data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d67f4/d67f482f82c63c53558b6d88503a93c68072dafe" alt=""
Buy
this book at Amazon.com!
|
For tomorrow's class, we'll focus on two aspects
of this irreverent, mind-boggling text: IMITATION and PARADOX.
- paradox refers to the funhouse-mirror, now-you-see-it-now-you-don't
aspect of the novel. Please look especially closely at the following
passages: pp 74-78 (suspension and resumption of story); Part II, Prologue
(pp. 467-470); DQ and SP's conversation about the "fake" DQ
II, with Samson Carrasco (pp. 484-492); The Cave of Montesinos (pp.
614ff.); Clavinleño (pp. 721ff.); the encounter with a character
from the "fake" DQ II (pp 926-930); and the ending
(pp. 930-840). Note that DQ's "real name" changes again
on p. 936. Are we left, finally, with anything that isn't in
doubt? What do you suppose the point is?
-
imitation is an important aspect of the literary-critical
subtext of the novel. Of the book's notable characters--the narrator(s?),
DQ, SP, the barber, the priest, the canon, Gines de Pasamonte (p.
176ff.), Chrysostom and Marcela (pp. 90-95)--how many are engaged
in imitating something? How many are engaged in imitating
literature? What about Cervantes himself?
In the discussions about literature
that crop up frequently, how is the notion of "imitation"
used? What does "good" literature imitate? How about "bad"
literature? See esp. pp 426 ff. (the canon), p. 202 (Don Quixote),
pp. 56ff. (the Inquisition of books). Given that several different
perspectives on these questions are presented (DQ's, the priest's,
the barber's, the canon's, and the narrator's), which do you think
is authoritative and why? (Don't forget to consider possible counter-arguments...)
|
|