashioned narrative voice. Me acuerdo. I remember. > Pronominal «acordarse»: «acordarse (de)» means 'to remember' and is reflexive in form — it always carries a pronoun («me», «te», «se»…). Don't confuse it with «acordar» (without the pronoun), which means 'to agree' or 'to grant'. Durante aquellos tres días en que estuvo refugiado en mi casa, lo confesó todo. During those three days when he was holed up in my house, he confessed it all. > Preterite for a closed span: Both verbs are preterite. «estuvo refugiado» frames the three days as one bounded period now over, and «confesó» reports a completed act — Spanish uses the preterite, not the imperfect, when the past event is sealed off rather than ongoing. Nos reuníamos en una pieza enorme y vacía de muebles, donde poca luz llegaba. We would meet in a huge room, empty of furniture, where little light reached. > «pieza» = room: In River Plate Spanish «pieza» commonly means a 'room' (especially a bedroom or a let room), where Peninsular Spanish would say «habitación» or «cuarto». «pieza» can also mean a 'piece' generally, so context decides. Erdosain quedábase sentado en el borde de una silla, la espalda arqueada, los codos apoyados en las piernas, las mejillas enrejadas por los dedos, la mirada fija en el pavimento. Erdosain would sit on the edge of a chair, his back arched, his elbows propped on his legs, his cheeks barred by his fingers, his gaze fixed on the floor. > Absolute participle phrases: Spanish piles up noun + past-participle clauses with no verb — «la espalda arqueada» = 'his back (being) arched', «los codos apoyados» = 'his elbows propped'. Each is a little snapshot of posture. Note the definite article «la / los» where English uses possessives ('his back', 'his elbows'). Hablaba sordamente, sin interrupciones, como si recitara una lección grabada al frío por infinitas atmósferas de presión, en el plano de su conciencia oscura. He spoke dully, without pause, as if reciting a lesson engraved in the cold by infinite atmospheres of pressure, on the plane of his dark consciousness. > «como si» + imperfect subjunctive: «como si» ('as if') always triggers the subjunctive, and for a hypothetical happening at the same time it takes the imperfect subjunctive: «recitara» ('were reciting'). The construction sets up an unreal comparison — he wasn't really reciting a lesson, he only sounded as though he were. El tono de su voz, cuáles fueran los acontecimientos, era parejo, isócrono metódico, como el del engranaje de un reloj. The tone of his voice, whatever the events might be, was even, isochronous, methodical, like that of a clock's gearing. > Concessive subjunctive ('whatever…'): «cuáles fueran los acontecimientos» uses the imperfect subjunctive «fueran» in a concessive sense: 'whatever the events were / might be'. Spanish builds 'no matter what / whoever / whenever' clauses with the subjunctive to signal that the case is left open. Si se le interrumpía no se irritaba, sino que recomenzaba el relato, agregando los detalles pedidos, siempre con la cabeza inclinada, los ojos fijos en el suelo, los codos apoyados en las rodillas. If he was interrupted he did not grow annoyed, but rather began the account again, adding the requested details, always with his head bowed, his eyes fixed on the floor, his elbows propped on his knees. > «no… sino que»: «sino» corrects a preceding negative — 'not X but rather Y'. When the contrast is between two whole conjugated clauses, Spanish uses «sino que»: «no se irritaba, sino que recomenzaba» = 'he did not get annoyed, but rather started over'. With just a word or phrase, plain «sino» would do. Narraba con lentitud derivada de un exceso de atención, para no originar confusiones. He narrated with a slowness that came from an excess of attention, so as not to cause confusion. > «para» + infinitive of purpose: «para» plus an infinitive states a purpose: «para no originar confusiones» = 'in order not to cause confusion'. The negative «no» sits directly before the infinitive. Because the subject is the same throughout, Spanish keeps the infinitive instead of a full «para que» + subjunctive clause. Impasiblemente amontonaba inquietud sobre iniquidad. Impassively he heaped unease upon iniquity. Sabía que iba a morir, que la justicia de los hombres lo buscaba, encarnizadamente, pero él, con su revólver en el bolsillo, los codos apoyados en las rodillas, el rostro enrejado en los dedos, la mirada fija en el polvo de la enorme habitación vacía, hablaba impasiblemente. He knew he was going to die, that the justice of men was hunting him, relentlessly, but he, with his revolver in his pocket, his elbows propped on his knees, his face barred by his fingers, his gaze fixed on the dust of the huge empty room, went on speaking impassively. > «ir a» + infinitive in the past: «iba a morir» is the imperfect of «ir a» + infinitive — the past version of 'going to': 'he was going to die'. It expresses a future seen from a point in the past, the doom hanging over the scene rather than a finished act. Había enflaquecido extraordinariamente en pocos días. He had grown extraordinarily thin in just a few days. > Pluperfect tense: «había enflaquecido» is the pluperfect: imperfect of «haber» («había») + past participle. It reports an action completed before another past moment — by the time of the narration he had already wasted away. English matches it with 'had grown thin'. La piel amarilla, pegada a los huesos planos del rostro, le daba la apariencia de un tísico. The yellow skin, stuck to the flat bones of his face, gave him the look of a consumptive. > «tísico» = consumptive: «tísico» means someone suffering from «tisis», the old word for tuberculosis ('consumption'). Used as a noun here, it conjures the wasted, hollow-cheeked look the disease was famous for — fitting the next sentence's autopsy. Más tarde la autopsia reveló que estaba ya avanzada la enfermedad en él. Later the autopsy revealed that the disease was already far advanced in him. Decíame la segunda tarde de encontrarse en mi casa: He was telling me, on the second afternoon of his stay in my house: > Enclitic «me» on the imperfect: «decíame» is «me decía» ('he was telling me') with the object pronoun attached after the verb. As with «paréceme» earlier, this enclitic-on-a-finite-verb word order is a literary archaism; modern speech puts the pronoun in front: «me decía». –Antes de casarme, yo pensaba con horror en la fornicación. —Before I married, I used to think of fornication with horror. > «antes de» + infinitive: When both clauses share a subject, 'before doing X' is «antes de» + infinitive: «antes de casarme» = 'before getting married / before I married'. The reflexive «-me» on «casar» marks the subject as the one marrying. En mi concepto, un hombre no se casaba sino para estar siempre junto a su mujer y gozar la alegría de verse a todas horas; y hablarse, quererse con los ojos, con las palabras y las sonrisas. To my mind, a man married only to be always at his wife's side and to enjoy the gladness of seeing each other at every hour; and to talk to each other, to love each other with the eyes, with words and smiles. > Reciprocal «-se»: Here the pronoun «-se» is reciprocal — 'each other'. «verse» = 'to see each other', «hablarse» = 'to talk to each other', «quererse» = 'to love each other'. Spanish folds the whole 'one another' idea into a single pronoun. Cierto es que yo era joven entonces, pero cuando fui novio de Elsa sentí necesidad de renovar todas estas cosas. True, I was young then, but when I became Elsa's sweetheart I felt the need to renew all these things. > Imperfect vs. preterite: «era joven» (imperfect) describes a lasting background state — 'I was young'. «fui novio» and «sentí» (preterite) report bounded events — 'I became her sweetheart', 'I felt'. The same sentence shows the contrast: ongoing condition vs. punctual act. Hablaba. He went on speaking. Erdosain jamás besó a Elsa, porque era feliz dejando que le apretara la garganta el vértigo de quererla y porque además creía que «a una señorita no debe besársela». Erdosain never kissed Elsa, because he was happy letting the vertigo of loving her tighten his throat, and because he also believed that "a young lady should not be kissed". > «dejar que» + subjunctive: «dejar que» ('to let / allow that…') governs the subjunctive: «dejando que le apretara la garganta» = 'letting the vertigo tighten his throat'. «apretara» is imperfect subjunctive because the main verb «era» is in the past. The thing doing the tightening, «el vértigo», is the grammatical subject sitting after its verb. Y confundía con espiritualidad lo que en sí no era más que un apetecimiento de su carne. And he mistook for spirituality what was in itself nothing more than an appetite of his flesh. > «lo que» = 'what / that which': «lo que» is a neuter relative meaning 'what' or 'that which' when there is no specific noun to point at: «lo que… no era más que un apetecimiento» = 'what was nothing more than an appetite'. The neuter «lo» refers to a whole idea rather than a masculine or feminine thing. –Tampoco nos tuteábamos, porque me era agradable era distancia que interponía entre nosotros el usted. —Nor did we address each other as "tú", because the distance that the formal "usted" set between us was pleasant to me. > «tutear» = to use «tú»: «tutear» means to address someone with the familiar «tú» (or, in Buenos Aires, «vos») rather than the formal «usted». Reflexive «tutearse» makes it mutual: «nos tuteábamos» = 'we were on familiar terms'. He prefers the cool formality of «usted». Además yo creía que a una señorita no se la tutea. Besides, I believed that one does not use "tú" with a young lady. > Impersonal «se»: «no se la tutea» uses impersonal «se» for a generalized 'one': 'one does not address her familiarly'. The «la» is the feminine direct object ('her', the young lady). Spanish leans on «se» where English reaches for 'one', 'you', or the passive. No se ría. Don't laugh. > Negative «usted» command: «no se ría» is a negative command addressed with «usted»: 'don't laugh'. Negative commands always use the subjunctive form («ría» from «reír»), and the reflexive «se» comes before the verb in a negative command (compare the affirmative «ríase»). En mi concepto, la «señorita» era la auténtica expresión de pureza, perfección y candidez. To my mind, the "señorita" was the true expression of purity, perfection, and innocence. A su lado yo no conocí el deseo, sino la inquietud de un arrobamiento delicioso que me llenaba de lágrimas los ojos. At her side I did not come to know desire, but the disquiet of a delicious rapture that filled my eyes with tears. > «conocer» in the preterite: «conocer» in the imperfect means 'to know / be acquainted with', but in the preterite it shifts to 'to meet' or 'to come to know (for the first time)'. So «no conocí el deseo» = 'I did not come to know desire' — the onset of an experience, framed as a single event. Y era feliz porque amaba con sufrimiento, ignorando el fin de mi deseo, y porque creía que era amor espiritual toda esa convulsión orgánica y terrible que me postraba dichoso ante la quieta mirada de ella, una mirada limpia que me penetraba con lentitud las subcapas más estremecidas del espíritu. And I was happy because I loved with suffering, unaware of the aim of my desire, and because I believed that all that terrible organic convulsion which laid me low, blissful, before her still gaze was spiritual love — a clean gaze that slowly pierced the most trembling under-layers of my spirit. > False friend «ignorar»: «ignorar» does not mean 'to ignore'; it means 'to be unaware of / not know'. «ignorando el fin de mi deseo» = 'not knowing the aim of my desire'. To say 'ignore (deliberately disregard)' Spanish would use «hacer caso omiso» or «no hacer caso». En tanto hablaba, yo lo miraba a Erdosain. While he spoke, I watched Erdosain. > «en tanto» = while: «en tanto (que)» is a literary connector meaning 'while / meanwhile / as long as'. Here it sets the narrator's watching against Erdosain's talking, both ongoing in the imperfect («hablaba», «miraba»). ¡El era un asesino, un asesino, y hablaba de matices del sentimiento absurdo! He was a murderer, a murderer, and he was talking about the shadings of an absurd feeling! Continuaba: He went on: –Y la noche del día que nos casamos, ya solos en la pieza del hotel, ella se desnudó con naturalidad frente a la lámpara encendida. —And on the night of the day we married, alone at last in the hotel room, she undressed unselfconsciously in front of the lit lamp. > Reflexive «desnudarse»: «desnudarse» ('to undress oneself') is reflexive — the «se» shows the subject acts on herself. Many grooming and dressing verbs work this way in Spanish: «vestirse» (get dressed), «bañarse» (bathe), «peinarse» (comb one's hair). Ruborizado hasta las sienes, yo volví la cabeza para no mirarla y que no descubriera mi vergüenza. Blushing to the temples, I turned my head away so as not to look at her and so that she would not discover my shame. > Purpose clause + subjunctive: After the purpose «para» the sentence shifts subjects, so it switches to a «(para) que» clause with the subjunctive: «que no descubriera mi vergüenza» = 'so that she would not discover my shame'. «descubriera» is imperfect subjunctive, matching the past main verb «volví». Luego me quité el cuello, el saco y los botines y me puse bajo las sábanas con los pantalones puestos. Then I took off my collar, my jacket, and my boots, and slipped under the sheets with my trousers still on. > «saco» = jacket: In River Plate Spanish «saco» is a man's suit jacket, not a 'sack'. «botines» are ankle boots or laced boots. Note «me quité» (reflexive «quitarse» = to take off one's own clothing) versus plain «quitar» = to take away from someone. Sobre la almohada, entre sus rizos negros, ella volvió el rostro y dijo sonriendo con una risa extraña: On the pillow, among her black curls, she turned her face and said, smiling with a strange laugh: –¿No tenés miedo de que se te arruguen? —Aren't you afraid they'll get wrinkled? > «Voseo»: «tenés» for «tienes»: Buenos Aires uses «vos» instead of «tú», with its own present-tense endings: «vos tenés» where Peninsular Spanish says «tú tienes». The stress moves to the final syllable and the stem does not diphthongize. «Voseo» is the hallmark of porteño speech throughout Arlt's dialogue. Sácatelos, zoncito. Take them off, you silly thing. > «zoncito» — affectionate 'silly': «zonzo/sonso» means 'silly, foolish' in River Plate slang; the «-ito» diminutive «zoncito» turns it tender, like 'you little goose'. «Sácatelos» stacks two pronouns on a command — «saca» + «te» (reflexive) + «los» ('them', the trousers): 'take them off (yourself)'. Más tarde, una distancia misteriosa la separó a Elsa de Erdosain. Later, a mysterious distance separated Elsa from Erdosain. > Doubled object again: As in the opening sentence, the human object is doubled: the pronoun «la» plus «a Elsa». «la separó a Elsa de Erdosain» = 'it separated Elsa from Erdosain'. The clitic «la» anticipates the named object — standard in Buenos Aires speech and prose. Se entregaba a él, pero con repugnancia, defraudada quién sabe en qué. She would give herself to him, but with revulsion, let down who knows in what. > Imperfect for a habit: «se entregaba» is imperfect — a repeated, habitual past: 'she would give herself / used to give herself'. The imperfect is Spanish's tense for customary or recurring past behaviour, distinct from a one-time act in the preterite. Y él se arrodillaba a la cabecera de su cama, y le suplicaba que se le diera un instante, mas la mujer, con voz sorda de impaciencia, le respondía casi gritando: And he would kneel at the head of her bed and beg her to give herself to him for a moment, but the woman, with a voice dull with impatience, would answer him almost shouting: > «suplicar que» + subjunctive: Verbs of asking and begging like «suplicar» take a «que» clause in the subjunctive: «le suplicaba que se le diera» = 'he begged her to give herself to him'. «diera» is imperfect subjunctive because «suplicaba» is past. Note also literary «mas» (no accent) = 'but', a higher-register «pero». –¡Déjame tranquila! —Leave me alone! > Affirmative command + attached pronoun: «déjame» is the «tú»-command «deja» with «me» attached: 'leave me'. «tranquila» is a feminine adjective agreeing with the female speaker — 'leave me (in) peace / alone'. In affirmative commands the pronoun attaches to the end and an accent is added to keep the stress («déjame»). ¿No ves que me das asco? Can't you see you disgust me? > «dar asco» = to disgust: «dar asco» literally 'to give disgust/nausea' is the idiom for 'to disgust / be revolting': «me das asco» = 'you disgust me'. It works like «dar miedo» (to frighten) — the thing that causes the feeling is the subject, and the person who feels it is the indirect object «me». Refrenando un terror de catástrofe, Erdosain se hundía otra vez en su cama. Reining in a terror of catastrophe, Erdosain would sink back into his bed. > Gerund as backdrop: The «-ndo» gerund «refrenando» ('reining in') opens the sentence to describe a simultaneous action: 'while reining in a terror of catastrophe, he sank…'. Spanish often fronts a gerund to set the manner or circumstance of the main verb. –No me acostaba, sino que permanecía sentado, casi apoyada la espalda en la almohada, mirando las tinieblas. —I would not lie down, but rather stayed sitting up, my back almost propped against the pillow, staring into the darkness. > Fronted absolute participle: «casi apoyada la espalda en la almohada» is an absolute construction — participle before its noun — meaning 'my back almost propped against the pillow'. The participle «apoyada» agrees in gender and number with «la espalda». It paints the posture without a separate finite verb. Yo sabía que no había ningún objeto en estar mirando las tinieblas, pero me imaginaba que ella, compadecida de verme así, abandonado en la oscuridad, terminaría por apiadarse y decirme: «Bueno, vení si queras». I knew there was no point in lying there staring into the darkness, but I imagined that she, moved to pity at seeing me like that, abandoned in the dark, would end up taking pity and saying to me: "All right, come if you want". > «terminar por» + infinitive: «terminar por» + infinitive means 'to end up (doing)': «terminaría por apiadarse» = 'she would end up taking pity'. «terminaría» is the conditional, reporting an imagined future from a past viewpoint. «vení» is the «vos» command of «venir», and «queras» is his rendering of «quieras» ('you want'). Pero nunca, nunca, me dijo esas palabras, hasta que una noche le grité desesperado: But never, never did she say those words to me, until one night I shouted at her, desperate: > Double negation and emphasis: When a negative word like «nunca» comes before the verb, Spanish needs no extra «no»: «nunca me dijo» = 'she never said to me'. Repeating «nunca, nunca» piles on emphasis — 'never, never'. The preterite «dijo» marks it as a settled fact across the whole marriage. –¿Pero vos qué te pensás... que voy a estar masturbándome siempre? —But you, what do you think… that I'm going to be masturbating forever? > «Voseo» + reflexive «pensarse»: «vos te pensás» is the porteño «vos» form of «pensarse» ('to think / suppose'), stressed on the last syllable: «pensás» rather than «piensas». The reflexive «te» adds a colloquial, indignant edge — roughly 'what on earth do you imagine?'. Y entonces ella, serenamente, me contestó: And then she, serenely, answered me: –Es inútil: yo no debía haberme casado con vos. —It's no use: I should never have married you. > «deber» + perfect infinitive = regret: «debía haberme casado» pairs «deber» ('ought / should') with a perfect infinitive «haber casado» to voice regret about the past: 'I should have married'. Negated, «no debía haberme casado con vos» = 'I should not have married you'. «vos» is again the porteño 'you'. --- Source text: public domain (Roberto Arlt, d. 1942). English translation: © 2026 1732 Studios, LLC — original draft, pending editorial review. NOTE: this is a minimal seed excerpt to make the app target runnable; full verified content is authored through the content pipeline.