From: Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America
7.1 (1987): 79-81.
Copyright © 1987, The Cervantes Society of America
| REVIEW |
|
Weiger refutes the “funny book”
interpretation of the Quijote advanced in recent scholarship. He focuses
on the underpinning of Cervantes' art, as evident in DQ as it is
elsewhere: the emulation of literary models and conventions. Weiger produces
fresh readings of several important passages and works, and posits a new
arrangement for the composition of DQI chs. 1-8. This is considerably
more, indeed, than what one might with reason expect from one book.
In DQ and elsewhere, Cervantes consistently
upholds the serious role of poetry, one which may underlie any subject, however
mundane; why, then, would he compose a work which does not conform to that
role? Sidestepping the issue of what Cervantes' serious intent in
DQ was, Weiger poses another question in ch. 1. What did Cervantes
think of the reader reaction given to Part I of DQ? He thereupon examines
the following: Cervantes' portrayal of the many readers of DQI who
inhabit DQII; Cervantes' reactions to popular judgments of DQI
as seen in the prologue and opening chapters of DQII; the bases of
dissatisfaction which inform Cervantes' criticism of Avellaneda's
“false” continuation; and remarks about his readers found in the
prologue to the Persiles. A convincing case emerges for the equal
measures of pleasure and frustration voiced by Cervantes —pleasure at
his success, but deep dissatisfaction with the lack of comprehension on the
part of his readers and their inability “to see beyond the risible”
(p. 27).
Chapter II addresses the question of originality.
If Cervantes takes pride in his own “invención” and yet
we know his writing depends at least in part on clearly identifiable sources
or precedents, how did he define “original”? Drawing observations
from throughout the canon, Weiger documents the author's respect for and
appreciation of literary models, and argues that Cervantes defined the artist
as one capable of the “ingenuity required for restatement
. . . . whether the reshaping is in a temporal, cultural,
generic or linguistic context” (p. 59). He then provides examples of
this varied reshaping, such as an analysis of the prologue to DQI
where Cervantes parodies the novelty topos and “plays with the concept
of originality on every conceivable level, even to the point of having the
author feign silence and an uncritical attitude concerning the arguments
of a fictive interlocutor” (p. 68). Weiger takes pains to affirm the
distinction between comic and literary parody, and to insist on the purposeful
reshaping inherent in the latter. All of this reinforces the argument that
purposeful artistic intentions inform the writing of the
Quijote.
The next two chapters give fresh consideration
to the realistic-idealistic visualization of the world, and its bases in
physical processes affecting sense perceptions. “The Reality of
Illusion” considers the reality of fictional illusions: how the act
of reading literally produces precise mental images of characters in Don
Quijote, which function as “conditioning experience” that molds
his sense perceptions. Through his intensive “literary mental
conditioning,” Don Quijote recognizes, and then sees, reality
(p. 94). Here and elsewhere, Weiger adduces evidence that “a general
comprehension of how simple optical illusions function does inform the
comparatively more dramatic illusions that typify Don Quijote's distortion
of the physical phenomena
|
|
||
| 80 | MAUREEN IHRIE | Cervantes |
|
|
||
he encounters” (p. 97). “The Illusion of Reality” approaches
sense perceptions from the other side: optical illusions are verified phenomena
of which Cervantes was well aware. One of the strongest insights for this
reviewer was Weiger's insistence on the role theatre played in shaping Cervantes'
art. Theatre was Cervantes' first love, and the object of intense interest
throughout his writing. Weiger discerns a “theatrical visualization”
in his prose —starting in the Galatea and continuing in DQ
and the Persiles. In addition to determining the manner of presentation
of many scenes, this theatrical visualization heightened Cervantes' sensitivity
to fluctuations in visual perceptions, facilitated acknowledgment of the
subjectivity of perception, and affected his relationship with his readers.
Chapter V, “The Faculties of the Soul,”
illustrates how the functioning of the soul as voluntad,
memoria and entendimiento underlies full appreciation of “La
fuerza de la sangre” and the “Casamiento engañoso / Coloquio
de los perros.” His new reading of the latter persuasively justifies
the relationship between the two tales.
Chapter VI returns to the more general concern
of literature and its proper role. Here, Weiger charts Cervantes' changing
opinions about the value of, and the reception given to, contemporary literature.
He sets Cervantes' initial enthusiasm against his progressive disenchantment
with his contemporaries and their varying fortunes. Weiger thus underscores
how the latter, also, are judged and misjudged by the reading public, from
prince to vulgo.
In Chapter VII Weiger breaks new ground in
his examination of the artistic substructure in Cervantes' work. He identifies
three discrete stages of composition for the first eight chapters of
DQI. Phase one, probably written in the early to mid 1590's, is a
self-contained unit, centered around the scrutiny of books, starting in ch.
IV after Don Quijote returns home and ending mid-way through ch. VII. Literature
in general motivates the protagonist, and he impersonates various figures
of fiction. Stage two was also originally written as a continuous, independent
unit, and is comprised of all that remains of chs. I-VIII. Here, only novels
of chivalry inspire Don Quijote, and he emulates, not impersonates, his heroes.
Stage three is the text as we know it; stage one is interpolated into stage
two, and some details have been retouched to seam them more smoothly. Weiger's
striking hypothesis argues against an evolution in the hero in these early
pages, and explains inconsistencies modern readers have found by means of
the distinct orientations of phases one and two. His theory accounts for
puzzles such as: 1) the changes in what motivates the hero; 2) changing opinions
the barber and curate voice about specific books; 3) the repetitive introduction
of the barber in ch. V; 4) Don Quijote's claim to multiple identities, such
as Valdovinos, the twelve peers of France, Reinaldo de Montalbán,
in the chapters comprising phase one, and his emulation of chivalric heroes
in the others.
These are only several of the many details
resolved by Weiger's simple, lucid theory. The reduction of inconsistencies
and the logical explanation of others limit the amount of “linguistic
playfulness,” and the fundamental issue which emerges is “a toying
with the most elemental problem of a writer's substance: the inability to
get the facts right (p. 203). Ultimately,
|
|
||
| 7.1 (1987) | Review | 81 |
|
|
||
Weiger concludes, “it is a question not of the relativity of truth but of the human limitations that circumscribe the apprehending of the truth” (p. 203). This conclusion, as well as much of chapters III and IV, offers significant support to those who discern classical skeptical attitudes toward reality in Cervantes. Weiger's final chapter abounds with insight as he retraces his analysis. A few of his final comments may strike some as more speculative than useful. But, in sum, this is a well-woven, meticulously argued, original analysis. It bears witness to a profoundly sensitive appreciation of Cervantes. The wide-ranging discussions are tightly organized to clarify or correct previous understandings of Cervantes, and surely support the premise of deliberate artistic intentions in the Quijote.
| MAUREEN IHRIE |
| Lafayette College |
|
|
Digitized with the help of Kendall Sydnor |
|
| Fred Jehle jehle@ipfw.edu | Publications of the CSA | H–Cervantes |
| URL: http://users.ipfw.edu/jehle/cervante/csa/artics87/ihrie.htm | ||