The Mysticism of Aldous Huxley


The high intelligence of genius always has an inclination to grow towards mysticism. This is in the nature of things and less astounding than it may seem. For the higher levels of rational development border closely upon the transrational and the omega pull in rational development drives the man of genius to topple this border. One day she or he will cross the line. Then the mystical aspect of life will be accepted and understood. Simply because the man of genius has an open intellect. He wants to understand. He is curious about all phenomena. And the mystical is a phenomenon of life itself.

We see this high level of rational development and its inclination towards mysticism beautifully illustrated in existential philosophers like Kierkegaard and Camus. Their intelligence did not want to exclude the subjective from their philosophical inquiries. They were not content with looking at life in an objective and detached way, but they also wanted to investigate what the relation was between life and the self. They had come to understand that philosophical inquiries only made sense if the self was somehow included in the picture of life presented. In their eyes there is no such thing as a loose consciousness floating around in space, grabbing on to an object in the abstract. Consciousness is always connected to a subject. And the subject is in need of explanation if we want to understand the object -in the case of philosophy: life in its totality.

But this led to a crisis in existential philosophy. For once the self became an object of study, all of its characteristics were laid bare. Though they had wanted to make progress in the field of philosophy, they had in fact opened up a Pandora box. As the existentialists discovered, and they discovered it the hard way, the self is a very dangerous object of study. It can really drive you mad if you do not find the right solutions to the problem of self. Kierkegaard and Camus did not find such a solution. Eventually madness made an end to all of their suffering. But they had moments that their genius was rewarded with true mystical insights. If you skip aside all the humbug and the lunacy in the writings of Kierkegaard you will find some pearls of deep mystical truth, never so beautifully phrased in the whole history of philosophy. Camus in his finest moments crossed also the border of transrationality on occasion. In his le malentendu Caligula, for instance, the mad main character of the play tries to sketch out for himself what a world beyond rationality would look like. The result is sheer mysticism and mystical thought.

So a man of genius, brave enough to investigate everything that can be an object of study, does not only have to have openness of mind, sincerity and curiosity, she also needs to have the guts and the healthy bowels to proceed in very dangerous territory. For deep awareness and high intelligence can really drive you mad. But if these conditions are met, then something very beautiful may emerge, something of extreme value. Then rationality will take the dive into the ocean of transrationality. A wider vista may open up. A deeper intelligence and happiness may be the result. But before the jump occurs, there is always the risk of  rationality slipping back into the madness of prerationality. This kind of regression may easily happen with unbalanced and very tensed minds, like it happened to Kierkegaard and Camus. With them it was paradise lost, the asylum regained.

But in a number of exceptional cases the border is crossed. In these cases a high intelligence is coupled with a sound mind and a healthy complexion. Then the organic conditions to give the intelligence a firm physiological base and structure are met. Such an intelligence is not so easily upset, because it is rooted in a strong and healthy nervous system. Thinking in these cases does not weaken the organism, but instead strengthens it. It is opened up, instead of closed down. It happens only rarely. But in these cases thinking and intelligence support life.

Such was the case with Aldous Huxley. From childhood on his intelligence had always been bright and sharp. He had a drive to understand the world. He wanted to know what it all meant. So he read all that he could lay a hand on. He surely wasn´t a born mystic. In his twenties and thirties he was even an avowed rationalist, more of the extravert than the introvert type, as he described himself in his Proper Studies (1927). In an article in Vanity Fair of the same year he compared his type of reasoning with Goethe and Bergson and concluded:

I have a non-mystical mind; hence their arguments leave me entirely unconvinced. Goethe´s remark about the magical properties and symbolic virtues of triangle strike me as being pure nonsense.

And in a letter to a reader in 1929 he described his own stance, when he wrote the essays of Do What You Will (1929):

...Being an unmetaphysically-minded person preoccupied with phenomenal appearances, not ultimate reality, I think mostly of the diverse Many and not much of the final One. My essay (`One and Many´) in Do What You Will is a statement of the observable facts of diversity so stupidly overlooked by contemporary science and contemporary religion. (...) Any tentative solutions of the problems raised are never (...) metaphysical solutions, only practical, ethical, sociological and psychological solutions.

But Huxley disliked prejudices. He was one of those very few with the openness of mind to accept other ways of thinking. It intrigued him. Already as a boy at Eton he read Jacob Boehme, the famous Medieval German mystic, and refused to close the book. It was interesting indeed, he said, though not congenial. But learning comes from what is different and not from what´s the same. So already at that time he tried to understand what the mystics learned. Though not being very religious himself, he considered it an intellectual challenge to understand religion.

At age 17 he contracted a severe eye disease which left him almost blind at the time. He had to learn braille. This near blindness not only sharpened his intelligence, but also, by being forced to look inwards, kindled a small mystical flame, that did not become ablaze right away, but remained always there, smouldering, waiting for the fuel of his more riper years. For Huxley in his later days became little short of a mystic. But already in his more positivistic and rationalistic twenties and thirties we can detect this mystical flame in his writings. In one of his first novels Antic Hay (1923) there is a passage that is written with inspired mysticism. It is worth quoting at large:

`There are quiet places also in the mind´, he [Gumbril] said meditatively. ´But we build bandstands and factories on them. Deliberately -to put a stop to the quietness. (...) All the thoughts, all the preoccupations in my head -round and round, continually (...) What´s it for? What´s it all for? To put an end to the quiet, to break it up and disperse it, to pretend at any cost that it isn´t there. Ah, but it is; it is there, in spite of everything, at the back of everything. Lying awake at night -not restlessly, but serenely, waiting for sleep- the quiet re-establishes itself, piece by piece; all the broken bits (...) we´ve been so busily dispersing all day long. It re-establishes itself, an inward quiet, like the outward quiet of grass and trees. It fills one, it grows -a crystal quiet, a growing, expanding crystal. It grows, it becomes more perfect; it is beautiful and terrifying (.....) For one´s alone in the crystal, and there´s no support from the outside, there is nothing external and important, nothing external and trivial to pull oneself up by or stand on (...) There is nothing to laugh at or feel enthusiast about. But the quiet grows and grows. Beautifully and unbearably. And at last you are conscious of something approaching; it is almost a faint sound of footsteps. Something inexpressively lovely and wonderful advances through the crystal, nearer, nearer. And, oh, inexpressively terrifying. For if it were to touch you, if it were to seize you and engulf you, you´d die; all the regular, habitual daily part of you would die (....) one would have to begin living arduously in the quiet, arduously in some strange, unheard of manner. Nearer, nearer come the steps; but one can´t face the advancing thing. One daren´t .....

....The quiet....the beautiful crystal....terrifying...you´d die...... These words of mysticism were written in the early twenties of the last century. They were written by a Huxley who was at that time famous for his iconoclastic and agnostic rationalism. But already then we meet another Huxley: a deeply religious and mystical man and writer. Had the Jacob Boehme of his schooldays somehow managed to nestle himself in his mind and heart? Whatever the explanation may be, the quotation above is immensely beautiful and of great mystical importance. It shows that Huxley was already at an early age aware of the mystical dimension of life.

The theme of mysticism recurs two years later in his novel Those Barren Leaves (1925). One of the main characters of the book, Calamy, has gone to live by himself in the mountains, to sort out the problems of his life. As one of the reasons he gives:

`The mind must be open, unperturbed, empty of irrelevant things, quiet. There´s no room for thoughts in a half shut, cluttered mind....`

Calamy wants to find the same solutions as Gautama the Buddha did. He wants to make a `breakthrough´ in his mode of thinking and cross the line, the line between ordinary modes of thinking and enhanced forms of consciousness.

`Perhaps you really do get, in some queer sort of way, beyond the limitations of ordinary existence. And you may see that everything that seems reel is in fact illusory -maya, in fact, the cosmic illusion. Behind it you catch a glimpse of reality.`

In the light of later developments it is not far fetched to conclude that we can detect in these words the voice of Huxley himself. Already at an early age he wondered about the line between rationality and postrationality. He was intrigued by the utter mysteriousness of life. He knew the limitations of rationality. His intuition whispered that there must be something more, a farther reach for mankind. Later in life he devoted much time and energy in mapping out these reaches.

But it is one of the purposes of this article to show that mysticism had always been something of a counterpoint in the life of Huxley. Behind the `unmetaphysically-minded person preoccupied with phenomenal appearances` there was always that other Huxley, who was interested in the One more than the Many. Even in such a rationalistic, detached, almost cynical book like his famous Point Counter Point (1928), that became celebrated with the young for its Nietzschian revolt and iconoclastic breaking of taboos, a different tone is heard. In the beginning of the book listening to the Sarabande of Bach´s B minor suite for flute leads to the following mesmerizing thoughts:

(....)  a slow and lovely meditation on the beauty (in spite of the squalor), the oneness (in spite of such bewildering diversity) of the world. It is a beauty, a goodness, a unity that no intellectual research can discover, that analysis dispels, but of whose reality the spirit is from time to time suddenly and overwhelmingly convinced.


The turning point

Though Huxley, as said, was interested in religion and mysticism for the greater part of his early life, the final breakthrough, the ultimate shift from rationality to postrationality occurred in the three years before his migration to the US in 1937. In 1935 he was by then forty two years of age and entered into, what we now call, his midlife crisis. The crisis, in a way reflective of the crisis the whole of Europe had to face in those years, was a severe one. It was accompanied by months of insomnia, which left him utterly paralyzed with fatigue and lack of concentration. He became extremely worried not to be able to work again. He had always prided himself in being able to support his family with his plume. Now his whole future became uncertain. He tried anything from extra vitamins to hypnotism. In the end the instructions his friend Gerald Heard gave him, along with the physical exercises of the then famous Alexander-technique, benefited him the most. Gerald had taught him some yogic breathing. In a natural way these techniques developed in the course of 1935 into a form of meditation. This crisis, together with the probed solutions, eventually caused the counterpoint of mysticism to become more prominent, both in his personal life and in his writings. His novel Eyeless in Gaza (1936) can be seen as the outcome of this crisis. It is of key interest in the development of Huxley´s mysticism.

In the book the main character, Anthony Beavis (probably short for ´beata visio´), suffers, just like Huxley himself, from a deep existential crisis, following a murderous attack on his life. In the end, after his whole life is put upside down, Anthony finds comfort and strength in a religious answer to his problems. But it is not any religious answer. It is a very personal one, reaching out to him in his solitude and loneliness. The solution to the riddle of life must be found in that one four letter word, that is so frequently misused:

`It begins,` he answered, `with trying to cultivate the difficult art of loving people`.
´But most people are detestable.`
`They´re detestable, because we detest them. If we like them, they´d be likeable.`
´Do you think that´s true?`
`I´m sure it´s true.`
`And what do you do after that?`
`There is no after´, he replied. `Because it´s a lifetime´s job.`
(Eyeless in Gaza: last chapter)

Anthony Beavis, just like Calamy in Those Barren Leaves a decade earlier, wants to make the mystical breakthrough, a breakthrough that so heavily preoccupied Huxley´s mind during his crisis. The thoughts of Anthony reflect Huxley´s own pondering at the time:

Some way, Anthony was thinking, of getting beyond the books, beyond the perfumed and resilient flesh of women, beyond fear and sloth, beyond the painful but secretly flattering vision of the world as menagerie and asylum....

'the contemplative life': it can be made a kind of highbrow substitute for Marlene Dietrich: a subject for erotic musing in the twilight. Meditation -valuable (.....) only as a mean of effecting desirable changes in the personality and mode of existence. To live contemplatively is not to live in some deliciously voluptuous or flattering Poona; it is to live in London, but to live there in a non-cockney style.
(Anthony´s diary, 17 sept. 1934)


The American years

In 1937 Gerald Heard and the Huxley family set off for a lecture tour around the US. Because of the impending doom in Europe they were not to return till after the war. By that time Heard and Huxley were so content with living in California that they chose to remain there for the rest of their lives. California proved also beneficial for a further development of their spiritual life. It was here that Heard founded his Trabuco College, a combination of university and monastery in one. It was here that Huxley got acquainted with Jiddu Krishnamurti. They remained close friends for the rest of their lives. Huxley also got involved with the legacy of Vivekananda, the Vedanta Movement of California, and got initiated by Swami Prahbavananda. All these meetings and acquaintances gave another impetus to his study of mysticism, both from the East and the West. His contributions to the periodical `Vedanta and the Western World` belong to the most beautiful essays in mystical literature.

In 1945 Huxley surprised friend and fiend with the publication of a textbook on religion, the Perennial Philosophy, just like his Texts and Praetexts a combination of quotations from men of genius together with his own commentary thereon. It was the outcome of his devotion to mysticism in the years following his crisis in the late thirties. To some readers who more appreciated the extravert rationalist Huxley, the book was a disappointment. They thought he had gone hazy and wacky and had deserted the cause of clear empirical thinking. But they failed to see that there had always been an undertone of mysticism in his writings. It was only now, in the liberal climate of California and prompted by his own inner development, that the religious colors on his pallet became more prominent.

In retrospect the writing of the Perennial Philosophy is but a logical continuation of much that preoccupied Huxley at an earlier date. He had always been concerned with the state the world was in. He always thought it the duty of a writer to warn and educate mankind, in order to create a better world. Even the purpose of his rather cynical Brave New World (1931) was a positive one: he wanted to warn against some negative traits in the prevailing modernism of his time, to make a stop as long as it was possible. Some ten years later, with the writing of the Perennial Philosophy and Grey Eminence, he had come to the conclusion that the solution to the problem was a religious one:

A totally unmystical world would be a world totally blind and insane. (Grey Eminence)

So the mystical element became more and more prominent in the work of Aldous Huxley. He devoted more and more time in discussing the theory and the implications, both individual and social, of mysticism in his books. But how was the person Huxley effected by all this? Was Huxley merely philosophically interested in the study of mysticism -like any curious intellectual is- or was his interest existential? Was mysticism of vital importance to himself, or was it merely one of the numerous of subjects his mind got interested in in the course of his life? To get a glimpse of Huxley the man, behind Huxley the intellectual, a telling letter from his wife Maria to her sister Jeanne has fortunately (for much of the Huxley correspondence has been destroyed by fire) survived. The year is 1952. Huxley is now an older man of fifty eight:

You know for how many years we´ve loved Aldous and known his goodness and his sweetness and his honesty -but you also know how tiring, in spite of all this, he was to live with - sad to live with. Well now, he is transformed, transfigured. What I mean to say is that this change has been working in an intangible way and for a very, very  long time, but that the result suddenly exploded - and I say exploded. Aldous no longer looks the same, his attitude is not the same, his moral and intellectual attitude, his attitude to animals, to people, the clouds, to the telephone ringing (and that´s going very far) - no let´s go further and say that he even decides his own decisions- (.....) At last he has reached the point of putting into daily practice everything he wants to practise, and this even without realizing it. (....) His search for this road, we know, did not only come out of his philosophical interests; he helped himself by psychological experiments, by spiritual exercises.

And in a letter to her son Matthew she wrote:

Aldous in fact is being spontaneous. (...) Aldous who could never say the right thing (I mean in the psychological sense and strains), now cannot say the wrong thing -and what is more, bubbles with the right things at the right moments and with the most difficult people and in the most difficult circumstances and in the most unaccountable positions. (.....) In fact he lets his E or super-conscious run him. There is no more a blockage between him and his super-conscious.



The experiment

In 1953 Huxley met dr. Humphrey Osmond, an English psychiatrist from Canada, who had done some experiments with the drug mescaline to find a cure for certain forms of mental disease. This drug, used by the native Americans in their religious rites, was in later years to be artificially and chemically reproduced under the name of LSD. According to dr. Osmond the drug provoked certain changes in the mind, that could be compared to the experiences certain mystics had described in their literature. Huxley was very much interested. For here he could perhaps directly experience what the source of religion and mysticism was. He knew in a way what to expect because of his own mystical training. But he also wanted to know the workings of this very ancient and, for native Americans, holy drug. So he decided to take the drug as an experiment.

He knew well that the mystical experience was an integral part of the human psyche. It is part of us being human. We have been born with this inclination towards mysticism and religion. We are all homines religiosi by birthright. So the mystical experience is not something that is or can be artificially  implanted into the human psyche. It is there already. So he clearly understood that it was not the drug that called for these experiences to originate. All it did was to remove certain internal neurological blockades, so the original faculties of the mind would come to light. In a letter to dr. Osmond he wrote:

Disease, mescaline, emotional shock, aesthetic experience and mystical enlightenment have the power, each in its different way and in varying degrees, to inhibit the functions of the normal self and its ordinary brain activity, thus permitting the `other world` to rise into consciousness (...)

Under the supervision of dr. Osmond and his wife Maria also in the room, Huxley took the drug. Its workings lasted for some fourty eight hours. He described the mystical transformation of consciousness, provoked by the taking of the drug, in detail in his perhaps most famous, but also most controversial book the Doors of Perception (1954). What is most significant in Huxley´s description of the mystical experience is the fact that he didn´t see another, a dreamlike, reality, but that he saw normal waking time reality, but now totally transformed in revealing its innate divine splendor. So it was not a fanciful dreamworld he chemically conjured, so he said, but finally the very essentiality of the world was disclosed to his mind´s eye.

(...) I was seeing what Adam has seen on the morning of creation -the miracle, moment by moment, of naked existence (...) flowers shining with their own inner light and all but quivering under the pressure of the significance with wich they were charged (....) Words like ´grace´ and ´transfiguration´ came to my mind (...) Being-Awareness-Bliss -for the first time I understood, not on the verbal level, not by inchoate hints (...) but precisely and completely what those prodigious syllabes referred to (...)

But there were more fearful moments also in the experience, shivers of awe, that made one feel small and humble:

The fear, as I analyse it in retrospect, was of being overwhelmed, of disintegration under a pressure of reality greater than a mind, accostumend to living most of the time in a cosy world of symbols, could possibly bear. The literature of religious experience abounds in references to the pains and terrors overwhelming those who have come, too suddenly, face to face with some manifestation of the mysterium tremendum (...)

But, though oscillating also to the tremendum side of reality, the total outcome of the experience was positive and meaningful. Finally Huxley felt that he had seen the deeper meaning of reality. All the questions of his long intellectual life of learning finally were answered. He came to see that the mystical experience was the one true answer to the riddle of life. `This is how one ought to see. This is how things really are,` he said.

Huxley was well aware that the taking of drugs was only a poor substitute for a real and everlasting life of mysticism. All it meant was taking a shortcut for something that took a lot more pains and efforts to accomplish. Perhaps that was the great danger of the drug: it afforded too easy means for something that was worth struggling for. Still he thought that the drug could be benificial:

Most men an women lead lives at the worst so painful, at the best so monotonous, poor and limited that the urge to escape, the longing to transcend themselves (...) is and has always been one of the principle appetites of the soul. Art and religion, carnivals and saturnalia, dancing and listening to oratory -all these have served, in H.G. Wells´s phrase, as Doors in the Wall. And for the private, for everyday use there have always been chemical intoxicants. All the vegetable sedatives and narcotics, all the euphorics that grow on trees, the hallucinogens that ripen in berries (...) all (...) have been used by human beings from times immemorial. And to these natural modifiers of consciousness modern science has added its quota of synthetics -chloral, for example and benzedrine, the bromides and the barbiturates.
    Most of these (...) cannot now be taken except on doctor´s orders, or else illigally and at considerable risk. For unrestricted use the West has permitted only alcohol and tabacco. All the other chemical Doors in the Wall are labelled Dope and their unauthorized takers are Fiends.

criticism: Huxley was right in saying that it was unrealistic to make a policy of banishing all drugs for ever. People will always take resort to an easy escape from mundane reality. They want that shortcut. Nobody can wait years on end to realize that final Paradise one is so desperately longing for. But the point of criticism one can raise against the Doors of Perception is the fact that there are no substantial chapters in the book devoted to real alternatives for the shortcut. Huxley warned enough against drugs and he also wrote:

I am not so foolish as to equate what happens under the influence of mescaline or any other drug (...) with the realization of the end and ultimate purpose of human life: enlightentment, the beatific vision. All I am suggesting is that the mescaline experience is what Catholic theologians call a `gratuitous grace`, not necessary to salvation but potentially helpful and to be accepted thankfully (...)

But the `to be accepted thankfully` is taken too literally after the publication of the Doors of Perception. In a way the book contributed to the emergence of a drug culture in the sixties and seventies (a lot of youngsters were inspired by the book in taking their first drugs) and it is even possible that the book was of influence in shaping our modern day chemicalization of happiness. For nowadays we want Paradise instantaneously, without wondering about the causes of our unhappiness. Drugs and chemicals reward our impatience. And there´s no inhibition as long as our doctors are willing to prescribe. It would have been better if Huxley had adressed this impatience of ours in a few chapters devoted to the means and techniques of real and healthy mysticism. For the workings of meditation and other spiritual techniques are rather slow compared to the giant leap of drugs, but meditation in the end is far more effective and far more healthy. We must never forget that all true Masters have warned against the taking of drugs, though they knew well their potentialties in offering these shortcuts.

But in defense of Huxley it must be said that at other times and places he did describe the techniques of mysticism and their implications. And also did he address our impatience on number of occasions. So it is better to regard the Doors for what it actually is: a curious, informative, almost journalistic account of  what it is like to take a mind altering drug like mescaline. So we may say that the book has some phenomenological significance. But it was not the way to promote mysticism.


The London interview

In 1961, at the end of his life, Huxley now being sixty seven, a review of his life and works were given in a famous interview with John Chandos on BBC radio. In this long interview all the major topics of his life long intellectual labor were being discussed and revaluated. They also talked about religion and mysticism. What I like the most about the London interview is the fact that it is one of the scarce occasions we hear a mystic talk about the physical implications of spirituality. Huxley was aware that tensions in the body were the major impediment for enlightenment to occur. Let´s quote him in full:

We didn`t have to say that when the Quakers quaked or the Shakers shook, this was necessarily the operation of the Holy Ghost. (...) They were getting rid of tensions [my italics]. (...) I think we can talk about this in realistic terms without invoking supernatural explanations. But at the same time, what we may call the sort of basic supernaturalism, what we may call the life force, are of value in so far as they permit basic sources of energy and enlightenment to flow freely through an organism which is constantly blocking itself up and obstructing itself by the operation of the conscious ego. There are ways of getting rid of the conscious ego, of getting out of our own light.

Huxley agreed with Bergson in stating that the light in man was already given. The science of mysticism should therefore have as its main goal the removal of blockades, the taking away of all impediments, be it physiological, psychological, neurological or even chemical, that stand in the way of this light coming through. The taking of drugs could also be such a mean for removing the blockades. With Huxley it was the same as the quaking of the Quakers: just a mean ´of getting out of our own light´.


Conclusion

I think that looking back in retrospect we can say that Huxley failed to assess the danger of his promoting drugs as a mean for getting spiritual revelations. I think he was swept away by the initial euphoria that followed the first mescaline and LSD testing. I´m not speaking of the sociological and medical consequences of a wide scale promotion of drugs (even if only administered in a sacred and ritual context). History itself has and will show what these consequences are. But as far as mysticism is concerned I think that Huxley´s promotion of drugs has widely missed the mark. Serious mysticism will always warn against taking shortcuts. For shortcuts are gratifying to our ego and help our self to keep up its status quo, instead of looking for deeper transformations in the verticality of our existence. For the laziness and the cocksureness of our ego says: ´well, then I can have the best of both worlds. I can go on in this world with my old ways of self assessment and be the self kicker I have always been. But once in a while I can taste the blissfulness of that other world also by taking some dope. Then I can lay my head to rest and feel my primal oneness with existence again. But not to long. For there is work to do and dreaming is for children.` Huxley has I think underestimated the tricks the ego plays with our mind. And with pleasure and drugs these tricks tend to be of the worst kind. The flesh is weak etc.

But this can and must not be our final verdict when talking about Aldous Huxley. For his intelligence was too sharp not to foresee these dangers. He knew about the tricks of the ego. But his was not the advantage of seeing the recent developments in pharmacology and the use of drugs. Perhaps nowadays he would have concluded otherwise. Taking of drugs is now the major problem in our national health care. I think nowadays he would have been more hesitant in advocating the use of drugs, even when restricted only to a liturgical environment.

His genuine and true mysticism compel us to end on a more positive note. He showed with the example of his life that growth towards liberation was possible. In the end of his life both Huxley the man and Huxley the writer were remarkable indeed. The warnings of Brave New World and the hopes and prophecies of his latest novel Island were no abstractions as Huxley himself was concerned. He did all he can to live up to the ideals he preached. He knew that all the ideals of spirituality had to be realized, as not to end with empty words and empty promises. The individual should try to transform itself, if we want a better and more peaceful world. It was the work of a life time, he said. But in the end he himself showed that it was feasible. He was a man of genius. There is always something of a mystic in a man of genius.  



Amsterdam, October 21  2005



© http://home.wxs.nl/~brouw724/Huxley.html

Academic year 2008/2009
© a.r.e.a./Dr.Vicente Forés López
© Víctor Ortuño Domínguez
vicordo@alumni.uv.es
Universitat de València Press