Chapters IX through XVIII

[Thomas]

When we last left Don Quixote he was in the midst of a furious battle with an angry Basque. Cervantes tells us that the story abruptly ends there, the battle unresolved, because the manuscript breaks off. The next part begins with the recovery of the manuscript and the continuation of the story, without which the reader would have been deprived of "almost two hours of entertainment." It turns out that this continuation was written by an Arab historian, Cide Hamete Benengeli. What does it mean that the rest of the history of Don Quixote was written in Arabic? Is this a simple "historical" fact? Or is there more to it?

If any objection can be raised regarding the truth of this one, it can only be that its author was Arabic, since the people of that nation are very prone to telling falsehoods, but because they are such great enemies of ours, it can be assumed that he has given us too little rather than too much.

The fight with the Basque ends in a kind of victory for Don Quixote, though he sustains an injury that he complains about (even (though in Chapt. 8 he says that it is not the custom of knights errant to complain of their wounds.)

The next few chapters feature poems and tales of "The Golden Age" of romance and chivalry, including the story of Grisostomo, a student-shepherd who dies for love. Is there any relation between Grisostomo and DQ? Are Marcela and Dulcinea analogous in any way? What is the purpose of this story and its placement here?

DQ and Sancho endure another trial when they engage a group of Yanguesans, a conflict due in part to the romantic aspirations of Rocinante. A familiar pattern is starting to emerge where DQ sees an opportunity for adventure and glory, ventures in with Sancho, and they both get the worst of it. Afterwards, they discuss it. DQ seems to rationalize his suffering, or find an explanation within his understanding of chivalry, in order to make his suffering meaningful. He urges Sancho to "find strength in weakness" and tells him that it is in the nature of knight errantry for defeat to turn into victory and reward. (DQ seems to believe sincerely in the "wheel of fate.") What sort of counterweight can Sancho provide to this?

The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha has been called the "first novel," and Cervantes has been called the man who invented fiction. I'm not sure if that's true, but with the bedroom scene in the inn, I wonder if he isn't at least the inventor of slapstick. This scene is followed by Sancho being "treated" for his injuries with DQ's potion, which of course makes him violently ill. The next morning he is tossed in a blanket by some residents of the inn. Where is the line between comedy and cruelty? (Assuming there is one...)

[Rafael]

I don't remember if someone already say it, but I guess that to we better understand Don Quixote and its references to arab people we should be aware that almost all of Spain was under muslim control for 700 years. The spanish and portuguese languages have a lot of arab words.

[Xan]

Lots of stuff here, but first the comedy. I'm beginning to think DQ is the source of many comedy tropes and troupes: Monty Python, Marx Brothers, Abbot and Costello, Three Stooges, etc. Those last few chapters and their high-low toilet humor/slapstick are classics. In a sense Cervantes is a script writer for many of the greatest comedy teams.

That scene in the inn with everyone crawling over everyone and punching each other, I was wondering if I was going to be able to breath again. 400 years old and it hasn't aged.

[Xan]

Thomas wrote: "What does it mean that the rest of the history of Don Quixote was written in Arabic? Is this a simple "historical" fact? Or is there more to it? "

The story of the great Spanish knight DQ and the whole idea of Christian knighthood and chivalry being captured in Arabic, the language of the mortal enemy, and translated into Spanish is irony (maybe)?

[Xan]

DQ reveals himself in his speech to the shepherds, doesn't he? He is on a quest for a different era, a past era of civility and decency. He wishes to bring it back.

But DQ is delusional and has a rather romantic view of chivalry and the past, so this begs the question, is he right? Did better times exist in the past or has he got it wrong? I think the tragedy is he has it wrong. His entire quest is based on a falsehood.

[Xan]

What about Marcela?

Perhaps the first feminist, definitely reminiscent of one of those independent-minded women you come across in history every so often, like Lady Byron or Queen Christina of Sweden. Marcela tells everyone how it really is and how they can take their twitter-like shaming and shove it -- she wasn't born to please anyone but herself.

Then DQ, in a great example of blowhard excess and male pomposity, threatens anyone who would follow her. You can feel his chest hairs standing on end, bristling for a fight. But Marcela needs no protector. She is quite capable of taking care of herself. A good example of how out of place and meaningless DQ is.

He attempts to find her but fails. Lucky for him :)

Edit: I would add that DQ follows her after he tells everyone else not to follow her. I guess DQ only trusts his motives.

[Xan]

Footnotes tell me there is a lot of word play in the text, particularly with names. This must be a gas to read in Spanish.

[Kyle]

Thomas wrote: "When we last left Don Quixote he was in the midst of a furious battle with an angry Basque. Cervantes tells us that the story abruptly ends there, the battle unresolved, because the manuscript brea..."

If a familiar pattern is starting to emerge already, I'm curious how Cervantez will sustain some interest over the next several hundred pages.

[Kyle]

Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "DQ reveals himself in his speech to the shepherds, doesn't he? He is on a quest for a different era, a past era of civility and decency. He wishes to bring it back.

But DQ is delusional and has a ..."

I agree, Xan. It may seem that the previous era is "better", but in reality, any sort of reliance upon an age that has past appears to look like a delusion. As a result, DQ seems to be getting beaten, and maimed, and taken advantage of pretty well.

[Lia]

Susanna wrote: "I love how Rocinante is referred to as a person:

[W]e’ll help Rocinante, though he doesn’t deserve it, because he’s the main reason for this beating. I never would have believed it of Rocinante; I..."


I love that too! It reminds me of Balaam blaming and wrongfully abusing his burro, who turned out to not only be sentient (which many animals are anyway, with or without enchantments) and in fact so enchanted that he can see angels when Balaam himself cannot.

Or Achilles blaming and quarreling with Balius and Xanthus, who turned out to be immortal, divine, and capable of “speech”, and talked back, and wept, inspired pity of the Gods, and put Achilles in his place.

The main difference here is that we understand DQ’s world to already be disenchanted, DQ is just being a drama queen, or “mad,” no otheworldly greater than humans unknown is responsible for the mishaps, only DQ and other human decisions are morally responsible for the violence and harm.

Though, in the prologue, we were told Rocinante had a cheeky, clever, philosophical, endearing, adorable, charming, compassionate “dialogue” with Babieca

“B. Why is it, Rocinante, that you’re so thin?
R. Too little food, and far too much hard labor.
B. But what about your feed, your oats and hay?
R. My master doesn’t leave a bite for me.
B. Well, Señor, your lack of breeding shows
because your ass’s tongue insults your master.
R. He’s the ass, from the cradle to the grave.
Do you want proof? See what he does for love.
B. Is it foolish to love?
R. It’s not too smart.
B. You’re a philosopher.
R. I just don’t eat.
B. And do you complain of the squire?
R. Not enough.
How can I complain despite my aches and pains
if master and squire, or is it majordomo,
are nothing but skin and bone, like Rocinante?”

Who’s a good boy? Yes you are, yes you are!

[David]

Thomas wrote: "the manuscript breaks off. The next part begins with the recovery of the manuscript and the continuation of the story"

If Cide Hamete Benengeli (the eggplant) writes this second part, where did the first part come from?

Thomas wrote: "What does it mean that the rest of the history of Don Quixote was written in Arabic?"

Maybe the Spanish speaking people at the time did not feel it was an important enough story to write down?

[David]

Thomas wrote: " Is there any relation between Grisostomo and DQ? Are Marcela and Dulcinea analogous in any way? What is the purpose of this story and its placement here?"

At first I thought the story only about free will and as a cautionary tale for DQ with Marcela corresponding to ideals and Grisostomo and DQ corresponding to those who devoutly pursue their ideals. But it can also be said Marcela is pursuing her own ideal of living the life of a shepherd. Grisostomo and Marcela were both better off than most, and poets. It seems perhaps they both suffered from the book madness in different ways than DQ resulting in Grisostomo's tragic death and Marcela's seemingly lonely and tragic withdrawal from people, because from traditional perspectives Marcela and Grisostomo seem to have much in common and may have been a good match for each other. What fate between death and being alone and on the run will DQ find as a result of pursuing his ideals?

I am liking the basic dignity that DQ grants to those he is not convinced are evil-doers by his delusion.

[Tamara]

David wrote: "Grisostomo and Marcela were both better off than most, and poets. It seems perhaps they both suffered from the book madness in different ways than DQ resulting in Grisostomo's tragic death and Marcela's seemingly lonely and tragic withdrawal from people, because from traditional perspectives Marcela and Grisostomo seem to have much in common and may have been a good match for each other. .."

I may have missed something, but I don't see Marcela as being "lonely and tragic" at all. I see her as being strong, empowered, and logical.
She says she is not responsible for her beauty and, therefore, is not responsible for whatever foolishness a man does because of her beauty. She goes on to say:

And if chastity is one of the virtues that most adorn and beautify both body and soul, why should a woman, loved for being beautiful, lose that virtue in order to satisfy the desire of a man who, for the sake of his pleasure, attempts with all his might and main to have her lose it.

She has chosen a life of freedom--freedom to roam the countryside with trees, mountains, and the waters as her companions. She has done nothing to encourage any man's attention and asks to be left alone, valuing her freedom above all else.

That doesn't sound like someone who is lonely and tragic. It sounds to me like this is a strong-willed, independent woman who knows what she wants and is unwilling to submit herself to male domination.

[David]

Tamara wrote: "I may have missed something, but I don't see Marcela as being "lonely and tragic" at all. I see her as being strong, empowered, and logical."

That may have been true then, and certainly true in light of modern feminist views, but there is also another perspective that muddies the water a bit.

Certain perspectives, the shepherds, and perhaps even Cervantes himself may feel that Marcela has acted selfishly in choosing to go around the woods and playing at being a shepherdess, not marrying, it may be claimed that these two have squandered the possibility of marriage as well as their estates.

Marcela makes a very clear case for her exoneration in Grisostomo's suicide. As far as free will goes Grisostomo's death was 100% his call, despite some opinion's even after her speech, as well as Grisostomo's epitaph.

But it may be said that Marcela has also committed suicide in her own fashion, of a civil or social kind.

Maybe part of what Cervantes is saying here is free will, or choosing your own path, is certainly to be defended, as DQ does, but their are costs and consequences to the choices you make. That M & G both seem to have been driven by their passions and from what they have read just adds to the complexity relative to DQ's quest.

[Thomas]

Kyle wrote: "If a familiar pattern is starting to emerge already, I'm curious how Cervantez will sustain some interest over the next several hundred pages."

That is a legitmate concern, but I think it's no different than other episodic formats -- TV shows follow similar types of patterns and are similarly repetitive. Ultimately I think what keeps the reader's interest is not the structure of the novel but the strength of the author's characters and the quality of the writing. If the reader feels nothing for the Knight and his squire, then there isn't much Cervantes can do to keep the reader's interest. I think that's why we have to look at why we like Don Quixote and Sancho as people, what resonates with us and makes us want to follow them on this protracted journey.

[Thomas]

David wrote: "If Cide Hamete Benengeli (the eggplant) writes this second part, where did the first part come from?"

If "each man is the child of his deeds," as DQ says he is, how do we describe his stepfather?

[Thomas]

Tamara wrote: "David wrote: "Grisostomo and Marcela were both better off than most, and poets. It seems perhaps they both suffered from the book madness in different ways than DQ resulting in Grisostomo's tragic ..."

Marcela disappears into the densest part of the forest and DQ says, "Let no person, whatever his circumstance or condition, dare to follow the beautiful Marcela lest he fall victim to my fury and outrage." And then he tries to follow her himself.

She cannot be found. As usual, what a man wants most is what he can't have. As much as DQ professes his Platonic devotion to Dulcinea, he has a lot in common with his horse, who goes prancing off after the "ladies" in the next scene.

[Tamara]

Doesn't DQ go after Marcela to protect her?

Our knight resolved to seek out our shepherdess Marcela and offer to serve her in any way he could.

I think it is interesting that Cervantes seems to focus on the plight of women.

DQ emphasizes that the times are no longer safe for women to be wandering around unprotected. In Chapter XI, when he fantasizes about the nature of the Golden Age, he emphasizes it was a time when women could roam freely without fear of being molested.

But now, in these detestable times, no maiden is safe, even if she is hidden and enclosed in another labyrinth like the one in Crete; because even there . . . . with the zealousness of accursed solicitation the amorous pestilence finds its way in and, despite all seclusion, maidens are brought to ruin.
Grossman, Chapt. XI.

A few lines later he tells Sancho:

It is for their protection, as time passed and wickedness spread, that the order of knights errant was instituted: to defend maidens, protect widows, and come to the aid of orphans and those in need.

The goal was to aid the defenseless. So even though DQ goes looking for Marcela, perhaps his motives are not as prurient as those of Rocinante.

Perhaps I'm reading too much into this with a feminist lens, but it does strike me as interesting that there is so much focus on the times no longer being safe for women.

[Xan]

David wrote: "Certain perspectives, the shepherds, and perhaps even Cervantes himself may feel that Marcela has acted selfishly in choosing to go around the woods and playing at being a shepherdess, not marrying, it may be claimed that these two have squandered the possibility of marriage as well as their estates."

The shepherds, yes, but I doubt Cervantes feels this way.

It's early, so I might have this completely wrong, but . . .

From only reading the book, the Cervantes I'm seeing is a critic of his time, and particularly of his Church and possibly Christian virtue as taught by the Church. He's been around the barnyard a few times -- at war, a prisoner of war, and just a plain ol' ordinary prisoner -- and by now he's pretty much a skeptic if not a cynic.

There is the book burning that is an inquisition that quickly turns into farce. And then there is the original manuscript of DQ which is in Arabic -- that's hilarious -- right? It's the language of the Church's greatest enemy. But like so much else for the past thousand years, it takes Arabs/Islam to save it.

Then there is the chivalrous Christian crusade/quest embodied by DQ himself. Have you noticed how unchivalrous he is? He attacks without provocation and little warning and doesn't give a hoot if his victims are armed or not. On a horse and with lance he charges unarmed men sitting on donkeys. The Great Knight yearns for the safety of the Golden Age. Yet the only crimes I have seen committed are the ones committed by him.

Cervantes is having a ball. Everything establishment is fodder for criticism, and that includes shepherds whose tired idea of virtue includes accusing Marcela of not being virtuous.

[Ian]

The Arabic "source" for the story is (as I pointed out inside "spoiler" warnings, back when we were discussing tho Prologue), a typical ploy of chivalric romances, in which the author often claims to be transmitting something from another language, written by someone who knew first-hand what he described.

Don Quixote reflects on how lucky earlier knights-errant had been to have such followers to report on their deeds. The whole thing becomes an extended joke.

This practice goes back at least to the twelfth century, with Geoffrey of Monmouth's The History of the Kings of Britain, including a "history" of King Arthur, which is supposed to be based on "a very old British [or Breton] book."

The earliest surviving Arthurian romances, by Chretien de Troyes, sometimes profess to be following a source provided by a patron. Wolfram von Eschenbach, adapting Chretien's Grail romance in Middle High German, added another layer of a supposed source, this one Arabic (!). (Neither of these could have had any direct impact on Cervantes, by the way.)

In one branch of the Merlin tradition, everything is recorded by a priest who knows the prophet/magician. (If memory serves, this survives thinly as a mysterious "Master Blaise" in Malory's "Le Morte D'Arthur.")

French Carolingian romances claimed to be following a Latin history of Charlemagne by "Bishop Turpin."

The uses of an alleged source were various. And confusing, even when the source was real. Thomas Malory did translate (and abridge) Arthurian romances in French, but when he tells the reader that something is "as the French book sayeth," there is a likelihood that the French book doesn't.

[Xan]

Yes, but I like my explanation better. :-) It fits nicely into my thesis. Which could change, and even be wrong, which is fine and just as much fun anyway.

[Ian]

It seems to me that the Marcella episode is, among other things, a parody on the then international vogue for Pastoral romances, in which nobles (complete with courtly poetry) go off to live as simple shepherds, and discover fair maidens to woo, often of noble or royal origin themselves. This was driven in part by the rediscovery of Hellenistic pastoral literature, most notably for moderns Daphnis and Chloe, although there are several others.

It is a major plot device in Sir Philip Sidney's vast Elizabethan romance, The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia, in which he managed to incorporate several popular genres. The notion is treated as comedy in Shakespeare.

Part of the joke would be that the characters in the present book who seem to accept as just odd this sort of behavior (imitated from idealized literature) in their own local social superiors, are quick to decide that the stranger, Don Quixote, *must* be crazy to take the idea of knight-errantry seriously.

[Xan]

Ian wrote: "It seems to me that the Marcella episode is, among other things, a parody on the then international vogue for Pastoral romances, in which nobles (complete with courtly poetry) go off to live as sim..."

This seems to have been a cottage industry of sorts. I'm surprised.

[Tamara]

Susanna wrote: "I got the impression that Cervantes admired Marcela:.."

Me, too.

[Tamara]

Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "Yes, but I like my explanation better. :-) It fits nicely into my thesis. Which could change, and even be wrong, which is fine and just as much fun anyway."

I like your explanation and thesis. It will be interesting to see if it holds up.

[Thomas]

Tamara wrote: "Doesn't DQ go after Marcela to protect her?

Our knight resolved to seek out our shepherdess Marcela and offer to serve her in any way he could.

I think it is interesting that Cervantes seems to f..."

That seems to be the case. My thoughts were colored in part by DQ's encounter with Maritornes in the inn, where it turns out he is not necessarily as pure as he thinks he is. Maritornes is an entirely different kind of woman though, and DQ sees whatever he wants to see.

Perhaps if Grisostomo had the imagination of DQ he would have survived Marcela's rejection?

[David]

I have read in How to Read Literature Like a Professor by Thomas C. Foster that flying is often symbolic of freedom. What should we make of Sancho being tossed in the air; like a dog at a carnival? Sancho's flight seems a bit ironic to me. If it is ironic symbolism, it seems to say Sancho is not free. If so, to whom or what is he bound?

[Chris]

Xan Shadowflutter wrote: "Lots of stuff here, but first the comedy. I'm beginning to think DQ is the source of many comedy tropes and troupes: Monty Python, Marx Brothers, Abbot and Costello, Three Stooges, etc. Those last ..."

LOL! Couldn't agree with you more!! All these scenes are funny until one considers the injuries incurred as described. It's a wonder they can get up and head to the next "adventure". Kinda like the movies, people get beaten to a pulp but can still move about. Whereas, I sustain an injury and it's painful very slow move to get up at all. Perhaps I would be slung across the back of a donkey like a piece of trash as Sancho once described what DQ looked like after one fight.

[Chris]

Thomas wrote: The next few chapters feature poems and tales of "The Golden Age" of romance and chivalry, including the story of Grisostomo, a student-shepherd who dies for love. Is there any relation between Grisostomo and DQ? Are Marcela and Dulcinea analogous in any way? What is the purpose of this story and its placement here?
I did read that section wondering if this was a foreshadowing of what will happen to DQ as he continues to seek his dream of a sterling reputation as a knight through victories over various enemies or invaders and proclaiming his love for Dulcinea. He did say that when a knight goes into battle he seeks a word of encouragement/safekeeping from his love versus a prayer to God for victory.

[Chris]

Tamara wrote: I may have missed something, but I don't see Marcela as being "lonely and tragic" at all. I see her as being strong, empowered, and logical.
She says she is not responsible for her beauty and, therefore, is not responsible for whatever foolishness a man does because of her beauty.

I agree. I thought she was a quite a remarkable character considering the culture and time period. Loved her soliloquy. I also was taken that this fictional character is written by a man of that time period.

[Chris]

Thomas wrote: As much as DQ professes his Platonic devotion to Dulcinea, he has a lot in common with his horse, who goes prancing off after the "ladies" in the next scene.
I was thinking about how easy it was to turn DQ's head (and heart) from Dulcinea when the opportunity seemed to present itself as it did with Maritornes.

[Chris]

I was taken with a paragraph that seemed to sum up what was going on with DQ (He) turned to look, & he saw that it was true; he was overjoyed, thinking, no doubt, that these were two armies coming to attack & fight each other in the middle of that broad plain. Because at all times & at every moment his fantasy was filled with the battles, enchantments, feats, follies, loves & challenges recounted in books of chivalry, & everything he said, thought or did was directed toward such matters.

and that led into the fray with the sheep. Poor sheep!

[David]

Thomas wrote: My thoughts were colored in part by DQ's encounter with Maritornes in the inn, where it turns out he is not necessarily as pure as he thinks he is. Maritornes is an entirely different kind of woman though, and DQ sees whatever he wants to see."

Chris wrote: "I was thinking about how easy it was to turn DQ's head (and heart) from Dulcinea when the opportunity seemed to present itself as it did with Maritornes."

I do not see DQ's purity lessening or his heart turning in the scene with Maritornes. Like with the prostitutes at the inn of his first sally, DQ's idea of the chivalric code causes him to treat all women with the highest level of dignity and respect as if they were princesses or ladies of the court. Where there any chivalric romances that would teach him how to deal with or even recognize prostitutes?

I do not see his head or his heart turning or even the beginnings of his being unfaithful to Dulcinea. Instead, the joke seems to be that he has such a high opinion of himself that he believes Maritornes, a woman so unappealing that she would make any man but a mule driver vomit, is a great beauty that is trying to seduce him, and he has to turn her down without insulting or embarrassing her. First he reassures Maritornes she is a great beauty bestowing him with great gifts:

“Would that I were able, O beauteous and exalted lady, to repay the great boon thou hast granted me with the sight of thy sublime beauty,"

Then he tries to let her down gently by reasoning he cannot satisfy her desire for him because his wounds are too great:

"but Fortune, which never wearies of pursuing the virtuous, hath chosen to place me in this bed, where I lie so bruised and broken that even if I, with all my heart, desired to satisfy thine own desires, I could not."

Then he further explains even if he was healthy, his devotion to Dulcinea would prevent things from going further:

"Further, added to this impossibility is another even greater, which is the promise of faithfulness that I have sworn to the incomparable Dulcinea of Toboso, the sole mistress of my most hidden thoughts;"

And finally he again reassures Maritornes of her great beauty as a gift that he would under different circumstances be a fool to turn down:

"if this great obstacle did not loom between us, I would not be so foolish a knight as to turn away from so gladsome an opportunity as this that thy great kindness affords me.”

In short, DQ puts himself in the friend zone just before the mule driver knocks him out.

[Ashley]

Thomas wrote: "What does it mean that the rest of the history of Don Quixote was written in Arabic? Is this a simple "historical" fact? Or is there more to it? "

I think that by muddling the roles of audience/author/translator, Cervantes is effectively inviting us into a madness similar to DQ’s. Defined roles aren’t clear, maybe many things are true at once.

[Ashley]

Thomas wrote: "Are Marcela and Dulcinea analogous in any way?"

Yep. Marcela basically says "Hey, I'm not responsible for this guy's demise. He imagined this whole romance. The reality is that he just had a crush, I didn't do anything to encourage him."

DQ is also a man with a crush. He's putting Dulcinea on a pedestal in his imagination. Does his demise await?

I also thought it funny that DQ threatens anyone who follows Marcela but, what does he do? Follow Marcella. Of course.

[Ashley]

Tamara wrote: "Doesn't DQ go after Marcela to protect her?..."

I think a lot of the irony/humor comes from the chasm between what we as reader's see (DQ acting with noble intentions) and what the characters see (DQ is delusional and aggressively dangerous.

[Ashley]

Ian wrote: "The Arabic "source" for the story is (as I pointed out inside "spoiler" warnings, back when we were discussing tho Prologue), a typical ploy of chivalric romances, in which the author often claims to be transmitting something from another language, written by someone who knew first-hand what he described..."

Also, myths have a long history. You may have one person’s retelling, but the who was the original “author” of the tale?

[Rafael]

Ian wrote: "The Arabic "source" for the story is (as I pointed out inside "spoiler" warnings, back when we were discussing tho Prologue), a typical ploy of chivalric romances, in which the author often claims to be transmitting something from another language, written by someone who knew first-hand what he described."

Tolkien used the same literary device in some of his stories.

[Rafael]

It was very remarkable to Cervantes to create a character like Marcella. Her speech was so modern, but even today not so many men would create such speech for a woman.

[Rafael]

That medicine that only works with knights must be very tasteful. What a scene must have be that one with one vomiting on the other.

[Thomas]

David wrote: "I do not see DQ's purity lessening or his heart turning in the scene with Maritornes. Like with the prostitutes at the inn of his first sally, DQ's idea of the chivalric code causes him to treat all women with the highest level of dignity and respect "

I didn't mean to suggest that DQ is untrue, but that he is subject to the same erotic desires as other men. I would argue that these feelings are in fact necessary for him as a foil, as something to fight against -- just as he needs giants and enchanters and all other forces of imagined evil -- because they help define his character.

On a somewhat related note, why does DQ refer to Dulcinea, and Grisostomo to Marcela, as "my sweet enemy" and "that mortal enemy". Why enemy?

[Chris]

David @37 - Wow, I didn't come away after reading that scene that way at all, so I went back & re-read it. I can see some of your points. He does state that he wants to remain true Dulcinea. His language is that of a chivalrous knight, but he also might believe it as he is wrapped up in is fantasy. I still do believe that the beginning of the scene where he pops up in bed when she enters, shows an awareness just as keen as Rocinante's sniffing out the mares. When she collides into him in the dark he seized her by the wrist and, pulling her toward him, while she dared not say a word, forced her to sit on the bed. Then he touched her chemise.
while he begins his compliments & gentle rejection, she is extremely agitated & perspiring freely at finding herself held so firmly by Don Quixote...attempted without saying a word to break free.
So I certainly don't see her as the seducer and did see DQ as the one who initiated the contact & in his delusion it didn't seem to connect that she had no interest in him.

[Thomas]

Ashley wrote: "I think that by muddling the roles of audience/author/translator, Cervantes is effectively inviting us into a madness similar to DQ’s."

Yes! The madness of fiction. Don't we have to be a little crazy to read fiction? Isn't there something a little crazy about developing attachments and feelings and opinions about people we know have no basis at all in reality?

[Xan]

A couple of highlights I made.

Chapter 15

SP and DQ, having been thoroughly bludgeoned, lay on a hill next to Rocinante. SP speaks of defending one's honor.

SP replies:

"Senor, I'm a peaceful mild, and quiet man, and I know how to conceal any insult because I have a wife and children to support and care for."

What a fascinating response. It says so much about life. DQ, a single man with nothing better to do and no immediate family to care for, is out and about the countryside looking for honor and conquest. But SP, a married man with family, provides a very different perspective. Not chivalrous, and certainly not bold, but perhaps more realistic and honest. A comment about the importance of family and roots?

Chapter 18

More of the same.

SP wishes to return home because it is harvest time (or that's his excuse).

DQ responds: What greater Joy can there be in the world, what pleasure can equal that of conquering in battle and defeating one's enemy? None, most certainly none.

Here's a man who, consumed by the romantic idea of conquest, carefully skirts its uncomfortable realities. Tragedy amidst comedy.

[Tamara]

Thomas wrote: "Yes! The madness of fiction. Don't we have to be a little crazy to read fiction? Isn't there something a little crazy about developing attachments and feelings and opinions about people we know have no basis at all in reality?.."

I think it's quite the opposite. You have to be crazy not to read fiction.

It's by reading fiction, developing attachments and forming opinions about people who aren't real, by escaping the prison of our own minds and seeing the world through someone else's lens that we are able to expand our horizons and cultivate an understanding and compassion for people who are real.

[David]

Thomas wrote: "I didn't mean to suggest that DQ is untrue, but that he is subject to the same erotic desires as other men."

I agree. Like every husband who has ever been accused of enjoying the view at the beach, DQ would probably respond with, "Well, I'm not dead you know."

I also agree it is a struggle that defines DQ as it defined several knights, if not most with reputations as lovers struggled with, most recently we read of Sir Gawain's struggles and most notably, Lancelot, who tragically failed.

[Tamara]

Thomas @47--And, I might add, the more we read fiction and engage with fictional characters and walk, however briefly, in their moccasins, the more we learn about ourselves--our likes and dislikes, how and where we differ from others, etc. etc.

And we get to do all of this and learn all of this without having the messy entanglements that can sometimes characterize relations with real people.

What's not to love about that?

[Ian]

Rafael wrote: "Tolkien used the same literary device in some of his stories...."

I didn't mention Tolkien because he has no value as a precedent for Cervantes, but yes, it seems to be part of the same tradition.

However, Tolkien was equipped to carry the supposition several stage farther. As a philologist, a professional scholar of languages, he was able to create relationships between his postulated Westron and other, non-Elvish, languages. This is not immediately evident, but it is mentioned (e.g., the ancient language of the Rohirrim was the same as that of the ancestral hobbits, before both migrated in different directions).

There is a competent, indeed fairly technical study available on line. See "The Westron Turned into Modern English: The Translator and Tolkien’s Web of Languages," by Thomas Honegger,
published in Thomas Honegger (ed.). 2004. Translating Tolkien. Cormarë Series 6. Zurich and Berne: Walking Tree Publishers, 1-20.
Abstract: "Tolkien’s presentation of The Lord of the Rings as a translation out of the original Westron into modern English inspired him to go one step further and reproduce the relationship between the various languages of Middle-earth by means of linguistic transposition (e.g. Rohirric = Old English, Language of Dale = Old Norse). The resulting ‘web of languages’ presents itself as a highly complex and not always fully coherent structure and poses an additional challenge to every translator."

https://www.academia.edu/12229118/_Th...

[David]

Is it just me, or does anyone else hear John Neville channeling Don Quixote in his portrayal of the title character of Terry Gilliam's, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen? Especially when he address the beautiful ladies?

[Kerstin]

The slapstick has me in stitches. How many times can you get beat up into a pulp and still be able to ride into another adventure?