On Cervantes
After reading both The Dialogue of the dogs and the excerpts from Don Quixote I feel as though Cervantes did a very good job of drawing his reader into the stories. Although both are fictional works, real lessons or ideas can be gotten from them. If the consumer relates to a certain aspect of the story, then that part of the fiction seems, maybe even is, more real. Every reader associates differently with a text. One can relate in an individual way, or one can see a larger message. The Cervantes pieces that we read contained more than the simple fiction that makes a story.
Although I liked it, Don Quixote was the harder of the two to analyze. The main reason for this difficulty was that we did not read the whole piece. The excerpts we read begin by telling us about Don Quixote. We are told about his way of life, who he lives with, where and how he lives, but most importantly and in the most detail, we are told about the books he read. He reads books about knight-errants and chivalrous acts. He reads these books so much, and comes to believe in them so strongly, that from almost the onset, he is considered crazy. "when his wits were gone beyond repair, he came to conceive of the strangest idea that ever occurred to any madman in the world". His plan was to become a knight-errant like those he had read about. Don Quixote goes on to have many adventures which would appear to confirm is madness. Looking at him more closely, however, one can see some important traits and qualities. He is a good person. In other words, his motives are good even if some think his actions are crazy. He seems to be some sort of idealist. He sets out to do brave and valiant deeds and he sees no reason why he should not accomplish his goals. He will become famous and gain all sorts of riches and rewards. He will do so well that he will have the means of giving Sancho Panza an island to be ruler of. Don Quixote does not doubt he will succeed. Nothing is able to put down the spirit of Don Quixote until the end when he is vanquished by the Knight of the White Moon. As he is dying the character of Don Quixote is made to realize his previous madness. He is once again Alonso Quijano the Good. Yet, in the end, it is the very people who first opposed what they considered his delusions, that seemed determined to continue the character of Don Quixote. They still call Don Quixote and they speak of all his deeds and plans as if they were not cloaked with madness. They speak of the Lady Dulcinea and of becoming shepherds as had been planned. It appears that they had become accustomed, even fond, of the character of Don Quixote, and were not willing to let if go.
The end of Don Quixote, in which the friends continue Don Quixote's fiction, brings up some questions. If Don Quixote were crazy, why, after he seemed to be "cured" , would they keep up his fantasies? It also questions reality. How wrong could the reality of Don Quixote have been? He was happy under what the others considered a delusion. He was enjoying himself. They too, must have gained something from him or they would not have kept his story alive after he claimed to have recovered his senses. It almost seems that after living so long in the mind set, the world of, Don Quixote, the other characters were used to it, maybe even found it more enjoyable then their own realities.
The Dialogue of the Dogs is full of things that can tell us about the era surrounding its writing. In this text a lot of things are said directly. It is after all, two dogs, and not two people who are talking. Berganza's story says a lot about the world they live in. He speaks of the corruption in the slaughterhouse and in the police force. He tells us about gypsies and witches. I found his encounter with the witch very interesting. Her story about his mother being a human and him having been changed magically into a dog, I found hard to believe, but within her story she revealed interesting information. Cañizares talks a lot about witchcraft and she mentions the "gentlemen of the Inquisition". One is able to see what the general image of witchcraft might have been at the time that Cervantes wrote the story. Berganzas description of her also fits in with what one might imagine a witch to look like. She is incredibly ugly. I also found interesting the point of view which Cervantes chose to give the dogs. They definitely appeared to be like Spanish Christians. They share their prejudices. Berganza surely has a negative view of the gypsies, something not uncommon in Spain at that time. He seems to feel they are all linked together in order to rob from everyone else. Berganza even seems to classifies himself with Spanish Christians. When speaking of the gypsies he says, "they steal from us", US, as if he is one of the humans. This, along with the way in which the two dogs spoke, and the learning they appeared to have, Berganza knew Latin, Cipión knew some philosophy, made them seem all the more human, even while it wasn't possible to forget that they were in fact dogs.
In class we saw a slide of a painting by Velásquez. The painting contains two obvious perspectives. As a whole, it is the perspective of the king and queen. What we see when we look at the work is what they were seeing as the work was being done. The other perspective in the painting is that of the artist. The artist is in the painting looking out at the royal parents. They in turn are reflected in the mirror that is at the back of the painting. These layers of views seem very like the works of Cervantes that we read. There is never just one viewpoint. Don Quixote may have been crazy, but people seemed to come round to his side at the end, so maybe he was the one living in reality. Maybe there are multiple realities at the same time. The dogs in The Dialogue of the Dogs may have really been dogs, or maybe the whole thing was the imagination of the man in hospital. If it were imaginary, does that change what it means? There are many sides to each story, just as the painting has many perspectives.
Don Quixote was, for me, a thought provoking piece of work. The Dialogue of the Dogs was more of a fun piece. At the same time it was gave a lot of insight into the epoch in which it had been composed. I really enjoyed both stories.
Click here to let Roberto know if you wish to respond to this essay
Back to Essays