Cecily's Reviews > Don Quixote
Don Quixote
by
by
Cecily's review
bookshelves: classics, humour, favourites, unreliable-narrators, postmodern-meta, roadtrips-and-travel
May 30, 2008
bookshelves: classics, humour, favourites, unreliable-narrators, postmodern-meta, roadtrips-and-travel
Whatever else Don Quixote may be, I never found it boring. Parts of it were very funny, others had wonderful similarities with Shakespeare, some bits were more serious: it's like a mini library in a single volume. Wonderful.
Overall, it has quite a Shakespearean feel - more in the plotting and tales within tales (eg The Man Who was Recklessly Curious, stolen by Mozart for Cosi fan Tutte) than the language. In fact, the story of Cardenio is thought to be the basis for Shakespeare's lost play of the same name.
Humour
Very funny - slapstick, toilet and more subtle humour, with lots of factual historical and chivalric detail as well, but it doesn't feel especially Spanish to me. Certainly long, but I don't understand why, supposedly, so few people manage to finish it. Some of DQ's delusions hurt only himself (tilting at windmills), but others lead to suffering for his "squire" Sancho Panza (tossed in a blanket) or reluctant beneficiaries of his salvation (the beaten servant, beaten even more once DQ departs) and bemuse people (mistaking inns for castles, sheep for enemy armies and ordinary women as princesses) and are used to justify theft (the golden "helmet"/bowl) and non-payment to inn-keepers. His resolute optimism in the face of severe pain and disaster is extraordinary. Meanwhile, Sancho wavers between credulity (wishfully thinking the promise of an island for him to rule will come true) and pragmatism.
Two Parts
Part II starts with Cervantes' response to the unknown writer of an unofficial sequel to part 1, though DQ, Sancho and others also critique it in early chapters. The following story presumes that part 1 is true, and shows how DQ's resulting fame affects his subsequent adventures. A very modern mix of "fact" and fiction. Some characters doubt his exploits, others pander to them, especially the duke and duchess who go to great lengths to treat him in knightly/chivalric manner, and provide new adventures (for their amusement, at the painful expense of DQ and Sancho). Sancho gets rather more scope for lengthy meanderings of jumbled and largely irrelevant proverbs. Less slapstick and more pontificating than part I - both DQ's advice to Sancho on how to govern his promised insula and when Sancho has intriguing disputes to resolve.
A Third, courtesy of Borges?
Borges wrote the short story "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote" (published in The Garden of Forking Paths ). Menard is an imaginary writer, described as if he's real, who “did not want to compose another Quixote” but “the Quixote” by combining the don and Sancho into a single character and by, in some sense, becoming Cervantes.
What Don Q Means to Me
I was wary of this book for many years; I feared it was too heavy in ounces and themes/plot/language, but only the former is true, and that can be obviated by a comfy chair (or an ebook).
I plucked up the courage to read it shortly after joining GR, partly through encouragement from others. It was a revelation, both in terms of the power of GR friends to enrich my life and my own confidence as a reader.
My enjoyment was heightened by reading it whilst my kid and their friend who was staying (both aged ~10) repeatedly watched and quoted Monty Python's Holy Grail - very appropriate!
Overall, it has quite a Shakespearean feel - more in the plotting and tales within tales (eg The Man Who was Recklessly Curious, stolen by Mozart for Cosi fan Tutte) than the language. In fact, the story of Cardenio is thought to be the basis for Shakespeare's lost play of the same name.
Humour
Very funny - slapstick, toilet and more subtle humour, with lots of factual historical and chivalric detail as well, but it doesn't feel especially Spanish to me. Certainly long, but I don't understand why, supposedly, so few people manage to finish it. Some of DQ's delusions hurt only himself (tilting at windmills), but others lead to suffering for his "squire" Sancho Panza (tossed in a blanket) or reluctant beneficiaries of his salvation (the beaten servant, beaten even more once DQ departs) and bemuse people (mistaking inns for castles, sheep for enemy armies and ordinary women as princesses) and are used to justify theft (the golden "helmet"/bowl) and non-payment to inn-keepers. His resolute optimism in the face of severe pain and disaster is extraordinary. Meanwhile, Sancho wavers between credulity (wishfully thinking the promise of an island for him to rule will come true) and pragmatism.
Two Parts
Part II starts with Cervantes' response to the unknown writer of an unofficial sequel to part 1, though DQ, Sancho and others also critique it in early chapters. The following story presumes that part 1 is true, and shows how DQ's resulting fame affects his subsequent adventures. A very modern mix of "fact" and fiction. Some characters doubt his exploits, others pander to them, especially the duke and duchess who go to great lengths to treat him in knightly/chivalric manner, and provide new adventures (for their amusement, at the painful expense of DQ and Sancho). Sancho gets rather more scope for lengthy meanderings of jumbled and largely irrelevant proverbs. Less slapstick and more pontificating than part I - both DQ's advice to Sancho on how to govern his promised insula and when Sancho has intriguing disputes to resolve.
A Third, courtesy of Borges?
Borges wrote the short story "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote" (published in The Garden of Forking Paths ). Menard is an imaginary writer, described as if he's real, who “did not want to compose another Quixote” but “the Quixote” by combining the don and Sancho into a single character and by, in some sense, becoming Cervantes.
What Don Q Means to Me
I was wary of this book for many years; I feared it was too heavy in ounces and themes/plot/language, but only the former is true, and that can be obviated by a comfy chair (or an ebook).
I plucked up the courage to read it shortly after joining GR, partly through encouragement from others. It was a revelation, both in terms of the power of GR friends to enrich my life and my own confidence as a reader.
My enjoyment was heightened by reading it whilst my kid and their friend who was staying (both aged ~10) repeatedly watched and quoted Monty Python's Holy Grail - very appropriate!
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Don Quixote.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
May 1, 2008
–
Finished Reading
May 30, 2008
– Shelved
June 9, 2008
– Shelved as:
classics
June 9, 2008
– Shelved as:
humour
November 21, 2008
– Shelved as:
favourites
July 20, 2024
– Shelved as:
unreliable-narrators
July 20, 2024
– Shelved as:
postmodern-meta
July 20, 2024
– Shelved as:
roadtrips-and-travel
Comments Showing 1-50 of 69 (69 new)
message 1:
by
Jim
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
05 juin 2012 07:29
reply
|
flag
That is interesting. There are, I think, three kinds of similarities-plagiarism (Marston and Schiller plagiarised Shakespeare a lot), genre similarity-Ngaio Marsh and Agatha Christie type similarities of situation, puzzle-who committed the murder, as belonging to the whodunnit genre, and similarities because they come from the same hand, in this case Shakespeare. What are you grounds if any, for tending to believe that the similarities to which you refer belong to the third category?
With respect, no, it doesn't.
My saying that I saw similarities makes no suggestion that I have any evidence for a causal link.
Bear in mind that I wrote this review about 5 years ago (the date shown is when I last edited it), so it's only to be expected that my memory of any specific examples has faded over the years. In fact, that is the reason I write much more detailed reviews now.
I can look at a pattern in the clouds and see something that looks like a dragon, without that implying that I think it actually is a dragon. I can see a person who looks like the milkman, but that doesn't imply that I think he's the milkman's child, merely that I see a resemblance.
My reviews are my personal musings on what I have read, written mainly for my benefit, but shown in a public place. I make no claim of any academic credentials relating to literature or history, so I see no way in which I can justifiably be accused of "misleading" anyone!
Personally, I think that's what makes Shakespeare so inexhaustible: the perfect mixture of bawdy humor, fine poetry, dramatic plots, and philosophical speculation.
Thanks, Jibran. I've only read this Grossman one, so I can't compare it with others, but I found it very readable, without being anachronistically modern.
However, we have plenty of tales of knights errant (King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table), so it has a degree of familiarity.
Thanks for the first, but I'm not sure about the second: I don't like the idea of an end to novels!
;)
RK-ique wrote: "We should all get out there and lose some battles against windmills. Thanks for the review."
Amen to the first, and thanks for the second!
I did indeed have a great time with DQ, but it was a few years ago now, but it is, as you say, unforgettable. Someone liked this review earlier today, and suddenly quite a lot of people are.
What does it mean to me? Quixote=Trump and now I can just laugh at the antics of both. Sad, isn't it?"
Better late than never, for both of us. I should probably reread it, but my TBR is so high, and I certainly don't want to do with Trump in mind!
What does it mean to me..."
Agreed! Now, the whole Trump thing feels anti-climactic. The latest news: Melania's father is a convicted felon and lied on his citizenship application...or something. I don't know the whole story, but no one could ever figure out what, exactly, were Melania's special characteristics/abilities that allowed her to be a citizen. Wild speculation: Putin placed Melania's family here? Okay, I'm straying into Robert Ludlum territory, I know. Let's just go on and read great books! Quixote is very funny and I didn't know that until I started reading it. Just when I needed a laugh, I read Quixote AND there is a new David Sedaris book on the shelves!
Really?! I wish.
Greg wrote: "Let's just go on and read great books!...."
Amen.
Really?! I wish.
Greg wrote: "Let's just go on and read great books!...."
Amen."
I've read four fiction novels from 2018 so far and was disappointed in them. I'll read the sixthand final volume of Knausguard's work (can't wait!) and I'm hoping for a new Wolf book from Anne Rice, but no more political stuff.
Oh dear. That's a poor result. I've generally found GR to be very helpful for me picking books I'll enjoy. I hope things pick up for you.
Actually, I just finished reading 50 authors in my "Mid-20th Century American Crime Readathon" and the only truly bad work, thus far, has been Gore Vidal's first book, so 49 of 50 good to great authors is pretty good! Now, round 2, I am going to read a second work by as many of those authors I can find, even Vidal, cause he eventually wrote "Burr"! (He wrote his early detective fiction under the name of Edgar Box.)