Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.71 AVERAGE
3.71 AVERAGE
"He likes to whip [...] and always finds a pretext so as to make it appear as if he were punishing them." — De Sade
Is the fixation on corporal punishment and attendant slapstick humor a particular quality of disrupted socialization (from which knight-errantry has potential to arise), or does it lie in a more fundamental plane anterior to psychology— a question for Pierre Menard.
“If Alexander the Great cut the Gordian knot, saying: ‘It does not matter if it is cut or untied,’ and that did not keep him from being the universal lord of all Asia, then in the disenchantment of Dulcinea it might not matter if I whip Sancho against his will, for if the condition of this remedy is that Sancho receive some three thousand lashes, what difference does it make to me if he administers them himself or if another does, since the essence of the matter is that he receive them regardless of where they come from?”
This book is so outrageous! A man reads and loves books of chivalry so much that he decides he wants to be a knight errant, too, so he does. He gets all the things he needs, like a horse with a noble name, a noble name for himself, a squire, armour, and a lady love. It doesn't matter if some things are made up, because this man actually believes they exist. So often it speaks of his madness, and he insists that inns are actually castles and windmills are giants, or that a peasant is his Lady enchanted to look like that to torment him. Don Quixote is so devoted to his cause and it's so admirable, because he puts up with a lot doing what he does, yet he doesn't notice people laughing behind his back. So ignorance is bliss, perhaps.
Everyone has a favourite scene or two (it's so hard to choose) from Don Quixote that will never be forgotten. Mine is how Sancho Panza, DQ's squire, went away to talk with shepherds and purchase some cheese, and then DQ calls him over quickly so he can fight a wagon. He calls for his helmet, which Sancho, hurried, had put the cheese/milk quickly because he didn't know where else to put it. Rather than telling him this, Sancho gives DQ the helmet, DQ puts it on, and curds and whey drip down his face. DQ exclaims that his brains are mush and he's expiring heavily, while Sancho waits by nervously hoping not to be discovered. It's hilarious and ridiculous, and I've never read anything like it. Crazy adventure after crazy adventure. It's not all funny, though, and it tends to become repetitive or dragging considering the book's length, but it's also touching. There are so many characters you meet and then never see again (or who do show up again), and it's easy to get attached to some. You've got to admire DQ's perseverance and Sancho's loyalty. You feel like you know them and forgive them of their quirks. You feel sad when DQ begins to lose his fantasy at the end, becoming more like Sancho with his low-brow proverbs and lack of belief in enchantments. All games come to an end, and DQ's travels as knight errant end eventually.
I liked all the narrator's inclusion. It was clearly Cervantes the author speaking, pretending to be the translator of the original author Cide Hemete Benengeli. He explains aspects to Cide Hemete's style, which brings this "author" to life, too, in my imagination. He is very upset about someone else publishing a book about the continued adventures of DQ and he says so often in frequent pointed remarks and rants. It was interesting seeing the difference between the first and second parts of the novel, as in the second part DQ was less enthusiastic and more realistic, even though fantastic adventures did happen still. He's more breakable and doesn't get up as easily.
So overall, good book but too long. Some adventures aren't as interesting as others, but you'll never get to the really great parts if you don't bother reading, and you miss part of the point of DQ's travels if you only read his adventure highlights.
Everyone has a favourite scene or two (it's so hard to choose) from Don Quixote that will never be forgotten. Mine is how Sancho Panza, DQ's squire, went away to talk with shepherds and purchase some cheese, and then DQ calls him over quickly so he can fight a wagon. He calls for his helmet, which Sancho, hurried, had put the cheese/milk quickly because he didn't know where else to put it. Rather than telling him this, Sancho gives DQ the helmet, DQ puts it on, and curds and whey drip down his face. DQ exclaims that his brains are mush and he's expiring heavily, while Sancho waits by nervously hoping not to be discovered. It's hilarious and ridiculous, and I've never read anything like it. Crazy adventure after crazy adventure. It's not all funny, though, and it tends to become repetitive or dragging considering the book's length, but it's also touching. There are so many characters you meet and then never see again (or who do show up again), and it's easy to get attached to some. You've got to admire DQ's perseverance and Sancho's loyalty. You feel like you know them and forgive them of their quirks. You feel sad when DQ begins to lose his fantasy at the end, becoming more like Sancho with his low-brow proverbs and lack of belief in enchantments. All games come to an end, and DQ's travels as knight errant end eventually.
I liked all the narrator's inclusion. It was clearly Cervantes the author speaking, pretending to be the translator of the original author Cide Hemete Benengeli. He explains aspects to Cide Hemete's style, which brings this "author" to life, too, in my imagination. He is very upset about someone else publishing a book about the continued adventures of DQ and he says so often in frequent pointed remarks and rants. It was interesting seeing the difference between the first and second parts of the novel, as in the second part DQ was less enthusiastic and more realistic, even though fantastic adventures did happen still. He's more breakable and doesn't get up as easily.
So overall, good book but too long. Some adventures aren't as interesting as others, but you'll never get to the really great parts if you don't bother reading, and you miss part of the point of DQ's travels if you only read his adventure highlights.
Be prepared for an uneven book--actually, 1 book and its sequel that are now commonly published together.
The first book is the most uneven as it doesn't just tell the story of Don Quixote. Interspersed are the tales of other characters, and even a novel inside a novel. Clearly, Cervantes received criticism for that--he actually addresses how people wanted more Don Quixote and less other stuff (through the guise of a fictional Arab author and a translator into Spanish). That said those stories within the story can have value. The story of Cardenio was adapted by Shakespeare into a now lost play (and reading it you can tell why) and another story inspired the term Lothario as an unscrupulous seducer of women.
All in all, Don Quixote is as much the narrative as a crazy would-be knight as Cervantes commentary on the world around him, and critique of modes of fiction (not just chivalric fiction). In the second book he even has fun with the unofficial continuation of Don Quixote by a different author. I've seen it said that Don Quixote is a work that is hard to interpet, and I have to agree. At times I saw a point to his critiques of society and fiction, but then the message could be almost reversed in a later scene or story. Maybe hat is part of the issue with having so many stories within the story. In part, though, it feels like Cervantes was as much having fun as making any unified point.
The first book is the most uneven as it doesn't just tell the story of Don Quixote. Interspersed are the tales of other characters, and even a novel inside a novel. Clearly, Cervantes received criticism for that--he actually addresses how people wanted more Don Quixote and less other stuff (through the guise of a fictional Arab author and a translator into Spanish). That said those stories within the story can have value. The story of Cardenio was adapted by Shakespeare into a now lost play (and reading it you can tell why) and another story inspired the term Lothario as an unscrupulous seducer of women.
All in all, Don Quixote is as much the narrative as a crazy would-be knight as Cervantes commentary on the world around him, and critique of modes of fiction (not just chivalric fiction). In the second book he even has fun with the unofficial continuation of Don Quixote by a different author. I've seen it said that Don Quixote is a work that is hard to interpet, and I have to agree. At times I saw a point to his critiques of society and fiction, but then the message could be almost reversed in a later scene or story. Maybe hat is part of the issue with having so many stories within the story. In part, though, it feels like Cervantes was as much having fun as making any unified point.
“For it was his great good fortune/to live a madman, and die sane.”
I finally finished the great Don Quixote of which I have picked up and put down since 2018. At times it was a slog, I suppose because it is so episodic and loose, especially the first book. I learned that Cervantes took some criticism for his treatment of the first book and the second book is certainly tighter, as far as its movements, though still episodic. I write all this knowing that my favorite moment in the book comes in the first part in the tale of Marcela the fiercely beautiful yet nobly independent young girl. Written when this book was, Marcela is an extraordinary embodiment of women’s liberation and power (I have three daughters and when they are teenagers I hope to read them Marcela’s speech at the funeral). It’s a visionary treatise.
I was also surprised by the amount of damage the delusional Quixote does to seemingly innocent people. He is not just jousting windmills. He is not just a quixotic, innocent, amusingly half mad man. He causes some pain and some havoc and wreckage. A common comment on this novel is such, and I paraphrase: the sane prove to be insane, and the insane sane. Meaning that we should go through life as Quixote and that his virtues are affirming. I agree that the virtues, and how color one’s life, are something to aspire to but Quixote’s delusions must not be discounted and perhaps that’s one of the complex beauties of the book? Saying that, I never found Quixote to be a villain but I also never found him entirely innocent either. I can see where this charactization and comment come from as the true villains of the novel are the Duke, Duchees and Altisidora. The supposed sane. Their treatment of Quixote and Panza lend a pathos to the book and some seriousness.
The book is also wildly funny, especially the repartiee between Quixote and Panza, an example being Book 2 Chapter VII in which is just masterclass dialogue. This brings me to Sancho Panza, constantly shooting proverbs as arrows, whom I believe to be the heart of the novel and one literature’s great characters. He is complex, hilarious, cunning, intelligent in corners (so to speak) with a simplicity that is endearing. He is Cervantes’ masterpiece.
Should you read it? The books moves so much and in so many directions that it will seem fatuous and at times tedious, yet if you are curious then by all means sit down (and plan to sit for a long time and over a long time) and start a relationship with Don Quixote. The experience of Sancho Panza alone is worth it.
I finally finished the great Don Quixote of which I have picked up and put down since 2018. At times it was a slog, I suppose because it is so episodic and loose, especially the first book. I learned that Cervantes took some criticism for his treatment of the first book and the second book is certainly tighter, as far as its movements, though still episodic. I write all this knowing that my favorite moment in the book comes in the first part in the tale of Marcela the fiercely beautiful yet nobly independent young girl. Written when this book was, Marcela is an extraordinary embodiment of women’s liberation and power (I have three daughters and when they are teenagers I hope to read them Marcela’s speech at the funeral). It’s a visionary treatise.
I was also surprised by the amount of damage the delusional Quixote does to seemingly innocent people. He is not just jousting windmills. He is not just a quixotic, innocent, amusingly half mad man. He causes some pain and some havoc and wreckage. A common comment on this novel is such, and I paraphrase: the sane prove to be insane, and the insane sane. Meaning that we should go through life as Quixote and that his virtues are affirming. I agree that the virtues, and how color one’s life, are something to aspire to but Quixote’s delusions must not be discounted and perhaps that’s one of the complex beauties of the book? Saying that, I never found Quixote to be a villain but I also never found him entirely innocent either. I can see where this charactization and comment come from as the true villains of the novel are the Duke, Duchees and Altisidora. The supposed sane. Their treatment of Quixote and Panza lend a pathos to the book and some seriousness.
The book is also wildly funny, especially the repartiee between Quixote and Panza, an example being Book 2 Chapter VII in which is just masterclass dialogue. This brings me to Sancho Panza, constantly shooting proverbs as arrows, whom I believe to be the heart of the novel and one literature’s great characters. He is complex, hilarious, cunning, intelligent in corners (so to speak) with a simplicity that is endearing. He is Cervantes’ masterpiece.
Should you read it? The books moves so much and in so many directions that it will seem fatuous and at times tedious, yet if you are curious then by all means sit down (and plan to sit for a long time and over a long time) and start a relationship with Don Quixote. The experience of Sancho Panza alone is worth it.
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Esta edição tem demasiadas notas... Passei metade do tempo a ir ver o que era a nota só para descobrir que era apenas para indicar que era 1 expressão idiomática espanhola... OK!! Eu conseguia perceber isso sem que me interrompessem a leitura!
Tirando isso, o livro é OK... Não achei que fosse tudo aquilo que dizem dele mas lê-se bem.
English:
The portuguese edition by Biblioteca Editores Independentes has too many notes ... I spent half the time to go see what was the note only to find it was just to indicate that it was a Spanish idiomatic expression ... OK! I could make it out without interrupting the reading!
Apart from that, the book is OK ... I didn't think it was all that but it reads well.
Tirando isso, o livro é OK... Não achei que fosse tudo aquilo que dizem dele mas lê-se bem.
English:
The portuguese edition by Biblioteca Editores Independentes has too many notes ... I spent half the time to go see what was the note only to find it was just to indicate that it was a Spanish idiomatic expression ... OK! I could make it out without interrupting the reading!
Apart from that, the book is OK ... I didn't think it was all that but it reads well.
This one is definitely an investment of time, and there's a lot to say about it, so I'll probably forgot some things on my first attempt to jot down my thoughts. If I think of more, I'll come back and edit. Let's split this up into the good parts and the bad parts.
The good:
-It's very funny. It's not laugh-out-loud funny most of the time (though it may have been to 17th century readers), but much of the book was both amusing and entertaining. I looked forward to picking it up again.
-It ends up being quite sweet, especially as you find that both Don Quixote and Sancho Panza are quite wise and level-headed about everything unrelated to chivalry. They have a caring relationship for one another even when they bicker.
-There's a good combination of dramatic irony (where the reader knows what's going on but the characters don't) and suspense or surprise (where the reader doesn't know what's actually going on until later). And just in general, it's hard to predict what is going to happen next. The most notorious adventure of Don Quixote, that with the windmills, happens in the first 10 chapters of the 70+ chapters that make up the book.
-There's a lot of sly commentary about writing, publishing, plagiarism, and translating, as Cervantes claims to be translating from another writer's history of Don Quixote, and then later on claims to be only recording what another person translated from the original writer.
-One of the characters early on, Marcela, delivers a badass defense of her supposed friendzoning of one of the other characters. They're all sitting around bemoaning the fact that he died due to her rejection of him and calling her cruel, and she shows up and is like, "It's not my fault that he loved me. I have zero obligation to return the affections of everyone who loves me, and plus if I did, you'd all say I was promiscuous, so bug off."
The bad:
-There are quite a few inconsistencies, some of which were apparently introduced intentionally (in the Second Part, the characters talk about some of the problems with the First Part of the narrative), but some of which were just confusing. The whole narrative thread about Dulcinea del Toboso hinges on the fact that Don Quixote has never met her and made her up, but it's mentioned twice near the beginning that she's actually a farm girl Don Quixote once had a crush on whom he renamed when he took on his own new name. If you remember that, then much of what comes at the end of the book makes zero sense.
-The whole part with the Duke and the Duchess was WAY too long. I get that we're supposed to like them at first for humoring Don Quixote and then despise them for how they take advantage of his madness, but it just went on and on and on longer than it needed to.
-Parts of the book started to feel repetitive to me in the Second Part, like Cervantes was just reusing the same narratives over again in a slightly different form. I was ready to scream if the "he promised to marry me so I let him sleep with me and I got pregnant and now he won't marry me" plot was used one more time. Also, some parts just seemed pointless, like the sister and brother who snuck out in each other's clothes. Sancho was all, "I want the brother to marry my daughter" and then we literally never hear about it again.
Ultimately I'd come down on the side of it being worth a read, though it's certainly not one of the best books I've ever read. I quite enjoyed the audiobook narrated by Roy McMillan and would recommend it if you have 36 hours to spare!
The good:
-It's very funny. It's not laugh-out-loud funny most of the time (though it may have been to 17th century readers), but much of the book was both amusing and entertaining. I looked forward to picking it up again.
-It ends up being quite sweet, especially as you find that both Don Quixote and Sancho Panza are quite wise and level-headed about everything unrelated to chivalry. They have a caring relationship for one another even when they bicker.
-There's a good combination of dramatic irony (where the reader knows what's going on but the characters don't) and suspense or surprise (where the reader doesn't know what's actually going on until later). And just in general, it's hard to predict what is going to happen next. The most notorious adventure of Don Quixote, that with the windmills, happens in the first 10 chapters of the 70+ chapters that make up the book.
-There's a lot of sly commentary about writing, publishing, plagiarism, and translating, as Cervantes claims to be translating from another writer's history of Don Quixote, and then later on claims to be only recording what another person translated from the original writer.
-One of the characters early on, Marcela, delivers a badass defense of her supposed friendzoning of one of the other characters. They're all sitting around bemoaning the fact that he died due to her rejection of him and calling her cruel, and she shows up and is like, "It's not my fault that he loved me. I have zero obligation to return the affections of everyone who loves me, and plus if I did, you'd all say I was promiscuous, so bug off."
The bad:
-There are quite a few inconsistencies, some of which were apparently introduced intentionally (in the Second Part, the characters talk about some of the problems with the First Part of the narrative), but some of which were just confusing. The whole narrative thread about Dulcinea del Toboso hinges on the fact that Don Quixote has never met her and made her up, but it's mentioned twice near the beginning that she's actually a farm girl Don Quixote once had a crush on whom he renamed when he took on his own new name. If you remember that, then much of what comes at the end of the book makes zero sense.
-The whole part with the Duke and the Duchess was WAY too long. I get that we're supposed to like them at first for humoring Don Quixote and then despise them for how they take advantage of his madness, but it just went on and on and on longer than it needed to.
-Parts of the book started to feel repetitive to me in the Second Part, like Cervantes was just reusing the same narratives over again in a slightly different form. I was ready to scream if the "he promised to marry me so I let him sleep with me and I got pregnant and now he won't marry me" plot was used one more time. Also, some parts just seemed pointless, like the sister and brother who snuck out in each other's clothes. Sancho was all, "I want the brother to marry my daughter" and then we literally never hear about it again.
Ultimately I'd come down on the side of it being worth a read, though it's certainly not one of the best books I've ever read. I quite enjoyed the audiobook narrated by Roy McMillan and would recommend it if you have 36 hours to spare!