CraigHDon Quixote - master or fool?
December 18th 2006 02:05
A friend and I are reading our way throught some of the Classics of the Western tradition. We're using Invitation to the Classics as a reading guide and I've just finished Cervantes' Don Quixote.
I must admit it was a hard read and at times I struggled to work out why it's such a classic.
One major problem when reading classics such as Don Quixote is to get a feeling for how the book would have been appreciated by contemporary readers. Don Quixote is generally considered by many to be the first novel, but accustomed as we are to this genre it's very difficult to understand what it would be like to read the first novel ever written. Add to this difficulty the historical aspect and the question of translation and it becomes an almost impossible task. I believe that the original Spanish is very elegant and makes a singular contrast with the ludicrous antics of Don Quixote.
The main message for me of Don Quixote is the importance of idealism. Although Cervantes seems to ridicule idealism and to portray Don Quixote as a foolish, misguided idiot, by the end of the novel we admire him for his perseverance, his courage and his loyalty to Sancho.
The book has a curious post modern self referential aspect to it. Following the publication of volume one, Fernandez Avellaneda wrote a sequel much to Cervantes' disgust. This prompted Cervantes to write his own authentic sequel which contains episode in which Don Quixote purposely undertakes various adventure which differ from Avellaneda's account in order to prove the usurping author wrong.
I'd be interested to hear from any of you who have read Cervantes' classic and have a view on the meaning of the book and whether or not it deserves its reputation as a classic.
I must admit it was a hard read and at times I struggled to work out why it's such a classic.
One major problem when reading classics such as Don Quixote is to get a feeling for how the book would have been appreciated by contemporary readers. Don Quixote is generally considered by many to be the first novel, but accustomed as we are to this genre it's very difficult to understand what it would be like to read the first novel ever written. Add to this difficulty the historical aspect and the question of translation and it becomes an almost impossible task. I believe that the original Spanish is very elegant and makes a singular contrast with the ludicrous antics of Don Quixote.
The main message for me of Don Quixote is the importance of idealism. Although Cervantes seems to ridicule idealism and to portray Don Quixote as a foolish, misguided idiot, by the end of the novel we admire him for his perseverance, his courage and his loyalty to Sancho.
The book has a curious post modern self referential aspect to it. Following the publication of volume one, Fernandez Avellaneda wrote a sequel much to Cervantes' disgust. This prompted Cervantes to write his own authentic sequel which contains episode in which Don Quixote purposely undertakes various adventure which differ from Avellaneda's account in order to prove the usurping author wrong.
I'd be interested to hear from any of you who have read Cervantes' classic and have a view on the meaning of the book and whether or not it deserves its reputation as a classic.
| 89 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Adele
Biology News
Lost Fanatic
Day Break TV
I haven't read Don Quixote, but Cervantes's annoyance with Avellaneda struck me as interesting.
It was usual for authors in the middle ages to take over someone else's characters, whether from their own time or from years past, and continue the story. Undoubtedly, it led to feuds and rivalries, as with Cervantes, but I'd never seen the cause and effect outlined so clearly.
Comment by LaurenD
Master or fool? I think the correct literary answer is Yes.
LaurenD