Laljit's comments (member since Jun 20, 2009)

Laljit's comments from the Classics and the Western Canon group.

this is a great discussion, and with Patrice, so much here that reading is slow. I think this book is going to take a while. :)

Okay, courtly love then seems like a sublimation of sexuality; so, was chivalry a means of sublimating violence?

Was Cervantes not only mocking and satirizing chivalry, but also love?

Cynthia - you certainly lost me. Although a digression, I am curious why you believe that everyone needs to "first and foremost" have a relationship with a woman in order to reach full maturity?

Whether a completely real way of life, it would seem that other writers of chivalry were not writing parodies and, hence, perceived that it was the ideal that others should follow.

Perhaps, that is why Cervantes parodies it so much. Writers suggested an other-wordly ideal that ignored he realities of the time? An empty honor without realistic actions

Everyman & Rich - sound reasoning to me! I've always wanted to read about the Pelo.War so a good way to get around to that.

thewanderingjew wrote: "Everyman wrote:
...So do we have here what DQ would have become if the books of poetry had consumed him rather than the books of knighthood?

We learn so many things from books. I do believe they c..."

Completely agree with you, TWJ, especially for bibliophiles. How many of us have read books that have changed our perspectives, if not lives?

Thomas wrote: "Patrice wrote: "Or slapstick."

That is exactly what the scene in the inn is. (Chap.16) Pure slapstick, with people bumbling around in the dark, the muledriver's floozy ending up in the arms of Don..."

I think we should keep in mind that Cervantes was writing an entertaining novel. Though we may dissect it and analyze it, on the surface it is meant to be comedic entertainment. I just finished "How to Read Literature Like a Professor," as was recommended. I have come to conclude that DQ, and any other literature, is like an onion and the first layer is simply entertainment. It is only as we peel away the layers that we get more depth.

Which brings up a question I have? It is my understanding that in the past there was a very limited "canon" that most educated readers were expected to have read. Therefore, the numerous allusions and such in literary works. If this is the case, would it be that authors made a conscious effort to layer their stories or was it more subconscious? In other words, was Cervantes simply writing a good story that was embedded with all these themes subconsciously, or did he intentionally intend to have these themes understood by educated readers of the time?

There are a variety of definitions of madness, but more importantly, one should keep in mind that "insanity" is exists in degrees and is not a permanent state. If the schizophrenia will have periods of lucidity.

And, why can't DQ be both insane and motivated by altruistic purposes? The two are not mutually exclusive.
__________
I'll get a little pedantic here, so feel free to skip ahead. :)

Currently, psychologists and psychiatrists use the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) to diagnose mental illness. There are, for our purposes, two "types" of mental disorder, which are referred to as Axis I disorders and Axis II disorders. Axis I disorders are "primary" disorders such as schizophrenia, depression, etc. The disorders that most people think of as "insanity." Axis II disorders are personality disorders, such as narcissism, paranoid personality, and schizotypal personality.

Patrice is correct that schizotypal personality disorder is not, technically, insanity; however, of all the personality disorders, it is the most severe and readily blends into schizophrenia and the other psychotic disorders. In fact, clinical research shows that people with schizotypal personality can have periods of psychotic breakdown.

Regardless, we really can't formally diagnose a literary character beyond recognizing that he falls somewhere within the psychotic disorder spectrum, whether schizotypal or delusional, or even schizophrenic.

A reference for further reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_diso...

The DSM-IV defines mental disorder as follows:

DSM-IV: DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS

Definition of Mental Disorder

Although this volume is titled the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the term mental disorder unfortunately implies a distinction between "mental" disorders and "physical" disorders that is a reductionistic anachronism of mind/body dualism. A compelling literature documents that there is much "physical" in "mental" disorders and much "mental" in "physical" disorders. The problem raised by the term "mental" disorders has been much clearer than its solution, and, unfortunately, the term persists in the title of DSM-IV because we have not found an appropriate substitute.

Moreover, although this manual provides a classification of mental disorders, it must be admitted that no definition adequately specifies precise boundaries for the concept of "mental disorder." The concept of mental disorder, like many other concepts in medicine and science, lacks a consistent operational definition that covers all situations. All medical conditions are defined on various levels of abstraction - for example, structural pathology (e.g., ulcerative colitis), symptom presentation (e.g., migraine), deviance from a physiological norm (e.g., hypertension), and etiology (e.g., pneumococcal pneumonia). Mental disorders have also been defined by a variety of concepts (e.g., distress, dyscontrol, disadvantage, disability, inflexibility, irrationality, syndromal pattern, etiology, and statistical deviation). Each is a useful indicator for a mental disorder, but none is equivalent to the concept, and different situations call for different definitions.

Despite these caveats, the definition of mental disorder that was included in DSM-III and DSM-III-R is presented here because it is as useful as any other available definition and has helped to guide decisions regarding which conditions on the boundary between normality and pathology should be included in DSM-IV. In DSM-IV, each of the mental disorders is conceptualized as a clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern that occurs in an individual and that is associated with present distress (e.g., a painful symptom) or disability (i.e., impairment in one or more important areas of functioning) or with a significantly increased risk of suffering death, pain, disability, or an important loss of freedom. In addition, this syndrome or pattern must not be merely an expectable and culturally sanctioned response to a particular event, for example, the death of a loved one. Whatever its original cause, it must currently be considered a manifestation of a behavioral, psychological, or biological dysfunction in the individual. Neither deviant behavior (e.g., political, religious, or sexual) nor conflicts that are primarily between the individual and society are mental disorders unless the deviance or conflict is a symptom of a dysfunction in the individual, as described above.

A common misconception is that a classification of mental disorders classifies people, when actually what are being classified are disorders that people have. For this reason, the text of DSM-IV (as did the text of DSM-III-R) avoids the use of such expressions as "a schizophrenic" or "an alcoholic" and instead uses the more accurate, but admittedly more cumbersome, "an individual with Schizophrenia" or "an individual with Alcohol Dependence."

Of course, one could take the position of Thomas Szaz, (or Tom Cruise) who claim that there really is no such thing as mental illness, beyond society simply defining "the other" as mentally ill.
___________

With regard to Plutarch and the Pelo. War ... would those be considered literature? I have always categorized them as history.

Everyman wrote: "Concerning the selection of future books, one group here has a practice where they have a list of every suggested book that fits into their genre, then rather than voting for all of them, the moder..."

Sounds like a good approach.

thewanderingjew wrote: "Laurele wrote: "Patrice wrote: "I wonder if Cervantes, like Shakespeare, is saying "all the world's a stage and we're all players"?

Also, I just checked with my psychiatrist son and his diagnosis ..."

Well, this is a bit of a digression, but a number of the major mental disorders have been known to exist since ancient times, though the etiology and specific symptom picture may not have exactly matched the current diagnostic criteria. For example, with disorders such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (manic-depression), delusional disorder, and depression it wouldn't surprise me if we found there presence in other works as well. They may not be labeled as such, but modern readers would recognize them quite easily.

Mental diagnosis is, in the end, a cataloging of human dis-order in thought and behavior. And, it is in great literature that we find the best and worst examples of human behavior. Freud readily adopted labels from Greek mythology (e.g., Oedipus Complex) and, if I recall correctly, William James made reference to literary figures as examplars. This would make sense, given the literary heights his own brother reached.

I diagnosed the delusional disorder and, would concur with your son about the Schizotypal Personality Disorder as well.

The notion of the book being a spoof of chivalry was mentioned. If I recall, I believe that is one of the key aspects of the work. It is meant to be a parody of the chivalry and romance of the era. Perhaps, Cervantes saw a false chivalry in the Spaniards of the era when he compared it to the life he had lived and seen, esp. if one acknowledges his lineage as a converso.

I had a somewhat different take on the book burning chapter. Cervantes, in my view, seemed to simply be cataloging what he has written as if to establishes his own credentials.

If I recall, DQ was not his first literary attempt and he had failed in the past.

By cataloging, and then burning the books, he both establishes his own status as an author and criticizes readers for somehow thinking that's even important. The book burners seem to reflect the foolishness of his audience - the public/ignorant housekeeper and the literary critic/priest are equally useless in deciding what work is of value and what is not. Just as Cervante's previous attempts had been judged.

With regard to the issue of madness, he seems to have delusional disorder with grandiose features. On the other hand, I couldn't help but think that DQ is the first true "nerd." He immerses himself in a fantasy world to the point of fashioning himself armor and a weapon. He attempts to find his place in a fantasy because he doesn't seem to fit into the reality that is his existence. He reminded me of the modern day dungeons and dragon player or the Trekkie. Immersing himself so deeply in his imagination. A physically weak, socially awkward man who fancies himself a heroic knight. Literature's first "D&D Dork."

And, as a disclaimer, I should point out that I mean no offense by the description of "nerd" and "dork" as I believe I fully qualify, being a D&D dork myself. :)

Everyman wrote: Literary criticism is a whole field -- actually, a whole series of fields -- all its own, but one book I did enjoy reading was "How to Read Literature like a Professor" by Thomas Foster. Maybe worth borrowing from the library and skimming to get some idea of what one professor looks for. "

Thanks for the explanation. I think I actually own that book, but haven't cracked it open. Will have to do so. Thanks for the reminder that I have it collecting dust.

In case others also want to look at it, here's a link:



How to Read Literature Like a Professor A Lively and Entertaining Guide to Reading Between the Lines

I've never read a book from a "literary critic" perspective before. Generally, even when reading "classics," I have never gone deeply into them. Therefore, this is all very new and interesting.

First and foremost, thanks for the great links. Very interesting reading. I do, however, have a question. Is this a fairly typical approach to literary analysis ... looking for hidden meanings in works or are are those who find hidden meanings in the books more along the lines of conspiracy theorists? or, is the idea to gain a better understanding of the author in order to interpret the work, ala, Patrice's comment: "It totally changes the reading of the book."

Apparently, he also attempted to make a living as a writer, but failed prior to writing Don Quixote. He was envious of the success of one of his rivals, Lope de Vega.

Also, was he in debtor's prison or just prison? Around that time he was a purchasing agent for the Spanish fleet, specifically the infamous Armada. Some accounts indicate that he was incarcerated for "irregularities in his accounts," suggesting embezzlement rather than debt. On the other hand, he is also described as being bankrupt. Just curious.

sounds like a good plan, though I thought we would start reading the book on July 1st. Time to crack open the book.

Also, with regard to formatting, the posts allow you to use html. For more complicated posts with lists, bold, etc., I found that it is easier to write up the post in Microsoft Word and then just copy and paste into the comment box.

certainly. I just wanted to start up the appropriate threads. Unfortunately, I wouldn't let me create the threads without text in them. Didn't meant to "jump the gun."

With regard to suggestions, I am not necessarily the person to make them as I am not as versed on the Wester Canon, but as examples of what I would consider short:

Candide

The Power and the Glory

All Quiet on the Western Front

This is meant to be a repository of reference material regarding the book, the author, and the context of the novel.

Some links to begin with:

MIGUEL DE CERVANTES

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_de_C...

DON QUIXOTE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote...


EDITH GROSSMAN EDITION REFERENCES

http://www.iadb.org/idbamerica/index.cfm...

http://www.guernicamag.com/interviews/26...