This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only.

You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to

your colleagues, clients or customers, please click here or use the "Reprints" tool that appears next to any article.
Visit www.nytreprints.com for samples and additional information. Order a reprint of this article now. »

November 2, 2003

Tilt
By Carlos Fuentes

DON QUIXOTE

By Miguel de Cervantes.

Translated by Edith Grossman.

940 pp. New York:

Ecco/HarperCollins Publishers. $29.95.

In 2005, Don Quixote will be 400 years old. Most epic heroes are young, from
Achilles to El Cid. It was part of the genius of Cervantes to put an old man in the
saddle and send him off to relive the heroic tales of the past. But Don Quixote is
not alone in his mad quest for chivalry. He is accompanied by his opposite in
figure, speech and temperament: the round, earthy, plainspoken Sancho Panza.

I stop right here, as the curtain goes up -+or the pages open -- to celebrate the
great new translation of ''Don Quixote'' by Edith Grossman. Nothing harder for
the traduttore, if he or she is not to be seen as the traditore, than to render a
classic in contemporary idiom yet retain its sense of time and space. Up to now,
my favorite ''Quixote'' translation has been that of Tobias Smollett, the
18th-century picaresque novelist, who rendered Cervantes in the style proper to
Smollett and his own age. His ''Quixote'' reads much like ''Humphry Clinker,''
and this seems appropriate and, even, delightful. The family relationship is
there.

Edith Grossman delivers her ''Quixote'' in plain but plentiful contemporary

1
English. The quality of her translation is evident in the opening line:
''Somewhere in La Mancha, in a place whose name I do not care to remember, a
gentleman lived not long ago, one of those who has a lance and ancient shield on
a shelf and keeps a skinny nag and a greyhound for racing.'' This ''Don Quixote''
can be read with the same ease as the latest Philip Roth and with much greater
facility than any Hawthorne. Yet there is not a single moment in which, in
forthright English, we are not reading a 17th-century novel. This is truly
masterly: the contemporaneous and the original co-exist. Not, mind you, the
''old'' and the ''new.'' Grossman sees to it that these facile categories do not creep
into her work. To make the classic contemporary: this is the achievement. And
through it, Grossman can highlight Don Quixote's flight into heroic rhetoric with
great comic effect and meaningful emphasis.

If for many reasons ''Don Quixote'' is the first modern novel, it is pre-eminently
because of the different languages spoken in it. Characters in classical literature
all spoke the same language. Achilles understands Hector; Ulysses can even
speak to Polyphemus. But Quixote and Sancho speak two different idioms. Why?
Because the characters are engaged in what the Spanish critic Claudio Guillén
calls ''a dialogue of genres.''

There has been some dispute about whether ''Quixote'' is indeed the first modern
novel. Ian Watt gives primacy to the 18th-century English novel, which was
responding to the rise of a middle-class, book-buying public. André Malraux
thought of Madame de Lafayette's ''Princesse de Clèves'' as the first because it
initiated inner exploration of character. But I believe that ''Don Quixote'' really
inaugurates what we understand modern fiction to be -- a reflection of our
presence in the world as problematic beings in an unending history, whose
continuity depends on subjecting reality to the imagination. Cervantes does it, as
all writers do, in a precise time and space. This is Spain in the decadent reign of
Philip III, a country that has conquered and plundered and built a New World in
the Americas and returns, exhausted, to its native village in La Mancha with
nothing but the memory of past deeds. It is also the Spain of the Counter-
Reformation, where the Renaissance enlightenment brought to the court of
Charles V by the Erasmist scholars had long been buried under the severe
vigilance of the Inquisition and the edicts of the Council of Trent.

2
Cervantes knew his times. One of his novellas, ''El Celoso Extremeño'' (''The
Jealous Old Man From Extremadura''), came under the censorship of the
archbishop of Seville because two lovers ended up together in bed. Heeding the
church warnings, Cervantes changed the finale. The couple, as in movies from
the Hays Office era, sleep in separate beds. Cervantes was a disciple of a daring
Spanish Erasmist, Juan López de Hoyos. If ''The Praise of Folly'' and its author
are never mentioned in the vast libraries of ''Don Quixote,'' it is for good reason:
it was too dangerous. Yet could not ''Don Quixote'' accept as its perfect subtitle
''The Praise of Folly''?

''Don Quixote'' has so many levels of significance that I can set foot on only a
couple of them. The first is the dialogue of genres. Cervantes inaugurates the
modern novel through the impurity, the mestizaje of all known genres. Often
criticized for ignoring the requirements of the well-made novel (recognizable
characters, expert plotting, linear narrative), Cervantes audaciously brings into
his book, first and foremost, the dialogue between the epic (Don Quixote) and
the picaresque (Sancho Panza). But then he introduces the tale within the tale,
the Moorish, the pastoral, the Byzantine modes and, of course, the love story.
The modern novel is born as both an encounter of genres and a refusal of purity.

Out of this meeting, Cervantes proposes a new way of writing and reading whose
starting point is uncertainty. In a world of dogmatic certitude, he introduces a
universe where nothing is certain. The place is uncertain: ''Somewhere in La
Mancha. . . .'' The authorship is uncertain. Who wrote ''Don Quixote''? One
Cervantes, ''more versed in pain than in verse''? A gentleman called de Saavedra,
mentioned in the novel with admiration for his love of freedom? (Cervantes's full
name was Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra.) Is the author the Moorish scribe Cide
Hamete Benengeli, who discovers, by chance, an anonymous manuscript? Or is
it the despicable Avellaneda, who writes an unauthorized sequel to ''Don
Quixote'' (in real life, and in the novel)? Or could it be, if we follow this rich,
fantastical path opened by Cervantes, that the author of ''Don Quixote'' is really
Jorge Luis Borges, who wrote a tale called ''Pierre Menard, Author of the
Quixote''?

If authorship is uncertain, so are names. ''Don Quixote'' is a veritable onomastic

3
carnival. For beginners, Don Quixote is the heroic name that a minor hidalgo
named Alonso Quixano gives himself in order to ride out as a knight errant. But
is the name Quixano or Quixada or Quesada? And Quixote himself is dubbed, as
he moves through the novel, the Knight of the Sad Face, or the Knight of the
Lions, but when he goes into the pastoral mode, he becomes Quixotiz. And when
he finally makes it to the castle of the cruel dukes, he is promptly dubbed Don
Azote (Mr. Scourge), whereas the disguised Countess Trifaldi calls him Don
Jigote, or Mr. Mincemeat Stew.

Whoever enters Don Quixote's sphere changes names, furthering the uncertainty
that brands this novel. The nameless horse becomes Rocinante; the magicians
who haunt the Don are tongue-twisted beyond recognition by Sancho, whose
wife can be Teresa, Juana or Mari Gutiérrez; Don Quixote's adversaries have to
assume heroic names in order to be credible. And above all, Dulcinea, the
knight's damsel, the epitome of gentility, is in all truth none other than the
sweaty peasant girl Aldonza.

Don Quixote wants to live the books he has read, Michel Foucault pointedly
observed. This leads the book to an extraordinary inaugural event and to a
heartbreaking conclusion. The event is that Don Quixote, in pursuit of the
malevolent plagiarist Avellaneda, rides into Barcelona and there visits . . . a
printing shop. And what is being printed there? The book that we are reading.
''Don Quixote de la Mancha.'' They know all about us! exclaims Sancho, even the
most private conversations. Cervantes and his ingenious squire have just
inaugurated, de facto, the era of Gutenberg, the democratic society of readers
and writers.

But then, the terrifyingly destructive, not evil but just plain and cruelly
destructive, dukes invite the knight and his squire to their castle. And here the
sadness of the book is brought to our hearts. For in the castle, Quixote's dreams
are offered to him in reality. Where his wonderful imagination could turn an inn
into a palace, here the palace is real. Where he could imagine scullery maids as
highborn princesses, here the aristocratic women are real. Both real and cruel.
Don Quixote is subjected to incessant mockery. Even Sancho, the levelheaded
peasant, is lured into the political comedy of becoming governor of a nonexistent

4
island.

The illusion comes crashing down. Books are no longer the grand, imaginative
truth that moved Don Quixote through perils without end. So the windmills were
not giants. So the armies were only flocks of sheep. So reality is shabby, gray,
unarmed. . . . What can Don Quixote do but return home, get into bed, recover
his reason and peacefully die? The ''impossible dream'' is over. No wonder that
Dostoyevsky, in his diary, calls ''Don Quixote'' ''the saddest book ever written.''
For it is, he adds, ''the story of disillusionment.''

That Edith Grossman has brought all these levels -- and many more -- to
contemporary life is a major literary achievement. For to read ''Don Quixote,'' in
an increasingly Manichaean world of simplistic Good versus Evil and
inquisitorial dogmas, becomes one of the healthiest experiences a modern,
democratic citizen can undertake.

Drawing (Drawing by Peter Blegvad)

Copyright 2016 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections
XML Help Contact Us Back to Top