The end of Don Quixote is not quite right; he has three options in light of his vanquishment: to carry on regardless as before, to give up the chivalry idea but switch to a pastoral setting (to become a shepherd) or to renounce the whole business and embrace 'normality'. He chooses the latter; an outcome that Dostoevsky considers the saddest imaginable. Certainly the choice he makes is a let down and supports Lamb's idea that Cervantes planned to end the book after Part One adding Part Two before another writer got there first. At the conclusion of the first part his chivalric narrative is working well and as the idea of multiple narratives is now commonplace each of the above three options has equal weight. Dostoevsky's notion of self deception or compounding lies with further lies is off target; Quixote is not a liar; he describes things as he sees them. We need a frame of reference within which to capture his immortality. Consider Munoz' Double Bind; here a lift goes up and down; it is nearly a real lift but not quite; more an alternative or possible lift; one of many possible lifts none of which being in any sense privileged; looking down are mysterious figures a bit like us but not quite. This is a preferred locus for Quixote; he is one of the figures up in the lift looking down on us-forever.
Showing posts with label Dostoevsky. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dostoevsky. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
charles lamb was right about don quixote
The end of Don Quixote is not quite right; he has three options in light of his vanquishment: to carry on regardless as before, to give up the chivalry idea but switch to a pastoral setting (to become a shepherd) or to renounce the whole business and embrace 'normality'. He chooses the latter; an outcome that Dostoevsky considers the saddest imaginable. Certainly the choice he makes is a let down and supports Lamb's idea that Cervantes planned to end the book after Part One adding Part Two before another writer got there first. At the conclusion of the first part his chivalric narrative is working well and as the idea of multiple narratives is now commonplace each of the above three options has equal weight. Dostoevsky's notion of self deception or compounding lies with further lies is off target; Quixote is not a liar; he describes things as he sees them. We need a frame of reference within which to capture his immortality. Consider Munoz' Double Bind; here a lift goes up and down; it is nearly a real lift but not quite; more an alternative or possible lift; one of many possible lifts none of which being in any sense privileged; looking down are mysterious figures a bit like us but not quite. This is a preferred locus for Quixote; he is one of the figures up in the lift looking down on us-forever.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
more on Sancho
Dostoevsky says Quixote comes to yearn for realism. Are not the Knight and his squire more worldly than this suggests? For example the adventure of the braying where Q abandons S in face of overwhelming odds; 'I have retreated not fled' says Q; S is unimpressed: Dostoevsky's reading is that faced with the collapse of one fantasy then Quixote (and everyone) invents a further to save the first. The two travellers have a discussion about the adventure and have no problems with realism and fantasy; pragmatism occurs. Maybe this is a turning point for S. Dostoevsky makes too literalist a reading. See blog 6 and how to answer 'what song the sirens sang'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
