Truth or Fiction? Cervantes is a String Puppeteer - 09/28/26

    Last class, we discussed the different layers of narration in Don Quixote.  Cervantes creates a character to act as the narrator, including remarks that question the validity of the stories.  This unreliability acts as an anchor for DQ's insanity, allowing his character to have a philosophical impact on the reader.  

    The inclusion of 'interpolated novels' (self-contained stories or shorter novels inserted into the main plot) is part of the reason truth is questioned in this part of the book.  Cervantes does this three times in pages 227-449, all stories are embedded in the main plot by belonging/involving the characters.  Although Don Fernando and Dorotea's  (and other characters in this part) story isn't focused on the main characters, they are still connected to the main plot.  The interpolated novels are discussed in the notes as autobiographical or based off of past literary works. I found these divulgences slightly distracting because they tend to begin suddenly, lasting multiple chapters.  However, I wonder if Cervantes included these stories to saturate them with his own perspectives and experiences.  He does this openly in the Captive's tale, saying "[t]he only one who held his own...was a Spanish solider named something de Saaverdra" (344).  This clever inclusion of Cervantes's last name made me question the validity of the story.  The non-fictional aberrations of these short stories remove the chance of non-biased narrations, meaning that we cannot interpret the story at face value (how it contributes to the main plot).  Instead we have to constantly ask "what is Cervantes saying with this?", adding perceived value to the three digressions.

    I noticed that this style of narration helped me see philosophical depth in DQ as a character in his "arms and letters" discourse.  Although he is funny and not fully with it, DQ manages to capture both the other character's and readers' attention and "no one listening...could think of him as a madman" (329).  The discourse is discussed as a popular debate topic in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, suggesting that Cervantes is again, bringing topics of analytical substance into the story.  DQ's views are now more than just a madman's nonsense, they empower us to form an opinion rather than a mere reaction.  During his impassioned moment of clarity, he talks about dependence, perceived value, and the ultimate sacrifice.  He speaks about things that we debate today, and his chivalrous views translate to modern day debates of honor and sacrifice for one's country.  The experience of reading this part of Don Quixote reminded me that although fictional works are 'made up', there are always truths the author guides the reader to find.

    Question: Did your views on Don Quixote (the character) change after reading this part?