# The Seven Madmen, To "Be" by Way of a Crime

Los siete locos · Roberto Arlt · Part One

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/arlt/ser-a-traves-de-un-crimen. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/arlt/ser-a-traves-de-un-crimen.json. Audio: https://audio.1732studios.com/arlt/<line id>.m4a.


Un trozo de andén de la estación de Témperley estaba débilmente iluminado por la luz que salía de una puerta de la oficina de los telegrafistas.  
A stretch of platform at the Temperley station was faintly lit by the light spilling from a door of the telegraph operators' office.
> Imperfect for a setting: «estaba» is the imperfect of «estar». With a past participle it forms a passive description of a continuous state — 'was lit', not a single finished act. The imperfect is the standard tense for painting a scene's backdrop, which is exactly what opens this chapter.
Erdosain sentóse en un banco junto a las palancas para los cambios de vías, en la oscuridad.  
Erdosain sat down on a bench beside the levers for the track switches, in the dark.
> Enclitic pronoun on the verb: «sentóse» is «se sentó» ('he sat down') with the reflexive pronoun «se» attached to the end of the verb. This enclitic placement is literary and slightly old-fashioned; modern speech puts the pronoun before the verb. The accent on «sentóse» keeps the original stress.
Tenía frío y tal vez fiebre.  
He was cold and perhaps feverish.
> «tener» for bodily states: Spanish uses «tener» ('to have') where English uses 'to be' for physical sensations: «tener frío» = 'to be cold', «tener fiebre» = 'to have a fever / be feverish'. Literally 'he had cold'.
Además experimentaba la impresión de que la idea criminosa era una continuidad de su cuerpo, como el hombre de tiniebla que pudiera arrojar en la luz.  
Moreover, he had the impression that the criminal idea was a continuation of his body, like the man of shadow he might cast in the light.
> Imperfect subjunctive: «pudiera» is the imperfect subjunctive of «poder». After a hypothetical 'the man of shadow that he could/might cast', the subjunctive marks the shadow as imagined rather than real. English leans on 'might' to carry the same uncertainty.
Un disco rojo brillaba al extremo del brazo invisible del semáforo: más allá otros círculos rojos y verdes estaban clavados en la oscuridad, y la curva del riel galvanoplastiado de esas luces sumergía en las tinieblas su redondez azulenca o carminosa.  
A red disc glowed at the end of the signal's invisible arm: beyond it other red and green circles were nailed into the darkness, and the curve of the rail, electroplated by those lights, sank its bluish or crimson roundness into the gloom.
> A coined, technical image: «galvanoplastiado» means 'electroplated' (covered with metal by electrolysis). Arlt, who trained around machinery, reaches for industrial vocabulary as poetry: the rail looks plated by the colored signal lamps. This rare, hyper-technical industrial term, unusual in literary prose, is part of his deliberately rough, modern texture.
A veces la luz roja o verde, descendía.  
At times the red or green light descended.
Luego todo permanecía quieto, dejando de rechinar las cadenas en las roldanas y cesando el roce de los alambres en las piedras.  
Then everything stayed still, the chains ceasing to grind on the pulleys and the wires no longer rasping against the stones.
> Gerunds for simultaneous action: «dejando» and «cesando» are gerunds (-ando/-iendo, like English '-ing'). They tack on what happens at the same time as the main verb «permanecía» ('stayed still'): everything goes quiet as the chains stop grinding and the wires stop rasping. «dejar de» + infinitive means 'to stop doing'.

Quedóse amodorrado.  
He fell into a drowse.
> «amodorrado» — heavy with sleep: «amodorrado» means 'drowsy, torpid, half-asleep', from «modorra», a leaden, dull sleepiness. «Quedóse amodorrado» = 'he stayed / sank into a stupor'. The pronoun «se» is again attached to the end of «quedó».

–¿Qué hago yo aquí?  
—What am I doing here?
> The dash and the emphatic «yo»: The dash «–» opens Erdosain's interior monologue, the way Spanish marks speech instead of quotation marks. The pronoun «yo» ('I') is optional after «hago» ('I do'), so spelling it out adds emphasis: 'what am I doing here, of all people?'
¿Por qué me quedo aquí?  
Why do I stay here?
¿Es cierto que quiero matarlo?  
Is it true that I want to kill him?
¿O es que quiero tener la voluntad de sentir el deseo de matarlo?  
Or is it that I want to have the will to feel the desire to kill him?
> «¿O es que…?» — pressing a doubt: «¿O es que…?» literally 'Or is it that…?' is a set way to reframe a question with a sharper alternative, often skeptical or self-interrogating. Here it lets Erdosain peel back his own motive layer by layer.
¿Es necesario eso?  
Is that necessary?
Ahora ella estará revolcándose con él.  
Right now she must be rolling around with him.
> Future of probability: «estará» is the future tense, but here it does not mean 'will be'. Spanish uses the future to guess about the present: «estará revolcándose» = 'she must be / is probably rolling around'. The progressive «estar» + gerund stresses the action in progress, and «revolcarse» is pronominal ('to roll about, wallow').
Pero, ¿qué me importa a mí?  
But what do I care?
> «importar» works like «gustar»: «importar» ('to matter') takes an indirect object: «me importa» = 'it matters to me'. The redundant «a mí» doubles the «me» for emphasis — 'what does it matter to *me*?'. The thing that matters is the grammatical subject, the person it matters to is the object.
Antes, cuando la sabía sola en casa, mientras yo estaba en el café, sufría por ella, sufría porque era desdichada a mi lado... ahora—claro... ya se habrán dormido, ella con la cabeza sobre el pecho de él.  
Before, when I knew she was alone at home while I was at the café, I suffered for her, suffered because she was unhappy at my side... now—of course... they will have fallen asleep by now, she with her head on his chest.
> «saber» + a state: «la sabía sola» = 'I knew her [to be] alone', i.e. 'I knew she was alone'. Spanish can follow «saber» directly with an object and a describing adjective, with no 'that… was'. The imperfect «sabía» marks the ongoing habit of those evenings.
> Future perfect of probability: «se habrán dormido» is the future perfect: literally 'they will have fallen asleep'. As with «estará», the future tense here guesses about a completed present situation — 'by now they've surely fallen asleep'. «dormirse» (pronominal) is 'to fall asleep', distinct from «dormir» 'to sleep'.
¡Nombre de Dios!  
Name of God!
¿Y ésta es la vida?  
And this is life?
¡Estar perdidos, siempre perdidos!  
To be lost, always lost!
> Bare infinitive as exclamation: «Estar» in the infinitive, with no subject, throws the whole idea up as a cry: 'to be lost!'. Spanish often uses a naked infinitive this way for a generalized lament or command. «perdidos» agrees in the plural — he means himself and the others.
¿Pero yo seré realmente el que soy?  
But am I really the one I am?
> Future of probability vs. plain present: «seré» (future) is again a guess about now — 'am I really…?'. It sits against «soy» (plain present, 'I am'), so the line pivots between doubting and asserting his own identity: 'am I really the one that I am?' This «ser» / identity question is the chapter's hinge.
¿O seré otro?  
Or am I someone else?
¡La tristeza!  
The sadness!
¡vivir con extrañeza!  
to live with strangeness!
> «extrañeza» — estrangement: «extrañeza» spans 'strangeness, surprise, estrangement'. Here it names the feeling of being a stranger to oneself — living as if alien to one's own life. It is a key Arltian mood: the self watched from outside.
Esto es lo que me pasa.  
This is what happens to me.
Igual que a él.  
The same as to him.
Cuando está lejos me lo imagino tal cual es, canalla, desdichado.  
When he is far away I picture him just as he is, a scoundrel, a wretch.
> Reflexive «imaginarse»: «imaginarse» adds a reflexive «me» that personalizes the act: 'I picture him to myself'. The «lo» is the direct object ('him'). Stacking «me lo» — indirect then direct object — is the normal order of clitic pronouns in Spanish.
Casi me rompe la nariz.  
He almost broke my nose.
> Dative of possession: Spanish does not say 'broke my nose' but 'broke the nose to me': «me rompe la nariz». The body part takes the article «la», and the indirect object «me» shows whose it is. This 'dative of possession' is standard for actions done to one's body.
¡Pero qué formidable!  
But how astonishing!
¡Resulta ahora al final de cuentas que el cornudo y apaleado es él y no yo!  
It turns out now, when all is said and done, that the cuckold who got the beating is him and not me!
> «al final de cuentas» — in the end: «al final de cuentas» (also «a fin de cuentas») is an idiom: 'in the end, when all is said and done'. «cornudo» is 'cuckold' (the betrayed husband) and «apaleado» 'beaten, thrashed' — the bitter joke is that the roles have flipped onto the other man.
¡Yo!...  
Me!...
¡Realmente, la vida es una bufonada!  
Truly, life is a buffoonery!
> «bufonada» — a clownish farce: «bufonada» means 'a piece of buffoonery, a clownish jest', from «bufón» ('jester'). Calling life a «bufonada» casts existence as a grotesque farce — a recurring Arltian verdict.
Y sin embargo, hay algo serio.  
And yet, there is something serious.
> «sin embargo» — and yet: «sin embargo» means 'however, nevertheless, and yet'. It pivots the thought against what came just before. Erdosain leans on it again and again, swinging between mockery and dread.
¿Por qué me repugna cuando está cerca?  
Why does he disgust me when he is near?
> «repugnar» like «gustar»: «repugnar» ('to disgust, repel') is built like «gustar»: «me repugna» = 'he is repugnant to me'. The person who disgusts is the subject, and «me» is the one feeling it. So 'why does he disgust me' is, word for word, 'why is he repugnant to me'.

Unas sombras se mecían ante la vidriera amarilla de los telegrafistas.  
Some shadows swayed before the telegraph operators' yellow window.
> Pronominal verb «mecerse»: «mecerse» ('to sway, rock') is pronominal — the «se» shows the shadows move on their own, not that something rocks them. The imperfect «mecían» keeps the motion ongoing, a continuous shimmer in the scene.

–¿Matarlo o no matarlo?  
—To kill him or not to kill him?
> Infinitive + attached object: «Matarlo» is the infinitive «matar» ('to kill') with the object pronoun «lo» ('him') glued to the end. Object pronouns always attach to an infinitive, gerund, or affirmative command, never stand before it there. The whole phrase poses the choice as a bare 'to kill him or not'.
¿Qué me importa esto a mí?  
What does this matter to me?
¿Me importa matarlo?  
Does killing him matter to me?
Seamos sinceros.  
Let's be honest.
> «nosotros» command (subjunctive): «Seamos» is the first-person plural present subjunctive of «ser», used as a 'let's…' command: 'let us be'. Spanish forms 'let's…' with this subjunctive form, not a separate word. «Seamos sinceros» = 'let's be sincere/honest'.
¿Me importa matarlo?  
Does killing him matter to me?
¿O es que no me importa nada?  
Or is it that nothing matters to me at all?
> Double negative: Spanish uses two negatives together where English uses one: «no me importa nada» = 'nothing matters to me' (literally 'not… matters… nothing'). The «no» before the verb and «nada» after it reinforce each other rather than cancel out.
¿Que me da igual que viva?  
That it's all the same to me whether he lives?
> Subjunctive after «dar igual»: «me da igual» ('it's all the same to me') triggers the subjunctive in the clause that follows: «que viva» = 'whether/that he live'. «viva» is the present subjunctive of «vivir». Expressions of indifference, emotion, or will pull the verb into the subjunctive.
Y sin embargo quiero tener voluntad de matarlo.  
And yet I want to have the will to kill him.
Si ahora viniera un dios y me preguntara: ¿Quieres tener fuerzas para destruir a la humanidad?  
If a god came now and asked me: Do you want to have the strength to destroy humanity?
> Imperfect subjunctive in an «if» clause: «viniera» and «preguntara» are imperfect subjunctives of «venir» and «preguntar». After «si» ('if'), they set up a hypothetical, unreal condition: 'if a god were to come and ask me'. This pairing of «si» + imperfect subjunctive is how Spanish frames a 'what if'.
¿Yo la destruiría?  
Would I destroy it?
> The conditional: «destruiría» is the conditional of «destruir» ('I would destroy'). It is the natural partner of the «si» + imperfect subjunctive above: 'if a god asked… I would destroy'. The «la» ('it') refers back to «la humanidad».
¿La destruiría yo?  
Would I be the one to destroy it?
> Word order for emphasis: He repeats the question with «yo» moved to the end: «¿La destruiría yo?». Spanish shifts the subject pronoun around freely, and putting «yo» last throws the weight onto 'I' — 'would *I*, of all people, do it?'.
No, no la destruiría.  
No, I would not destroy it.
Porque el poder hacerlo le quitaría interés al asunto.  
Because being able to do it would take all interest out of the matter.
> Infinitive as a noun: «el poder hacerlo» uses the article «el» to turn the verb phrase into a noun: 'the being-able-to-do-it', i.e. 'the very power to do it'. Spanish nominalizes infinitives this way where English would use a gerund ('being able'). «quitarle interés al asunto» = 'to take the interest out of the matter'.
Además, ¿qué iba a hacer yo solo en la tierra?  
Besides, what would I do all alone on the earth?
> «ir a» + infinitive for the near hypothetical: «iba a hacer» is 'was going to do'. With the imperfect of «ir» plus an infinitive, Spanish projects a future seen from a hypothetical standpoint — 'what was I going to do / would I do'. It is a softer, more colloquial way to ask the conditional question.
¿Mirar cómo se oxidaban las dínamos en los talleres y cómo se desmoronaban los esqueletos que estaban a caballo encima de las calderas?  
Watch how the dynamos rusted in the workshops and how the skeletons astride the boilers crumbled away?
> «se» for things acting on their own: «se oxidaban» ('rusted') and «se desmoronaban» ('crumbled') use «se» to show the change happens by itself, with no agent — the so-called 'middle' use of «se». English just says 'rusted' and 'crumbled'. The imperfect keeps the slow decay in continuous view.
Cierto es que él me ha abofeteado, pero, ¿me importa eso?  
It's true that he slapped me, but does that matter to me?
> Present perfect for a recent blow: «ha abofeteado» is the present perfect ('has slapped'). Spanish uses the present perfect here to underline the ongoing psychological resonance of the slap; however, this usage is more typical of Peninsular Spanish. River Plate Spanish would more commonly express this with the simple preterite (me abofeteó). «abofetear» is 'to slap (across the face)', from «bofetada», 'a slap'.
¡Qué lista!  
What a list!
¡Qué colección!  
What a collection!
El capitán, Elsa, Barsut, el Hombre de Cabeza de Jabalí, el Astrólogo, el Rufián, Ergueta.  
The captain, Elsa, Barsut, the Man with the Boar's Head, the Astrologer, the Ruffian, Ergueta.

¡Qué lista!  
What a list!
¿De dónde habrán salido tantos monstruos?  
Where can so many monsters have come from?
> Future perfect of conjecture: «habrán salido» is the future perfect used to wonder about a past event: 'where can they have come from?'. As elsewhere in this chapter, the future tense expresses a guess rather than a real future. «salir de» here is 'to come / emerge from'.
Yo mismo estoy descentrado, no soy el que soy, y, sin embargo, algo necesito hacer para tener conciencia de mi existencia, para afirmarla.  
I myself am off-center, I am not the one I am, and yet I need to do something to have awareness of my existence, to affirm it.
> «mismo» for emphasis: «mismo» after a pronoun means '-self': «yo mismo» = 'I myself'. It intensifies the subject, throwing the spotlight back on the speaker. «descentrado» literally 'off-center', here 'unhinged, dislocated from himself'.
> «para» + infinitive of purpose: «para» + infinitive states purpose: «para afirmarla» = 'in order to affirm it'. The «la» refers to «mi existencia». Spanish stacks these purpose clauses — 'to have awareness… to affirm it' — to drive the point home.
Eso mismo, para afirmarla.  
That's it exactly, to affirm it.
Porque yo soy como un muerto.  
Because I am like a dead man.
No existo ni para el capitán ni para Elsa, ni para Barsut.  
I do not exist for the captain, nor for Elsa, nor for Barsut.
> «ni… ni…» — neither, nor: «ni… ni…» strings together negatives: 'neither… nor…'. With the «no» on the verb it forms a chain of denials — 'I don't exist for the captain, nor Elsa, nor Barsut'. Repeating «ni» before each item hammers the exclusion.

Ellos si quieren pueden hacerme meter preso, Barsut abofetearme otra vez, Elsa irse con otro en mis barbas, el capitán llevársela nuevamente.  
They, if they want, can have me thrown in jail, Barsut can slap me again, Elsa can go off with another man right under my nose, the captain can take her away once more.
> «hacer» + infinitive (causative): «hacer» + infinitive means 'to make / have (something done)': «hacerme meter preso» = 'to have me put in prison'. The «me» is who it's done to. «meter preso» is the idiom 'to lock up, jail'.
> «en mis barbas» — to my face: «en mis barbas» (literally 'in my beard') is an idiom meaning 'right in front of me, to my very face, under my nose' — with the added sting of being done brazenly. «llevársela» combines «llevar» ('take away') with «se» + «la» ('her').
Para todos soy la negación de la vida.  
To everyone I am the negation of life.
Soy algo así como el no ser.  
I am something like non-being.
> Negated infinitive as a noun: «el no ser» turns the infinitive «ser» ('to be'), with «no» in front, into a noun: 'non-being, not-being'. The article «el» makes the whole phrase a thing one can name. This is the philosophical core of the chapter — Erdosain defining himself as «no ser».
Un hombre no es como acción, luego no existe.  
A man is not, as action, and so he does not exist.
> «luego» as 'therefore': Besides 'later/then', «luego» can mean 'therefore, hence' in a logical chain — the sense of the Latin 'ergo'. «no es… luego no existe» reads like a parody of Descartes: 'he is not… therefore he does not exist'.
¿O existe a pesar de no ser?  
Or does he exist in spite of not being?
> «a pesar de» — in spite of: «a pesar de» means 'in spite of, despite'. Followed by an infinitive: «a pesar de no ser» = 'despite not being'. The phrase weighs one thing against another — here, existing against not-being.
Es y no es.  
He is and is not.
Ahí están esos hombres.  
There are those men.
> «estar» for location: Spanish splits 'to be' into «ser» and «estar». For where something is physically located you use «estar»: «ahí están esos hombres» = 'there those men are'. He has just been arguing about «ser» (essential being); the switch to «estar» quietly grounds the thought in the men actually present.
Seguramente tienen mujer, hijos, casa.  
Surely they have a wife, children, a house.
Quizá son unos miserables.  
Perhaps they are wretches.
> «quizá» with indicative or subjunctive: «quizá» ('perhaps') may take either the indicative or the subjunctive. With the indicative «son» the guess feels more confident — 'perhaps they really are wretches'. The subjunctive («sean») would make it more tentative.
Pero si alguien tratara de invadir su casa, de arrebatarles un centavo o de tocarles la mujer, se volverían como fieras.  
But if anyone tried to break into their house, to snatch a cent from them or to lay a hand on their wife, they would turn into wild beasts.
> Unreal condition + conditional: «si tratara» (imperfect subjunctive) sets up the hypothetical, and «se volverían» (conditional) gives the result: 'if anyone tried… they would turn'. «volverse» here is the pronominal 'to become / turn into'. «fieras» are 'wild beasts'.

¿Y yo por qué no me he rebelado?  
And why have I not rebelled?
> Pronominal «rebelarse»: «rebelarse» ('to rebel, rise up') is pronominal, so it carries «me»: «me he rebelado» = 'I have rebelled'. Don't confuse «rebelarse» (rebel) with «revelar» (to reveal) — different verbs, near-identical sound.
¿Quién puede contestarme a esta pregunta?  
Who can answer this question for me?
Yo mismo no puedo.  
I myself cannot.

Sé que existo así, como negación.  
I know that I exist this way, as a negation.
> «sé» — I know: «sé» (with an accent) is the first-person present of «saber», 'I know (a fact)'. It is distinct from «se», the pronoun. Spanish has two verbs for 'to know': «saber» for facts and «conocer» for being acquainted with people or places.
Y cuando me digo todas estas cosas no estoy triste, sino que el alma se me queda en silencio, la cabeza en vacío.  
And when I say all these things to myself I am not sad; rather, my soul falls silent within me, my head empty.
> «sino que» — but rather: After a negative, 'but' is «sino», not «pero». When a full clause with its own verb follows, it becomes «sino que»: «no estoy triste, sino que… se me queda en silencio» = 'I'm not sad, but rather it falls silent'. It corrects the first statement instead of just adding to it.
Entonces, después de ese silencio y vacío me sube desde el corazón la curiosidad del asesinato.  
Then, after that silence and emptiness, the curiosity of murder rises in me from the heart.
> Subject after the verb: The real subject, «la curiosidad del asesinato», comes after the verb «sube» ('rises'); «me» marks it as rising in him. Literally 'there rises in me from the heart the curiosity of murder'. Holding the subject back lets the dreadful noun land at the end.
Eso mismo.  
That's it exactly.
No estoy loco, ya que sé pensar, razonar.  
I am not mad, since I know how to think, to reason.
> «ya que» — since, given that: «ya que» introduces a reason already taken as known: 'since, seeing that'. «sé pensar» uses «saber» + infinitive for 'to know how to': 'I know how to think'. The title of the novel — «los siete locos», 'the seven madmen' — hangs over this protest of sanity.
Me sube la curiosidad del asesinato, curiosidad que debe ser mi ultima tristeza, la tristeza de la curiosidad.  
The curiosity of murder rises in me, a curiosity that must be my last sorrow, the sorrow of curiosity.
> «deber» for supposition: «deber» + infinitive (without «de») normally marks obligation, but it also expresses a strong supposition: «debe ser» = 'it must be / surely is'. Here it reads as inference, not duty — 'this must be my last sorrow'.
O el demonio de la curiosidad.  
Or the demon of curiosity.
Ver cómo soy a través de un crimen.  
To see how I am by way of a crime.
> «a través de» — through, by way of: «a través de» means 'through, across, by way of'. The chapter's title repeats this very phrase: to «ser» (to be) «a través de un crimen» — to discover one's own being *through* committing a crime. This is the idea the whole monologue circles.
Eso, eso mismo.  
That, that's it exactly.
Ver cómo se comporta mi conciencia y mi sensibilidad en la acción de un crimen.  
To see how my conscience and my sensibility behave in the act of a crime.
> Pronominal «comportarse»: «comportarse» ('to behave, conduct oneself') always carries the reflexive «se»: «se comporta» = 'it behaves'. «conciencia» here means both 'conscience' (moral sense) and 'consciousness' — Spanish uses one word for both.

«Sin embargo, estas palabras no me dan la sensación del crimen del mismo modo que el telegrama de una catástrofe en China no me da la sensación de la catástrofe.  
"And yet, these words do not give me the sensation of the crime any more than a telegram about a catastrophe in China gives me the sensation of the catastrophe.
> Guillemets open a long meditation: The opening «guillemet» (angled quote mark) signals a sustained stretch of Erdosain's thought set off as a quotation. «del mismo modo que» = 'in the same way that', here making a comparison: the words no more convey the crime than a distant telegram conveys a real disaster.
Es como si yo no fuera el que piensa el asesinato, sino otro.  
It is as if I were not the one thinking the murder, but someone else.
> «como si» + imperfect subjunctive: «como si» ('as if') always takes the imperfect (or pluperfect) subjunctive: «como si yo no fuera» = 'as if I were not'. It frames a counter-to-fact comparison. The split between the self who acts and the self who watches is the heart of this passage.
Otro que sería como yo un hombre liso, una sombra de hombre, a la manera del cinematógrafo.  
Another who, like me, would be a flat man, a shadow of a man, in the manner of the cinema.
> «cinematógrafo» — the early cinema: «cinematógrafo» is the period word for the movies (the projector and the picture-show). In 1929 the image is fresh and modern: a man as flat and weightless as a figure on a screen — present, moving, suffering, yet only a «sombra», a shadow.
Tiene relieve, se mueve, parece que existe, que sufre, y, sin embargo, no es nada más que una sombra.  
He has relief, he moves, he seems to exist, to suffer, and yet he is nothing more than a shadow.
> «no… nada más que» — nothing but: «no es nada más que una sombra» = 'he is nothing but a shadow'. The piled-up negatives «no… nada más que» tighten into the English 'nothing but / only'. It seals the image: all that apparent life is mere surface.
Le falta vida.  
He lacks life.
> «faltar» like «gustar»: «faltar» ('to be lacking') works like «gustar»: «le falta vida» = literally 'life is lacking to him', i.e. 'he lacks life'. The thing missing is the subject; «le» marks who goes without it.
Que diga Dios si esto no está bien razonado.  
Let God say whether this is not well reasoned.
> «Que» + subjunctive for a wish/command: «Que» followed by the subjunctive «diga» forms a third-person command or wish: 'let God say', 'may God say'. The «que» stands in for 'let / may'. It is the same structure as «¡que te vaya bien!» ('may it go well for you').
Bueno: ¿qué es lo que haría el hombre sombra?  
Well then: what would the shadow-man do?
> «¿qué es lo que…?» — what exactly: «¿qué es lo que haría…?» is an emphatic way to ask 'what is it that… would do?'. The frame «es lo que» adds insistence over a plain «¿qué haría…?». «haría» is the conditional, 'would do'.
El hombre sombra percibiría el hecho, pero no sentiría su pesantez, porque le faltaba volumen para contener un peso.  
The shadow-man would perceive the deed, but would not feel its heaviness, because he lacked the volume to contain a weight.
> Conditional for the hypothetical man: «percibiría» and «sentiría» are conditionals ('would perceive', 'would feel'), keeping the shadow-man purely hypothetical. «pesantez» means 'heaviness, weight'; the figure, being flat, has no «volumen» to hold any «peso».
Es sombra.  
He is shadow.
Yo también veo el suceso, pero no lo contengo.  
I too see the event, but I do not contain it.
Esta debe ser una teoría nueva.  
This must be a new theory.
¿Qué diría un Juez del Crimen de conocerla?  
What would a Criminal Judge say if he came to know it?
> «de» + infinitive as a condition: «de conocerla» uses «de» + infinitive to mean 'if he knew it / were to know it' — a compact substitute for a «si» clause. «conocerla» is «conocer» ('to know, become acquainted with') + «la» ('it', the theory).
¿Se daría cuenta de lo sincero que soy?  
Would he realize how sincere I am?
> «lo + adjective + que» — how…: «lo sincero que soy» = 'how sincere I am'. The frame «lo + adjective + que» expresses degree, like English 'how…'. The adjective «sincero» here stays masculine singular agreeing with the abstract quality. «darse cuenta de» is the idiom 'to realize'.
¿Mas cree esa gente en la sinceridad?  
But do those people believe in sincerity?
> «mas» — but (literary): «mas» without an accent is a literary word for 'but' (= «pero»); it is not «más» ('more'). «esa gente» ('those people') is grammatically singular, so it takes the singular verb «cree» — 'those people believe'.
Fuera de mí, de los límites de mi cuerpo, existe el movimiento, pero para ellos la vida mía debe ser tan inconcebible como vivir al mismo tiempo en la Tierra y en la Luna.  
Outside of me, beyond the limits of my body, movement exists, but to them my life must be as inconceivable as living at the same time on the Earth and on the Moon.
> Possessive placed after the noun: «la vida mía» = 'my life', with the long possessive «mía» put after the noun for emphasis or flavor, instead of the usual «mi vida». «tan… como» frames the comparison: 'as inconceivable as…'.
Yo soy la nada para todos.  
I am nothingness to everyone.
> «la nada» — nothingness: With the article «la», the negative word «nada» ('nothing') becomes a noun: «la nada» = 'the nothing, nothingness, the void'. Erdosain names himself with it — he is not merely unimportant but, to others, sheer nonexistence.
Y sin embargo, si mañana tiró una bomba, o asesino a Barsut, me convierto en el todo, en el hombre que existe, el hombre para quien infinitas generaciones de jurisconsultos prepararon castigos, cárceles y teorías.  
And yet, if tomorrow I throw a bomb, or murder Barsut, I become the whole, the man who exists, the man for whom endless generations of jurists prepared punishments, prisons, and theories.
> Present for a vivid future: Grammar would expect a future or subjunctive here, but Arlt uses present-tense forms («me convierto», 'I become') after «si» to make the hypothesis feel immediate — a colloquial, breathless 'if I do X tomorrow, I turn into…'. «convertirse en» is 'to turn into, become'.
> «jurisconsultos» — jurists: «jurisconsultos» are legal scholars / jurists. The grand, Latinate word casts the whole apparatus of law as an ancient machine built across «infinitas generaciones» just to receive a man like him.
Yo, que soy la nada, de pronto pondré en movimiento ese terrible mecanismo de polizontes, secretarios, periodistas, abogados, fiscales, guardacárceles, coches celulares, y nadie verá en mí un desdichado sino el hombre antisocial, el enemigo que hay que separar de la sociedad.  
I, who am nothingness, will suddenly set in motion that terrible mechanism of cops, clerks, journalists, lawyers, prosecutors, jailers, prison vans, and no one will see in me a wretch but rather the antisocial man, the enemy who must be cut off from society.
> «polizontes», «coches celulares»: «polizontes» is slangy, scornful for 'cops, coppers'. «coches celulares» are the police 'paddy wagons / prison vans' (cells on wheels). Arlt's list piles up the gears of the penal machine in their grubby, concrete particularity.
> «hay que» + infinitive: «hay que» + infinitive states an impersonal necessity: «hay que separar» = 'one must separate / it must be separated'. No specific subject — it is what society in general 'has to' do. «el que hay que separar» = 'the one who must be cut off'.
¡Eso sí que es curioso!  
Now that is curious!
> «sí que» — emphatic affirmation: «sí que» strongly affirms: «eso sí que es curioso» = 'that really is curious, now *that* is curious'. The «sí» is the stressed 'yes/indeed', not the conditional «si». It underlines the word that follows.
Y sin embargo, sólo el crimen puede afirmar mi existencia, como sólo el mal afirma la presencia del hombre sobre la tierra.  
And yet, only the crime can affirm my existence, just as only evil affirms the presence of man upon the earth.
> «como» drawing a parallel: «como» here means 'just as', setting up a parallel between two claims: only crime affirms his being, as only evil affirms mankind's. The repeated «sólo» ('only') makes each half an absolute. This is the dark thesis the chapter has been building toward.
Y yo sería el Erdosain, previsto, temido, caracterizado por el código, y entre los miles de Erdosain anónimos que infectan el mundo, sería el otro Erdosain, el auténtico, el que es y será.  
And I would be the Erdosain foreseen, feared, defined by the legal code, and among the thousands of anonymous Erdosains who infest the world, I would be the other Erdosain, the authentic one, the one who is and will be.
> «el que» — the one who: «el que es y será» = 'the one who is and will be'. «el que» means 'the one that/who'. Pairing the present «es» with the future «será» fuses being now with being to come — the authentic self he claims only the crime could realize.
Realmente, es curioso todo esto.  
Truly, all this is curious.

Sin embargo, a pesar de todo existen las tinieblas y el alma del hombre es triste.  
And yet, in spite of everything, the darkness exists and the soul of man is sad.
> «las tinieblas» — the darkness: «tinieblas» (almost always plural) is deep, total 'darkness, gloom', heavier and more charged than ordinary «oscuridad». It carries a moral and spiritual weight — the night of the soul, not just the night of the station platform.
Infinitamente triste.  
Infinitely sad.
Mas la vida no puede ser así.  
But life cannot be like this.
Un sentimiento interno me dice que la vida no debe ser así.  
An inner feeling tells me that life should not be like this.
> «deber» for what ought to be: «deber» + infinitive can express obligation or rightness: «no debe ser así» = 'it ought not to be like this'. Set against «no puede ser» ('cannot be') just before, the pair separates what is impossible from what is simply wrong.
Si yo descubriera la particularidad de por qué la vida no puede ser así, me pincharía, y como un globo me desinflaría de todo este viento de mentira y quedaría de mi apariencia actual un hombre flamante, fuerte como uno de los primeros dioses que animaron la creación.  
If I were to discover the particular reason why life cannot be like this, I would prick myself, and like a balloon I would deflate of all this wind of lies, and out of my present appearance there would remain a brand-new man, strong as one of the first gods who breathed life into creation.
> Full unreal conditional: «si descubriera» (imperfect subjunctive) + a chain of conditionals «me pincharía… me desinflaría… quedaría» builds an extended 'if I were to… I would…'. «pincharse» and «desinflarse» are pronominal ('prick oneself', 'deflate'). The balloon image makes the whole self a bladder of «viento de mentira» — wind of lies.
> «flamante» — brand-new: «flamante» means 'brand-new, gleaming, freshly made'. Applied to «un hombre flamante» it promises a wholly remade self — bright and strong as a primordial god. The word's spark of newness cuts against the surrounding gloom.
Con todo esto me he ido a las ramas.  
With all this I've wandered off the point.
> «irse por las ramas» — to digress: «irse a/por las ramas» (literally 'to go off into the branches') is an idiom: 'to wander off the point, beat around the bush, digress'. Erdosain catches himself drifting and yanks his thought back to the practical question of the Astrologer.
¿Lo veo o no al Astrólogo?  
Do I see the Astrologer or not?
> Doubled direct object: The object appears twice: the pronoun «lo» before the verb and the full «al Astrólogo» after it. This clitic-doubling is common in River Plate Spanish, especially when the object is a known person. «a» before «el Astrólogo» is the 'personal a' marking a human object.
¿Qué dirá cuando me vea llegar otra vez?  
What will he say when he sees me arrive again?
> Subjunctive after «cuando» for the future: When «cuando» points to an action still to come, the verb goes into the subjunctive: «cuando me vea llegar» = 'when he sees me arrive'. «vea» is the present subjunctive of «ver». English just uses the present ('when he sees'), but Spanish marks the not-yet-real moment.
Quizá me espere.  
Perhaps he is waiting for me.
> «quizá» with the subjunctive: Here «quizá» takes the subjunctive «espere» (from «esperar»), making the guess more open and uncertain than the indicative would. Compare «quizá son» earlier, where the indicative felt surer. The mood itself shades how firmly he believes it.
El es, como yo, un misterio para sí mismo.  
He is, like me, a mystery to himself.
> «sí mismo» — himself (reflexive): «sí» is the reflexive pronoun for the third person after a preposition, reinforced by «mismo»: «para sí mismo» = 'to/for himself'. It mirrors Erdosain's own «para mí mismo», binding the two men in the same self-estrangement.
Esa es la verdad.  
That is the truth.
Sabe tanto hacia dónde va como yo.  
He knows where he is going as much as I do.
> «tanto… como» — as much as: «tanto… como» frames 'as much… as': «sabe tanto… como yo» = 'he knows as much as I do'. Given the context, it is bitterly ironic — both of them know equally little. «hacia dónde va» = 'where he is heading'.
La sociedad secreta.  
The secret society.

Toda la sociedad se resume en él en estas palabras: sociedad secreta.  
The whole of society sums itself up in him in these words: secret society.
> Pronominal «resumirse»: «resumirse en» ('to be summed up in, boil down to') takes the «se» of a reflexive/passive sense: «se resume en estas palabras» = 'is summed up in these words'. Note the wordplay between «sociedad» ('society') and the Astrologer's «sociedad secreta» ('secret society').
Otro demonio.  
Another demon.
¡Qué colección!  
What a collection!
Barsut, Ergueta, el Ruñan y yo...  
Barsut, Ergueta, the Ruffian, and me...
Ni expresamente se podía reunir tales ejemplares.  
Not even on purpose could one gather together such specimens.
> «ni» for 'not even': «ni» at the head of a clause means 'not even': «ni expresamente se podía reunir…» = 'not even on purpose could one gather…'. «se podía reunir» uses impersonal/passive «se» — 'one could gather / they could be gathered'. «ejemplares» ('specimens') treats the men like odd items in a collection.
Y para colmo, la ciega embarazada.  
And to top it all off, the blind pregnant woman.
> «para colmo» — to top it all off: «para colmo» is an idiom: 'to top it all, on top of everything, as if that weren't enough'. It introduces the last, crowning absurdity of the list — «la ciega embarazada», the blind pregnant woman.
¡Qué bestia!  
What a brute!

El vigilante de la estación pasó por segunda vez ante Erdosain.  
The station guard passed in front of Erdosain for the second time.
> Preterite resumes the action: After pages of reflection in the present, «pasó» (preterite of «pasar», 'passed') snaps the narration back to a single completed event in the past. The preterite is the tense of finished actions that move the story forward, as opposed to the scene-setting imperfect.
Remo comprendió que llamaba la atención del hombre y entonces, levantándose, se dirigió hacia la casa del Astrólogo.  
Remo understood that he was drawing the man's attention and so, getting up, he headed for the Astrologer's house.
> Gerund of a pronominal verb: «levantándose» is the gerund of «levantarse» ('to get up'), with «se» attached to the end — 'getting up'. It runs alongside the main verb «se dirigió» ('he headed for'). «Remo» is Erdosain's first name, Remo Erdosain.
No había luna.  
There was no moon.
> «había» — there was/were: «había» (imperfect of «haber») is the impersonal 'there was / there were'. It never changes for number: «no había luna» = 'there was no moon'. It is the past counterpart of «hay» ('there is/are').
Los arcos voltaicos lucían entre las aéreas enramadas de las bocacalles.  
The arc lamps shone among the airy boughs at the street corners.
> «arcos voltaicos» — arc lamps: «arcos voltaicos» are 'arc lamps', the bright electric street lights of the period (named for the voltaic arc). «bocacalles» (literally 'mouths of the street') are 'street corners / intersections'. The technical light against natural «enramadas» (leafy boughs) is a typical Arlt contrast.
De alguna quinta salían los sones de un piano y a medida que caminaba, su corazón se empequeñecía más, oprimido por la angustia que le producía el espectáculo de la felicidad que adivinaba tras de los muros de aquellas casas refrescadas por las sombras, y frente a cuyas puertas cocheras se hallaba detenido un automóvil.  
From some villa came the strains of a piano, and as he walked his heart grew smaller and smaller, crushed by the anguish brought on by the spectacle of the happiness he sensed behind the walls of those houses cooled by the shadows, before whose carriage doors an automobile stood parked.
> «a medida que» — as, in step with: «a medida que» means 'as, to the extent that, in step with': «a medida que caminaba, su corazón se empequeñecía» = 'as he walked, his heart kept shrinking'. It links two ongoing actions, both in the imperfect, so they unfold together.
> «cuyo» — whose: «cuyo/cuya» is the relative possessive 'whose'. It agrees with the thing possessed, not the owner: «cuyas puertas» = 'whose doors' (feminine plural to match «puertas»). «puertas cocheras» are the large 'carriage doors' of a house's coach entrance.
---

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.