Life is a Dream ended much more neatly than I would have imagined. Perhaps the rhyming and rhythm reminded me too much of Shakespeare, but I was expecting a much more tragic ending. Instead, and Segismund forgives his father and his supporters, resolves the love triangle between Roaura, Astolf, and Stella peacefully, and assumes his place as heir with everyone’s blessing. Everyone, besides Clarion I suppose, received a happy ending. Except for one character, 1st Soldier, who is instead sent to be imprisoned in the very same tower that used to hold Segismund. Segismund says that is it is because he is a traitor to the crown. This, as the other characters proclaim, is a wise, if ruthless, decision, since someone who has already betrayed one king may well betray another. However, in the context of the play, where Segismund has learned to forgive his enemies and treat people with kindness, even in dreams, this didn’t quite make sense to me. 1st Soldier was simply returning the rightful heir to the throne of Poland, something seemingly noble. Surely his loyalty to the imprisoned prince should warrant better treatment. Furthermore, if Segismund was truly worried about the man betraying him in the future based on his past actions, he should also be locking up his father Basil. Who’s to say that Basil will not see more visions of woe in the stars and decide that his best course of action is opposing his son once again? Finally, it was not really necessary in the context of the play to include 1st Soldiers fate. He was an unnamed character who only had a few lines. Why did de la Barca go out of his way to include this information?
I can think of a few theories as to why this might have been the case. The first is that this is used to show that Segismund will be a strong king as well as a just one. At the time the play was written, king’s had to be harsh on their subjects in order to maintain rule. By having Segismund take this course of action with the traitor, de la Barca is showing that he will not be a weak, push-over of a king. My other theory is that this allows the play to come full circle, while also showing some progression. At the beginning, Segismund is locked up in a tower based on the readings of the stars proclaiming that he shall be a horrible man and betray his king. At the end of the play, 1st Soldier is locked in the same tower because he also may betray the king, but this time his imprisonment is based on his previous actions, as well as the law. However, no reason I’ve thought of thus far has convinced me that 1st Soldier needed to be imprisoned. So I declare, justice for 1st Soldier!
I think your theories are fascinating and speak to some of the philosophical questions de la Barca tries to address in Life is a Dream. The unfortunate ending of 1st Soldier reminded me of the belief that if one soul dies, another is born. This idea was, and still is, a relative common belief for Christians. Although it started as an ancient pagan belief and isn’t mentioned in the Bible, many Christians have adopted it- probably because it reminds them of resurrection/everlasting life and can help them resolve some fears they have about death. We regularly see this idea in books, plays, movies, and even TV shows. If one character is trapped somewhere, another character must often either die so that the first character can be free or they take their place as prisoner. For example, we saw this in Tron: Legacy, when Flynn sacrificed himself so that Sam and Quorra could make it back to the real world. Perhaps the unhappy ending of 1st Soldier is for similar reasons? Semismund’s sudden forgiveness and kindness, to me, marks his transition from his augmented reality into a true one. If the existence of the augmented reality relies on a person to behold it, what better way for de la Barca to resolve the issue then to send a tertiary character into it? It wouldn’t surprise me if de la Braca (who was probably a devout Spanish Catholic) had this belief about souls and saw 1st soldier as a way to tie up loose ends.