To start off with though, I thought I'd use the opportunity of a fiesta of Spanish-language writing to have a look at a book which has been sadly neglected on my bookshelves for a good while now, gathering dust and fading in the sun over a period of years. What makes my neglect even more criminal is that the book is not only a mainstay of Spanish literature, it's one of the true classics of world literature - I think you might have guessed its name by now...
*****
Miguel de Cervantes' Don Quixote is a monster of a book, around 800 pages in my Wordsworth Editions version, but nearer 1000 in other versions I've seen. Despite its size, however, it's actually a very accessible book, less a densely-plotted novel than a continuous series of stories held together by the seemingly-insane adventures of our titular hero, Don Quixote de la Mancha, the Knight of the Woeful Figure/Lions. A satire on improbable contemporary novels of knights-errant, Cervantes' book is a funny, page-turning work, one which can be recommended to any reader.
Our hero is a modest, relatively well-off man whose brains, after decades of reading sixteenth-century pulp-fiction, become so addled that he actually believes all the improbable events he reads about. Eventually, he decides that his life is worthless unless he does his duty to the world in becoming a knight-errant, a wandering righter of wrongs. Therefore, dressed in ancient and dubious armour, he sets off armed with a sword and his love for the semi-imaginary Dulcinea del Toboso (in reality, a peasant woman he has never met...), supported, initially at least, only by his trusty steed Rozinante.
He soon realises that a knight-errant needs a squire to take care of the incidentals in life, a right-hand man to bear witness to his heroics, and this is where the short, squat, simple figure of Sancho Panza fits in. A villager who is more than happy to leave his wife and children at home for a while, Sancho's greed for the treasures he expects to gain from his work with the noble knight lead him to saddle up his donkey and ride off into the sunset with Don Quixote in search of adventure - and what wonderful adventures they are :)
Although Don Quixote is a long work, it's divided into two parts (of which the second is better than the first), and each of these is subdivided into dozens of chapters, making it an excellent book to pick up and set down as the mood takes you. I tended to take it in small chunks, reading on if the story was continued in the next chapter, as was often the case. On a cold, wintry Melbourne day though, it was often all too easy to just stay in my armchair and keep going...
The translation in my edition is provided by Peter Motteux, and despite withering criticism of this version (a note on the Don Quixote Wikipedia page describes it as "worse than worthless"), I found it surprisingly good reading, especially when you consider that it dates from the start of the eighteenth century. If you're looking for something a little closer to the original text though, there are many versions to choose from - it seems that there has been no shortage of knights-errant willing to tilt the windmill that is translating Don Quixote ;)

I haven't read the whole of Quixote, but I enjoyed what I read... I agree with you, it's funny in small bits
ReplyDeleteDo visit!
Amritorupa - I'd recommend reading the whole thing. It's an excellent book, and the second part (especially where Don Quixote learns about a fake version of his adventures) is particularly fun :)
ReplyDeleteThe windmill episode is the only thing I know about the book, courtesy of Nik Kershaw's song. My dad has had a copy of it for a few years, he told me it was supposedly a good read, and I've been considering pinching it from him. I think it's the Penguin version.
ReplyDeleteCharlie - Literary theft of the most justified kind :)
ReplyDelete"Decreed" July to be Spanish Lit Month? Whoa, I kind of like the sound of that! Rollicking summary here and one which makes me glad I'll be revisiting the book this month sometime. Esp. love the fact that you found DQ so entertaining even in a "worse than worthless" translation...guess I need to read Wikipedia more--that's my kind of writing!
ReplyDeleteI've read the first part (Jarvis translation), but never quite managed the second part--this is the second time I've heard the second part's better, too, so I really have no excuses! One of these days when I have some spare time I'll have to pick it up again--I'm quite sure I couldn't manage it all for Spanish lit month!.
ReplyDeletetotally agree, I've previously described this as a 17th century Spitting Image sketch stretched to book length & a tale that had the Spanish developing severe bladder problems because of it’s cruelly funny take on the novels of chivalry
ReplyDeleteRichard - I didn't really look at the book in any great depth because my intention was just to tell people that it's not a diificult book, and it's one people should just dive into :) As for translations, well, that's definitely in the eye of the beholder - and he obviously beheld something very different to me ;)
ReplyDeleteAmanda - A week tops - easy! (says the man on school holidays...)
Gary - It's much more than that. The first part was like that, but the second part really forces us to think about what and who we should be laughing at - and with...
I'm still waffling on choices. I may end up picking a crime book
ReplyDeleteGuy - Time to stop messing around and choose a book :) I've just started 'Dublinesque', and I think that's going to be a good one - Stu and Violet have already confirmed that...
ReplyDeleteIt's my favorite book of last year. Took me some half year of episodic reading. I loved the Rutherford translation I read it in. But it's one of the books that survives any bad translation, at least according to Bolaño.
ReplyDeleteRise - Good to hear it :) And to be perfectly honest,"a deliciously postmodern American hodgepodge" sounds like the last thing I'd want to read...
ReplyDeleteI read the grossman translation I like to try another translation to compare the one that came out same year as grossman meant be good as well ,all the best stu
ReplyDeleteStu - I'd prefer a more recent British-English version, if there's one available :)
ReplyDelete