story, “ The Spivvelton Mystery, ” the remaining thirty works of short fi ction she pub-
lished during her lifetime fall into four general categories: four early derivative stories,
six stories set in Mexico, eleven stories and two short novels set in the South, 2 and
fi ve stories and two short novels of the twentieth - century wasteland. 3 This chapter
will focus on the seventeen short and long stories Porter set in Mexico and the South.
These two groups of stories are essential parts of her canon. With the Mexican stories,
258
Ruth M. Alvarez
set in what she named her “ familiar country ” ( “ Why I Write About Mexico, ” Collected
Essays 355), she made her debut as a literary artist on the New York scene. In Mexico,
she found a subject for her fi ction as well as “ a feeling for art consanguine ” with her
own ( “ Why I Write About Mexico, ” Collected Essays 356). However, when she turned
to the South, the “ native land of [her] heart ” ( “ ‘ Noon Wine ’ : The Sources, ” Collected
Essays 470), for the characters and settings of her fi ction, she found her m é tier.
The publication of “ Mar í a Concepci ó n, ” the fi rst of Porter ’ s six short stories set in
Mexico, marked the beginning of Porter ’ s career as a literary artist. “ Mar í a Concep-
ci ó n ” has roughly the same plot as her early derivative story “ The Adventures of
Hadji ” , a wife ’ s triumph over her unfaithful husband. In both stories, the husbands
are awed by the seemingly supernatural powers of their wives. The earliest work Porter
claimed as part of her canon, “ Mar í a Concepci ó n ” was written as a direct result of her
fi rst two visits to Mexico (November 1920 to autumn 1921 and April to June 1922).
Intrigued by descriptions of the country, its culture, and its history recounted by
Mexican friends and acquaintances she encountered in New York City in 1919 – 20,
Porter found in Mexico both aesthetic theories and subjects for her literary and jour-
nalistic work. The work that grew out of her Mexican visits brought Porter recogni-
tion and respect in New York literary circles. Published in Century in December 1922 ,
the story is one of only seven of the twenty - six in Collected Stories that appeared in four
of the collections of her work published during her lifetime. 4 Like all her other work
written after her fi rst visit to Mexico, it is markedly different from her previous work.
What came before is either apprentice work or journalism, none of it rising much
above competent professionalism.
“ Mar í a Concepci ó n, ” whose central character is an indigenous Mexican woman, was
an outgrowth of Porter ’ s 1920 – 2 experiences in Mexico and her reading on Mexican
history and culture. Porter met William Niven, the model for Givens in the story,
during her fi rst week in Mexico in November 1920. A mineralogist who came to
Mexico around 1891, Niven soon discovered the remains of a pre - Hispanic city in the
state of Guerrero and turned to archaeology, excavating pre - Hispanic sites in Mexico
for forty years. At one of these sites north of Mexico City, Azcapotzalco, Porter visited
in 1920 – 1 and herself dug artifacts from the earth. Her acquaintance with Manuel
Gamio also informs the story. His Forjando Patria (1916), credited with launching
social anthropology in Mexico, was followed in 1922 by the monumental two - volume
La Poblacion del Valle de Teotihuac á n , a study of the ancient civilization and modern
inhabitants of this region, like Azcapotzalco, north of Mexico City. Details of the
setting of “ Mar í a Concepci ó n ” are drawn from sites Porter had observed as well as
from generalizations about Teotihuac á n from Gamio. The story ’ s setting is on the
outskirts of Mexico City, perhaps Azcapotzalco. Porter depicts a valley and mountains
not unlike that of Gamio ’ s descriptions of the locations at Teotihuac á n. In his outline
of the contemporary architecture there, Gamio had described the organ cactus fences
and jacales which are featured prominently in Porter ’ s story. His characterization of
the “ pagan Catholicism ” of Teotihuac á n with its “ extreme religiosity “ and “ fanati-
cism ” 5
is skillfully portrayed in Porter
’
s delineation of the practices of Mar
í
a
Katherine Anne Porter
259
Concepci ó n; the remnants of pagan beliefs are briefl y sketched in the fi gure of Lupe,
the old medicine woman. Although only alluded to in passing, the problems of high
infant mortality and illiteracy delineated by Gamio are also represented by Porter.
The primarily agricultural economy of Teotihuac
á
n, into which bee
-
keeping was
introduced by Gamio ’ s program, as well as the town ’ s production of pottery and other
small arts and crafts for supplemental income are mirrored in Porter ’ s story. These
details help to structure Porter
’
s sympathetic portrait of an indigenous woman
’
s
triumph over her philandering husband and her rival for his affection.
“ The Martyr, ” the second of Porter ’ s Mexican stories to appear, like “ Mar í a Con-
cepci ó n, ” was published in Century (July 1923 ) during her third Mexican sojourn
(June – September 1923). The central character Rub é n is “ the most illustrious painter
in Mexico, ” who is creating a mural with twenty monumental fi gures of his sadistic
model Isabel when she leaves him for her lover, a rival painter. In this light satire,
Rub é n, who eats himself to death, is “ martyred ” by his unrequited love for Isabel.
The other major character in the story is a newspaper and magazine caricaturist friend
of Rub é n, who makes satiric drawings of Rub é n and, after Rub é n ’ s death, gathers
material for an intimate biography of him. Other than the studio of Rub é n, the other
important locale in the story is “ The Little Monkeys ” caf é where Rub é n dies. These
characters and locations are directly related to Porter
’
s Mexican observations and
experiences. Rub é n, Isabel, and Ram ó n are modeled on Diego Rivera, his fi rst wife
Lupe Marin, and Miguel Covarrubias or another of the contemporary caricaturists
whom Porter knew. Porter had visited Rivera ’ s studio in 1922 as well as the famous
caf é of artist Jose Clement Orozco ’ s brother, Los Monotes, a favorite gathering place
for Mexican artists. Rub
é
n, a representative of the Mexican artists Porter knew,
romanticizes Isabel and makes self - deluding assertions that he is dying for love, when,
in fact, he is indulging the vice of gluttony. This work satirizes the self - serving,
materialistic, opportunistic male artists of Mexico. However, it also parodies man the
martyr in all his self - pitying, self - indulgent glory.
“ Virgin Violeta ” was the third and last of Porter ’ s stories to be published in Century
(December 1924 ). In it, the title character watches the formalized courtship of her
older sister Blanca and their poet cousin Carlos under a framed depiction of the “ ‘ Pious
&n
bsp; Interview between the Most Holy Virgin Queen of Heaven and Her Faithful Servant
St. Ignatius Loyola, ’ ” 6 while the mother of the girls dozes off and on. When Carlos
follows Violeta into another room and attempts to kiss her, she becomes frightened
and repels his advance despite her romantic fi xation on him and his poetry. Confused
by the exchange, Violeta subsequently becomes hysterical when he tries to give her
a goodnight kiss in front of her mother and sister.
“ Virgin Violeta ” may be a disguised self - portrait. Porter conceived a child in the
spring of 1924 and experienced a still birth in December
1924
, when
“
Virgin
Violeta ” was published. As she wrote it, she must have confronted her deepest feel-
ings about sexuality and its consequences, including the sexual urges and fears she
had experienced when she herself was, like Violeta, “ nearly fi fteen. ” Her experiences
during her marriage to the adulterer John Henry Koontz, consummated shortly after
260
Ruth M. Alvarez
her sixteenth birthday, included physical and verbal abuse. Her pregnancy may also
have triggered memories of another deeply disturbing incident of her sexual history.
According to Porter ’ s friend Mary Louis Doherty, Nicaraguan poet Salom ó n de la
Selva and Porter “ had an affair ending in an abortion in 1921 when he was living in
a little house on Calle Guanajuato ” in Mexico City. 7 The story is both a self - portrait
of Violeta
-
Porter and also a caricature of a particular man, Carlos
-
Salom
ó
n de la
Selva, who represents the rapacious sexuality of all men, especially the ones Porter
had specifi c reason to despise (her fi rst husband and lovers who had impregnated
her). Porter ’ s pregnancy and the death of her nearly full - term infant in the fall and
winter of 1924 brought her face - to - face with the issues of womanhood explored in
the story. The subject of sexuality was one Porter would continue to explore through-
out her life.
“ Flowering Judas ” published in Hound & Horn , the little magazine founded by
Lincoln Kirstein, in its April – June 1930 issue is one of Porter ’ s most studied and
anthologized short stories. Although Porter consistently claimed that this story was
written in one night, it came out of the Mexican material she had begun gathering
in 1920 and may have had its genesis in the “ portrait of Y ú dico, ” one of the “ Four
Portraits of Revolutionaries ” outlined as a portion of a projected book. 8 By 1927,
she was describing the book project as “ a novel of Mexico ” with the title “ Thieves ’
Market. ” This particular story did not reach its fi nal form until shortly before she
sent it to Richard Blackmur of Hound & Horn on November 29, 1929. 9 The story ’ s
protagonist, Laura, a
gringa
in Mexico to support the revolution, attends union
meetings, and visits prisoners of her
“
own political faith
”
and men hiding from
fi ring squads. Laura
’
s month
-
long ordeal, consisting of nightly serenades by the
corrupt, corpulent revolutionist Braggioni, comes to an end when he callously dis-
misses the apparent suicide of Eugenio, one of his followers. Set in Laura ’ s apart-
ment in Mexico City where Braggioni attempts to seduce her with guitar playing
and singing, the story ends when Braggioni returns to his forgiving wife and Laura
retires and dreams of Eugenio. The fi gure of Laura, who is based on the physical
appearance of Porter
’
s friend Mary Doherty, is another of Porter
’
s self
-
portraits.
Other real - life models for characters in the story include Mexican politicians Samuel
Y ú dico and Luis Morones as well as foreign agitators Roberto Haberman and J. H.
Retinger, one of Porter ’ s former lovers. Braggioni ’ s return to his wife and his grant-
ing her forgiveness for her faithfulness suggest that faithlessness is the norm in this
perverted world, that faith is a sin for which one must atone. Braggioni ’ s vision of
the future, which he recites in the “ hypnotic ” voice ” of his political oratory, predicts
the reign of anarchy, the absence of government and order. Furthermore, Braggioni
is the embodiment of sensual delight in “ Flowering Judas, ” whom Laura fears both
because of the sexual threat he poses as well as for the threat of death his cult of
anarchy offers. The fi nal visual image in the story, Eugenio as a skeleton serving
Laura the Host in a parody of the sacrament of Communion of her Catholic faith,
suggests the desiccation of Laura
’
s beliefs. Her creeds
–
religious, political, and
romantic
–
have lost their power to effect her salvation. Laura, like the title
Katherine Anne Porter
261
character of T. S. Eliot ’ s “ Gerontion ” (three lines of which Porter had suggested as
the epigraph for the story), is impotent and living in memories which in sum mean
nothing, “ a dry brain in a dry season. ”
“ Hacienda ” and “ That Tree, ” the last two of Porter ’ s Mexican stories, were written
and published after her last period of semi - permanent residency in Mexico (April 1930
to August 1931). The month before her arrival there, she signed contracts with
Harcourt, Brace for a collection of six of her short stories as well as a novel of
Mexico entitled “ Thieves ’ Market. ” The fi rm decided upon a limited edition of 600
copies of Flowering Judas , calculated to create a demand for her novel that it planned
to publish in the fall of 1931, a year after the September 1930 publication of the
collection. However, Porter never fulfi lled the contract for the novel, and “ Hacienda ”
and “ That Tree ” were completely new works of fi ction unrelated to the never com-
pleted novel of Mexico.
Porter characterized the original, non - fi ction version of “ Hacienda ” as “ only an
article ” ; it had been intended as an American outsider ’ s observation of Mexican life,
an attempt to assess the changes since 1920, when the revolution had triumphed. By
November 1931, when Porter had sent the manuscript of this version of “ Hacienda ”
to Scribner ’ s , Porter had relocated to Europe, where she maintained her residence for
fi ve years. When the piece was rejected by Scribner ’ s , Porter sent it to Virginia Quarterly
Review , where it was published in October 1932 . It is based on an actual trip Porter
made to the pulque Hacienda Tetlapayac, northeast of Mexico City in the Mexican
state of Hidalgo. The Russian fi lm director Sergei Eisenstein had journeyed there with
his crew and his Mexican government entourage in early May 1931 to fi lm the second
of four major stories of an ambitious work, tentatively entitled Que Viva Mexico! ,
which was being fi nanced by Upton Sinclair and other wealthy investors.
Eisenstein had in
itially come to Mexico in early December 1930 and had aroused
such curiosity and apprehension that he, his party (assistant director Grigori Alexan-
drov, cameraman Eduard Tiss é , and business manager Hunter Kimbrough, who was
Sinclair ’ s brother - in - law), and several Mexican artists were arrested on December 21,
1930, although they were soon released. Adolfo Best - Maugard and Roberto Monte-
negro, Mexican friends of Porter, were among the Mexican government ’ s advisors to
Eisenstein during the period, from late December through late April 1931, when
parts of Que Viva Mexico! were fi lmed in fi ve separate Mexican locations. Eisenstein
returned briefl y to Mexico City between each of these location sessions, and, during
a visit of Eisenstein ’ s party to Mexico City, he met Porter, who was invited to visit
the fi lming at Hacienda Tetlapayac in mid - July 1931. If Porter did, indeed, visit the
hacienda on the day on which an Indian actor accidentally killed his sister, she must
have spent July 15 – 17, 1931, at Tetlapayac. Based on the evidence of the non - fi ction
version, she must have traveled to the hacienda by train in the company of Alexandrov
and Kimbrough, met the Indian male lead of the movie on the train, and encountered
Eisenstein, Tiss é , Best - Maugard, Don Julio Saldivar (the heir to the owner of the
hacienda), Don Julio ’ s “ wife, ” and “ some sort of assistant to the art adviser ” 10 at the
hacienda after her arrival.
262
Ruth M. Alvarez
The controversy over Eisenstein ’ s loss of control of his Mexican fi lm and the Sep-
tember 1933 release of Thunder Over Mexico , a fi lm edited from some of Eisenstein ’ s
footage by Hollywood producer Sol Lesser, may have precipitated Porter ’ s decision to
revise “ Hacienda ” as fi ction for publication in a fi ne press edition, by Harrison of
Paris, a publishing venture of two of the friends she had made since relocating to
Europe, Barbara Harrison and Monroe Wheeler. This version, completed in May
1934, appeared in December 1934; it shows evidence of exposure to Thunder Over
Mexico , as scenes and characters drawn from the fi lm are new introductions. Although
the point of both versions is that the Mexican revolution has changed nothing, the
revised version is both more despairing and more personal. It clearly articulates Por-
ter ’ s disillusionment and her fascination with death. The concluding dialogue of both
A Companion to the American Short Story Page 57