Don Quixote - Critical Essay (1016 words)
Chivalry: A Dangerously Absurd Delusion in the Context of Modernity
Most scholars consider Don Quixote to be the first modern novel. In, “Don Quixote at 400: Still Conquering Hearts,” Ilan Stavans asks just what is the definition of modernity: “To be an underdog, to be a fool content with one's delusions, is that what modernity is about? Or is it the impulse to pursue those delusions into action? (B11)” The answer to this question can easily be inferred from reading Cervantes own statement of purpose in writing Don Quixote, which was, “to topple the ill-founded machinery of chivalric romances. (Spitzer 17)” One can refer to the dictionary to further support this argument. Don Quixote is one of the few literary characters whose name has been turned into adjectives and non-proper nouns. In, “Don Quixote at 400: Still Conquering Hearts,” Ilan Stavans mentions that, ` ` "Quixotic," "quixotism," and "quixotry," according to the Oxford English Dictionary, are all related to “Quixote," "an enthusiastic visionary person like Don Quixote, inspired by lofty and chivalrous but false or unrealizable ideals." (B11)‘ ‘ A perfect example of this characteristic can be found in Chapter IV, where the newly-knighted Don Quixote has his first encounter with someone in distress. During this episode, Don Quixote’s foolishly romantic expectation that the countryman will honor the Chivalric code is shown to be a dangerously absurd delusion in the context of modernity.
According to Marianne Sturman’s commentary for Chapter IV, “Critics infer from this adventure that Cervantes wishes to show the futility of impetuously intruding into people's lives without considering all facets of the situation. Don Quixote's intrusions stem from his will to impose his faith on everyday situations. (12)” This same faith seems to cause Don Quixote to forget that he initially distrusted the countryman’s claim that Andres lies. Don Quixote originally arrived upon the scene with the assumption that there was a wrong that needed to be undone, and the countryman’s lack of proper etiquette seems to convince him that it is Andres who was being wronged. The first indication of the countryman’s guilt is that Andres is tied to a tree while he is being whipped, to which Don Quixote immediately remarks, “it is a caitiff’s deed to attack one who cannot defend himself. (Cervantes 2002)” And following this observation, Don Quixote also does not believe the countryman’s claim that Andres lies. In the first footnote to Chapter IV of the Edith Grossman translation of Don Quixote, it is explained that “It was considered insulting to call someone a liar in front of others without first begging their pardon. (36)” But Don Quixote believes in his own righteousness so fervently, he forgets that other people may not share his conviction. This may also be a commentary on the problem of confusing self-will with truth, or faith in the divine from a Catholic context. But obviously, it benefits Andres to believe in Don Quixote, while the countryman does not find any benefit in placing his faith in Don Quixote for any longer than is necessary to remove himself from mortal danger (which lasts only as long as Don Quixote is physically present).
The servant, Andres argues that Don Quixote should not trust the countryman to keep his promise to repay Andres his back wages. The first justification Don Quixote gives for trusting the countryman is based on his own romantic ideal of human nature, reflected in the statement, “every man is the son of his own works. (Cervantes 2003)” This seems similar to the biblical moral from Romans 2:6, “God will give to each person according to what he has done,” which is often used to claim that people are judged according to their works. Don Quixote also threatens to return and punish the countryman if he does not carry out his promise to repay Andres. But, as soon as Don Quixote is out of sight, the countryman whips Andres with even greater fury than before. This scenario illustrates how might makes right only in the immediate situation, and as soon as a perceived threat is removed, many people will revert to their natural tendencies to dominate and otherwise impose their will upon others.
According to the romantic ideals of chivalry, the characteristic of “noblesse oblige” was supposed to be a required quality of knighthood. The romantic term “noblesse oblige” indicates an obligation that the more fortunate nobility are supposed to have which will compel them to help those who are less fortunate than themselves. If one believes in these romantic ideals, then this “noblesse oblige” takes the form of a social contract, which compels nobility to act selflessly for the good of all. However, such a lofty ideal can be somewhat subjective, and difficult to implement successfully. In the introduction to “The Portable Cervantes,” Samuel Putnam states that the character Don Quixote can, “be looked upon as the prototype of the modern utopian who spends himself in the interest of the general good and makes himself guilty of many a particular evil, as Don Quixote does when he comes to the rescue of the farmer’s lad, Andres.(31)”
This is a truly ironic scenario on many levels. Obviously, the juxtaposition of Don Quixote’s intent to champion the boy, Andres, against the abuses of authoritarian tyranny is met with an ironic end -- for Andres is severely beaten/whipped as soon as Don Quixote is out of sight. And, as if anyone doubted the lack of success in this venture, Don Quixote himself meets with a brutal defeat at the end of the same chapter. But if we question Cervantes’ motivation in the inclusion of this episode, we must consider that the story of Don Quixote was written for a popular audience who would relate to the plight of Andres. So, the real moral of this particular encounter seems to be that one must not rely upon external authority for justice. This moral is further supported by Putnam’s analysis that, “if there are problems to be solved, the solution lies inside man, not in external circumstance; and he who starts out to set the world right is embarking on a truly Quixotic enterprise.(30-31)”
--
Works Cited
Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de. Don Quixote. Trans. Edith Grossman. New York:
HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 2003.
---. Don Quixote. Trans Starkie, Walter. Literature of the Western World. Vol. 1: The Ancient World Through the Renaissance, 5th edition. Eds. Brian Wilkie and James Hurt. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2001.
Putnam, Samuel. The Portable Cervantes. New York: Viking Press, 1949.
Stavans, Ilan. "Don Quixote at 400: Still Conquering Hearts." Chronicle of Higher Education 51.18 (01/07/2005): B11. Academic Search Premier. Austin Community College Library, Austin, TX. 04/05/2005.
.
Spitzer, Leo. “Linguistic Perspectivism in the Don Quijote.” Cervantes (Modern Critical Views). Ed. Howard Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Sturman, Marianne. Don Quixote : Notes. Lincoln: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1964.
The Holy Bible. New International Version (NIV). Grand Rapids: International Bible Society, 1973.