DQ por Picasso
Los capítulos VI a X de la primera parte Del Ingenioso Hidalgo Don Quijote de la Mancha contienen casi todo el ADN de la novela. Los libros de caballerías de DQ están sometidos a un cuidadoso examen (¡y a veces un no tan cuidadoso examen!) por el cura y el barbero antes de ser quemados por haber causado daño al juicio de su dueño. Don Quijote recluta a Sancho Panza para servirle de escudero. Después del célebre fracaso también conocido como la aventura de los molinos, nuestro protagonista se mete en su primer combate singular como un caballero andante...y está a punto de ganar la batalla contra el "vizcaíno" cuando el narrador de repente interrumpe la historia para decirnos que la "historia verdadera" de Don Quijote es nada más que una traducción de un manuscrito arábigo encontrado en el Alcaná, o calle de mercaderes, en Toledo. ¡Uno de los intervalos más intencionalmente intrusos en todos los tiempos!
Sin saber dónde empezar con todo esto, me gustaría regresar al tema de la metaficción una vez más. Aunque el episodio sobre el escrutinio de la biblioteca de don Quixote siempre me da risa, es difícil ignorar el lado simultaneamente juguetón y provocador de Cervantes al verlo insertarse en el hilo narrativo de tal manera. Hablando de La Galatea, publicada por Cervantes en el año 1585, el cura dice:
--Mucho años ha que es grande amigo mío ese Cervantes, y sé que es más versado en desdichas que en versos. Su libro tiene algo de buena invención; propone algo, y no concluye nada: es menester esperar la segunda parte que promete; quizá con la enmienda alcanzará del todo la misericordia que ahora se le niega; y entre tanto que esto se ve, tenedle recluso en vuestra posada, señor compadre. (I, VI, 75)
En otras palabras, don Quijote posee un libro escrito por Cervantes, él que está escribiendo otro libro sobre las hazañas de don Quijote. ¡Bueno, anotado el guiño por parte de Miguelito! ¿Pero qué podemos decir de un capítulo donde el quemar de los libros se describe como "la muerte de los inocentes" [67]? Al menos en parte, Cervantes parecería estar burlándose del juicio crítico del cura y el barbero, claro. No obstante, también hace referencia de los auto-de-fé españoles al comparar el quemar a uno en el poste con el incendio de los libros. Su sentido de humor es más que un poco subversivo, ¿de acuerdo?
Por supuesto, la confesión de Cervantes acerca del descubrimiento del manuscrito en Toledo es subversiva por otra razones. Primero, tenemos las ramificaciones artísticas para considerar. Dado que el narrador "Cervantes" se presenta como el "segundo autor desta obra" en el capítulo VIII (89), ¿qué debemos pensar acerca del primer autor de la obra? ¿Es importante que la obra conocida como Don Quijote de la Mancha es la traducción de otra obra, una que se llama Historia de don Quijote de la Mancha, escrita por Cide Hamete Benengeli, historiador arábigo (I, X, 94)? ¿Estamos leyendo una obra de ficción o una "verdadera historia" como el autor la describe tan frecuentemente? Estos tipos de preguntas, quizá pedantescos en sí mismas, hacen hincapié en el problema de autoría en la novela. Un anticipo: como un buen postmodernista, Cervantes va a explorar el lado cómico de todo esto a lo largo de la novela. En segundo lugar, la elección de Toledo como la fuente de la historia de don Quijote es genial por razones históricas. Durante la Edad Media, Toledo fue la capital de los cristianos durante la Reconquista y el centro de traducción en la peninsula ibérica. Al atribuir la autoria del Quijote a un historiador arábigo, Cervantes en efecto baraja las cartas de su "traducción" para proponer una nueva mezcla de la veracidad y las mentiras en su historia que es definitivamente española. Pero ésta es una sorpresa irónica: a la hora de la escritura de la novela, los moros, como los libros de don Quijote, habían sido expulsados del país. Próximamente: DQ, capítulos XI a XV.
*
Chapters 6 through 10 of the first part of On the Ingenious Hidalgo Don Quixote of La Mancha contain almost all of the DNA of the novel in full. DQ's books of chivalry are scrutinized (and sometimes not scrutinized at all!) by the priest and the barber before being burned for the harm they've done to their owner's mind. Don Quixote recruits Sancho Panza to serve as his squire. After the celebrated failure known as the adventure of the windmills, our protagonist engages in his first single combat as a knight errant...and is on the verge of winning the battle against "the Basque" before the narrator suddenly interrupts the story to tell us that the "true history" of Don Quixote is nothing more than a translation of an Arabic manuscript found in the Alcaná, or market street, in Toledo. One of the most intentionally intrusive chapter breaks in history!
Without knowing quite where to begin with all this, I'd like to return to the metafiction theme one more time. Although the episode dealing with the scrutiny of Don Quixote's library always makes me laugh, it's difficult to ignore the way in which Cervantes is simultaneously playful and provocative in inserting himself into the narrative. Speaking of La Galatea, published by Cervantes in the year 1585, the priest says:
"This Cervantes has been a good friend of mine for many years, and I know that he is better versed in misfortune than in verses. His book has a certain creativity; it proposes something and concludes nothing. We have to wait for the second part he has promised; perhaps with that addition it will achieve the mercy denied to it now; in the meantime, keep it locked away in your house, my friend" (I, 6, 52; note: this quote and all that follow below come from the Edith Grossman translation).
So Don Quixote owns a book by Cervantes, the same guy who's writing yet another book about the exploits of Don Quixote. OK, I see you working, Miguel! But what can we say about a work where the burning of books is described as "the death of those innocents" [46]? At least in part, Cervantes would seem to be making fun of the critical judgements pronounced by the priest and the barber. However, he also alludes to the Spanish autos-da-fé in comparing book-burning to people-burning. His sense of humor is more than a little subversive, don't you think?
Of course, Cervantes' confession about the discovery of the manuscript in Toledo is subversive for altogether different reasons. First, there are the artistic ramifications to consider. Given that the narrator "Cervantes" presents himself as the "second author of this work" in chapter 8 (64-65), what ought we to think about the first author of this work? Is it important that the work known as Don Quixote of La Mancha is the translation of another work, one known as the History of Don Quixote of La Mancha. Written by Cide Hamete Benengeli, an Arab Historian (I, 9, 67)? Are we reading a work of fiction or a "true history" as the author so often puts it? These types of questions, perhaps a bit pedantic in and of themselves, emphasize problems of authorship in the novel. A preview: like a good postmodernist, Cervantes will exploit the situation for full comic effect throughout the length of the novel. In the second place, the choice of Toledo as the source of Don Quixote's story is inspired for historic reasons as well. During the Middle Ages, Toledo was not only the Christian capital during the Reconquest but the center of translations on the Iberian peninsula. On attributing authorship of the Quixote to an Arab historian, Cervantes is in effect shuffling the deck of his "translation" to propose a new mix of truth and lies in his distinctly Spanish story. However, it's quite an ironic twist: at the time of the writing of the novel, the Moors, like Don Quixote's books, had been kicked out of the country. Coming up soon: DQ, chapters 11-15.
And this is just Part I!
ResponderBorrarThe strange thing, or wonderful thing, about the book burning scene, is all the books that are not burned. Not burned but pilfered!
*Amateur Reader: I got bogged down trying to translate my own post, but that's a wonderful point you make about the book pilfering. What a dirty trick to pull on a friend! And, yes, Part II does kick the metafictional antics into another gear, you're right.
ResponderBorrarLas bondades del Quijote, qué librazo. Decía Faulkner que al Quijote había que leerlo con fé, él lo leía todos los años. Imagino que así debe haber aprendido castellano a más no poder. El narrador de El quijote si que se atreve a hacer cortes de todo tipo e índole. Particularmente me descoloca la 2º parte cuando se habla de la 1º como un libro ya escrito y del quijo apócrifo de Avellaneda. Cómo olvidar el episodio del retablo de maese Pedro, o de las aventuras en el caballito volador. Conozco la edición con los dibujos de Picasso y Dali, de los dos, ? no me acuerdo.
ResponderBorrarEn fin Richard que disfrutes de la lectura y tu reseña está 10 puntos
The endnotes in the Rutherford version mention that Miguel de C kept promising the second part to Galatea (1585) but never produced it. There may be something there with regard to the “actual completion” of the Quixote’s 2nd part. The Galatea’s author failed to keep his promise while the Quixote’s succeeded in producing the sequel. Which means Galatea’s author isn’t as reliable as the Quixote’s? Did Miguel then intentionally abandon the Galatea's completion?
ResponderBorrarRe: authorship. One can argue that there’s a 3rd author of the book: the Spanish-speaking Moor who translated the true history of Cide Hamete Benengeli. The narrator sometimes speaks as if he is annotating the translation, sometimes undermining the quality of some translated passages and attributing it to some cultural orientation of the Moor. Cf. the way Borges undermines Miguel de C's book in favor of Monsieur Menard’s based on a passage in Chapter IX (this chapter really rocks).
I've really enjoyed your two posts. I had no idea there was so much meta stuff going on in this book! Nevertheless, I'm glad your posts are so good, so I don't have to feel like I'm missing anything whatsoever by not reading the actual book....
ResponderBorrarthe whole meta fiction angle is amazing really always considered it amodernist tool from joyce onwards to the like of auster ,but no cervantes did it 500 years earlier ,and book burning is something I ve always attach to the likes of krystal nacht and the facist regeimes of the 30's and 40's ,every 92 pages is a wonderful delight to me ,all the best stu
ResponderBorrarEs un libro que nunca acabas de terminarlo. Como decía Antonio Muñoz Molina ¿quien escribiría ahora un libro así?
ResponderBorrarYo voy poniendo en mi blog capítulo a capítulo para releerlos despacio.
Por si no lo sabéis yo vivo en La Mancha, tierra donde Cervantes se inspiró para escribir este librazo.
Pasear por estas tierras es revivir muchas escenas descritas, y no os digo que en la Mancha siempre es verano pero casi.
Me ha gustado mucho tu comentario
Un saludo
Teresa
Oh man, I desperately need to read this! Hall of Shame, indeed. I would obviously LOVE all the metafictional elements; I'm getting psyched just reading your posts. (Actually, I'm almost sort of glad I've waited so long, since my appreciation of this kind of intellectual playfulness has been increasing steadily lately.) In any case, thanks for the insight into the precociously pomo side of Cervantes. :-)
ResponderBorrar*Mario: ¡Muchísimas gracias por tu comentario tan amable! Lo irónico es que me acuerdo de la primera parte del Quijote mucho mejor que de la segunda...y sin embargo, es el segundo libro (y todo eso del Quijote apócrifo) que me pareció más asombroso en cuanto al inventivo de Cervantes. De todos modos, ha sido un placer revisitar al librazo y ahora tengo ganas de releer a esos episodios que vos mencionas. ¡Un abrazo!
ResponderBorrar*Rise: I don't remember for sure, but I believe the Galatea was the book on which Cervantes thought his reputation would rest for posterity. Such a clever, wildly imaginative author and such a bad critic of his own works! I like what you say about the multiple authors as well. Can't remember since it's been so long since I last read it, but I think there might even end up being more than three authors involved by the end--not counting the author of the "fake Quixote" who will show up later! In the meantime, must...read..."Pierre Menard"...again..soon. Cheers!
*Jill: Thanks a bunch! DQ is filled to the gills with meta stuff, and this is just the tip of the iceberg really [causing me to use extremely awkward mixed metaphors here, ha]. I hope you'll reconsider reading the novel someday, but I'll continue to keep my eyes out for some juicy quotes for you in case you're dead set against it for some reason. Cheers!
*Stu: Book burning and a full dosage of metafiction do make this seem pretty modern for something published in 1605, don't they? Glad you're enjoying the book as much as I am your readalong!
ResponderBorrar*Teresa: ¡Muchas gracias por tu visita and el comentario! Y qué honor tener una manchega en el blog durante la lectura de Don Quijote. :D Tendré que leer tus post sobre el Quijote; la idea de una entrada por cada capítulo me parece ser un buen plan (y más sano que el mío), pero al mismo tiempo estoy desfrutando leyendo a Cervantes con el grupo de lectores dedicado al asunto. ¡De todos modos, qué suerte la de vivir en La Mancha (aparte del calor)! ¡Saludos!
*Emily: I was wondering if you'd read DQ in its entirety before, but I think you'll certainly dig Cervantes' "precociously pomo" antics when/if you ever get around to it (note: I thought you wrote "porno" at first, but I couldn't remember what I'd written to give you that impression, ha ha!). In any event, glad you got a kick out of the posts and/or continue to stay psyched about DQ in general. I'm a big fan as you might have figured out, but I realize not everybody's down with the 1,000 page book scene and all!