Classics and the Western Canon discussion
Don Quixote - Revisited
>
Part 2: Chapters LXII - LXVIII
date
newest »
newest »
Thomas wrote: "Is there a "real" Don Quixote (or Alonso Quijano) beneath the self-inventions, or is Don Quixote whoever Don Quixote says he is?.."Maybe the "real" DQ is someone who has to believe in some sort of ideology (I'm not sure that's the right word I need) and act upon it.
He becomes a knight errant and adopts all the trappings of knight errantry. He has a framework or guideline which he can adhere to and which gives his life meaning and purpose. He knows the rules of this "ideology" and follows them unequivocally.
When he is forced into retirement, he substitutes one "ideology" for another--that of a shepherd. He wants to adopt all the paraphernalia of living the life of a shepherd. He'll buy some sheep, roam mountains and meadows, sing songs, live off the land, write verses, adopt a more suitable name, etc. etc. His planned immersion in shepherdhood (is there such a word?) is total--just as his immersion in knight errantry is total.
It seems to me that DQ is someone who searches for a purpose to his life. He needs to have something to believe in, something he can commit to that guides him and provides him with direction on how to live his life. The particular "ideology"--whether it is knight errantry or shepherdhood is not really relevant. What's important is his longing to find meaning and to follow a path that gives his life meaning.
Isn't that something we can all relate to? Isn't that why the novel has survived all this time?
Tamara wrote: "Thomas wrote: "Is there a "real" Don Quixote (or Alonso Quijano) beneath the self-inventions, or is Don Quixote whoever Don Quixote says he is?.."Maybe the "real" DQ is someone who has to believe..."
Yes, a person who has lost the curiosity to learn something or the will to find meaning in life is probably a very depressed person indeed. Curiosity is receiving the attention of many neuroscientists with its role in maintaining both mental and physical health in the elderly, and policies are working towards incorporating social participation and reeducation of the elderly population. As the population in many developed countries is rapidly aging and the rapidly evolving labor market that forces people to retrain and adapty ever more rapidly , DQ might be a book that has even more meaning for the future.
Borum wrote: "Curiosity is receiving the attention of many neuroscientists with its role in maintaining both mental and physical health in the elderly, and policies are working towards incorporating social participation and reeducation of the elderly population..."Very interesting.
Tamara wrote: "It seems to me that DQ is someone who searches for a purpose to his life. He needs to have something to believe in, something he can commit to that guides him and provides him with direction on how to live his life. The particular "ideology"--whether it is knight errantry or shepherdhood is not really relevant. What's important is his longing to find meaning and to follow a path that gives his life meaning."What gives me pause is not so much that he needs a purpose, but that the purpose provided by knight errantry is so easily replaced, or that DQ is willing to accept a substitute for it. The code he adheres to is at the core of his personality, and that doesn't go away, but his need for a shell is ever present, whether it be chivalry or shepherding. And as much as I admire his sense of honor and integrity, his need for a cover disguise is what makes him comical, and vulnerable to the predations of people like the Duke and Duchess.. I'd like to think DQ could have purpose in life by living as a simple but honorable hidalgo, but then he would merely be Alonso Quijano and not Don Quixote.
Sancho, on the other hand, has no need for ideology. He is simply trying to get ahead, get fed, and be happy. I think a lot of us can relate to that too!
Thomas wrote: "Is there a "real" Don Quixote (or Alonso Quijano) beneath the self-inventions, or is Don Quixote whoever Don Quixote says he is?.."Tamara wrote: " What's important is his longing to find meaning and to follow a path that gives his life meaning."
Now, nearly at the close of DQ, is a good time to step back and consider the book as a whole unencumbered by particulars. Don Quixote himself is a memorable character, which in itself is a reason to read the book. But what if we think of Don Quixote, at least for a moment, not as an individual character but as part of a whole character. Seen this way, Don Quixote is about purposefulness and meaning in life, and Sancho Panza is about the practical life. The Don Quixote/Sancho Panza whole character has and tries to live by purpose and ideals, yet is immersed in the practicalities and vicissitudes of everyday life. The interweaving, interdependence, and becoming of these two sides of a complete person is for me the essence of the novel. DQ is about how should one live.
Without suggesting that there is an exact parallel, I am put in mind of Freud’s concepts of the superego and ego (with nary a nod to the id). Consider the following summary definitions from Encyclopedia Britannica:
“The superego is the ethical component of the personality and provides the moral standards by which the ego operates. The superego’s criticisms, prohibitions, and inhibitions form a person’s conscience, and its positive aspirations and ideals represent one’s idealized self-image, or “ego ideal.”
“Ego, in psychoanalytic theory, [is] that portion of the human personality which is experienced as the “self” or “I” and is in contact with the external world through perception. It is said to be the part that remembers, evaluates, plans, and in other ways is responsive to and acts in the surrounding physical and social world.”
Gary wrote: "But what if we think of Don Quixote, at least for a moment, not as an individual character but as part of a whole character. Seen this way, Don Quixote is about purposefulness and meaning in life, and Sancho Panza is about the practical life. .."That's a really interesting point and it's sort of related to how I'm seeing the novel.
I’m wondering if it is possible to view the novel as a plea for balance.
DQ and Sancho are two individuals who couldn’t be more different. They have very different aspirations, dispositions, and physical attributes. One is tall, lanky, and has grand visions of doing good in the world; the other is short, squat, and has grand visions of feeding his belly. One has lofty aspirations; the other has earthy wisdom.
Even though these two are total opposites, we see them inching closer together as the novel progresses until, eventually, they forge a genuine friendship, grow to rely on one another, and care deeply for one another. Each is transformed and influenced by his counterpart. Sancho grows in wisdom and intellect; DQ becomes more grounded as a result of Sancho’s influence.
Perhaps what is being suggested here is that neither extreme is sufficient. Lofty aspirations to do good in the world are highly commendable, but you have to put food in your stomach and plant your feet on terra firma. And while the desire to fill one’s belly and find happiness is also commendable, that cannot be all there is to life. There has to be more, a purpose, a goal--whether it be to improve oneself or to help others or both.
Perhaps what the novel is suggesting is that neither extreme is sufficient. You need to find a balance. DQ, with his altruistic desire to right wrongs, needs a Sancho to anchor him; Sancho needs a DQ to remind him to look up at the stars.
Gary wrote: "The interweaving, interdependence, and becoming of these two sides of a complete person is for me the essence of the novel. DQ is about how should one live."
I agree completely.
On a related note, I am reminded of Icarus. His father cautioned him against extremes: don't fly too close to the sun because your wings will melt; don't fly too close to the ocean because you'll drown. Steer a middle path and you'll be safe.
If only a Sancho had been around to help Icarus. He might not have gone plummeting into the ocean :)
Tamara wrote: "Perhaps what the novel is suggesting is that neither extreme is sufficient. You need to find a balance."DQ offers this advice on a number of occasions throughout the book, but he is always offering this advice to others, usually Sancho. It brings Aristotle's practical mean to mind, rather than Plato's idealism. That always surprises me. On the other hand, it might be a setup, because invariably someone or something reminds him of chivalry, or Dulcinea, and his reason goes out the window. He can't resist the draw of chivalry. It's like an addiction for him.
Thomas wrote: "because invariably someone or something reminds him of chivalry, or Dulcinea, and his reason goes out the window. He can't resist the draw of chivalry. It's like an addiction for him..."Does Cervantes think Don Quixote is crazy? Well, without exception other characters in DQ - even Sancho Panza - say Quixote is crazy whenever he is blinded to “reality” and caught up in a chivalry wherein a pure heart and strong right arm can right the wrongs of the world; he finds purpose and, dare I say, joy in this quest. He reminds me of the holy fool character of many literatures who acts outlandishly but sheds light on uncommon truths.
Yes, Don Quixote is crazy in the eyes of the world and as much as Cervantes seems to like and even admire his creation, he would agree with the line attributed to Dr. Seuss: “Being crazy isn’t enough.”
Gary wrote: "Does Cervantes think Don Quixote is crazy?"The only way to know this is by reading what he wrote, and we know that he wrote deliberately (as opposed to the way Avellaneda wrote, and Orbaneja painted: "he painted or wrote whatever came out.") Sometimes Don Quixote is crazy, sometimes he is not. What is certain is that he suffers from an obsession, like most of us, though for most of us it is to a lesser degree.
There is also the matter of an enchanted head, a silly gimmick I find quite amusing, and the tale of the Morisco Ricote and his daughter. Ricote seems to be introduced in a rather abrupt way in Chapter LIV, but the reason for his introduction -- the story of Ana Felix and Don Gaspar -- is not picked up again until nine chapters later. Is this way of inserting side-stories into the novel better or more satisfying than the way they appear in Part 1?