حياة دون كيخوته وسانتشو

by Miguel de Unamuno, صالح علماني (ترجمة)

يهرب ميغيل دي أونامونو في هذا الكتاب من الطريقة التقليدية في قراءة عمل ثربانتس التي سار عليها التجديديون من أبناء جيله. ففي طرحه أسطورة الكيخوته، لم يتابع أونامونو الدروب التي خطّها غيره من التجديديين الإصلاحيين، وإنما استفاد من شخصية الكيخوته بصورة أساسية ليحدد نفسه في دور المثقف المصمم على لعب دور البطولة. وهو يُبقي خطابه موجهاً، حصرياً، إلى ذاتية القارئ. فنراه ينطلق في خطابه على الدوام من "تجربة" واردة في الكتاب، تُرفع هذه "التجربة" لديه إلى مقولة فلسفية، ثم تُحول إلى النظرية، واخيراً، وفي حركة ثالثة، ينزلق اهتمام النص إلى مناحي الحياة العامة.
لا يكتفي أونامونو في تفسيرة لنص ثربانتس بتقديم روايته الخاصة، بل إنه يمضي إلى ما هو أبعد من ذلك. فما يفعله، أو يحاول على الأقل فعله، هو تحرير دون كيخوته ن سجن التخييل الروائي، لجعله ينطلق من جديد في دروب الواقع.

Genres: Philosophy, Essays, Spanish Literature, Literature, 20th Century, Spain, Fiction

324 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1905

About the author

Miguel de Unamuno y Jugo was born in the medieval centre of Bilbao, Basque Country, the son of Félix de Unamuno and Salomé Jugo. As a young man, he was interested in the Basque language, and competed for a teaching position in the Instituto de Bilbao, against Sabino Arana. The contest was finally won by the Basque scholar Resurrección María de Azcue.

Unamuno worked in all major genres: the essay, the novel, poetry and theatre, and, as a modernist, contributed greatly to dissolving the boundaries between genres. There is some debate as to whether Unamuno was in fact a member of the Generation of '98 (an ex post facto literary group of Spanish intellectuals and philosophers that was the creation of José Martínez Ruiz — a group that includes Antonio Machado, Azorín, Pío Baroja, Ramón del Valle-Inclán, Ramiro de Maeztu and Ángel Ganivet, among others).

In addition to his writing, Unamuno played an important role in the intellectual life of Spain. He served as rector of the University of Salamanca for two periods: from 1900 to 1924 and 1930 to 1936, during a time of great social and political upheaval. Unamuno was removed from his post by the government in 1924, to the protest of other Spanish intellectuals. He lived in exile until 1930, first banned to Fuerteventura (Canary Islands), from where he escaped to France. Unamuno returned after the fall of General Primo de Rivera's dictatorship and took up his rectorship again. It is said in Salamanca that the day he returned to the University, Unamuno began his lecture by saying "As we were saying yesterday, ...", as Fray Luis de León had done in the same place four centuries before, as though he had not been absent at all. After the fall of Rivera's dictatorship, Spain embarked on its second Republic, a short-lived attempt by the people of Spain to take democratic control of their own country. He was a candidate for the small intellectual party Al Servicio de la República.

The burgeoning Republic was eventually squashed when a military coup headed by General Francisco Franco caused the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War. Having begun his literary career as an internationalist, Unamuno gradually became a convinced Spanish nationalist, feeling that Spain's essential qualities would be destroyed if influenced too much by outside forces. Thus for a brief period he actually welcomed Franco's revolt as necessary to rescue Spain from radical influence. However, the harsh tactics employed by the Francoists in the struggle against their republican opponents caused him to oppose both the Republic and Franco.

As a result of his opposition to Franco, Unamuno was effectively removed for a second time from his University post. Also, in 1936 Unamuno had a brief public quarrel with the Nationalist general Millán Astray at the University in which he denounced both Astray and elements of the Francoist movement. He called the battle cry of the rightist Falange movement—"Long live death!"—repellent and suggested Astray wanted to see Spain crippled. One historian notes that his address was a "remarkable act of moral courage" and that he risked being lynched on the spot. Shortly afterwards, he was placed under house arrest, where he remained, broken-hearted, until his death ten weeks later.[1]

Reviews

[Sawsan · Rating 4 out of 5]

رؤية الفيلسوف والأديب الأسباني ميجيل دي أونامونو لحياة دون كيخوته وسانتشو
دراسة أدبية تفصيلية لرواية ميجيل دي ثربانتس "دون كيخوته" ومحاولة إحياء أبطالها
يتفهم أونامونو جنون دون كيخوته وهذيانه ورغبته في تجسيد الخيال في الواقع
ويأمل أن يقوم تابعه سانتشو بمغامرات جديدة بعد موت سيده الفارس الحالم
تتفق فلسفة أونامونو مع فلسفة دون كيخوته خلال رحلته الطويلة
فهو يرى الحياة في الجنون, الشجاعة والإقدام, العاطفة والأحلام
"إذا كانت الحياة حلما, فدعني أحلم بأنها بلا نهاية"..

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

‘For me alone was Don Quixote born, and myself for his sake; he knew how to act and I to write,’ Cervantes has written with his pen. And I say that for Cervantes to recount their lives, and for me to explain and elucidate them, were born Don Quijote and Sancho. Cervantes was born to narrate, and to write commentary was I made.

Miguel de Unamuno defies classification. At once a philosopher, a literary critic, a novelist, a poet, and an essayist—and yet none of them completely—he resembled Nietzsche in his mercurial identity. In this way, too, did he resemble Nietzsche: though he had many themes and central ideas, he had no system. He wrote in short feverish bursts, each one as fiery and explosive as a sermon, going off into the branches (as the Spanish say) and returning again and again to his ostensible subject—only to depart once more. He was a wandering knight errant of a writer.

Unamuno was a member of the so-called Generation of ‘98. The date—1898—alludes to the Spanish-American war, a conflict in which Spain suffered a humiliating defeat and lost nearly all of her colonies. After this, it became impossible to see Spain as a world power; her decline and decadence were incontrovertible. This generation of intellectuals and artists was, therefore, concerned with rejuvenating Spanish culture. In Unamuno’s case, this took the form of finding Spain’s ‘essence’: which he did in the person of Don Quixote. He sees in the knight errant everything profound and important in Spanish culture, as a kind of Messiah of Spanish Catholicism, often comparing Quixote to Iñigo de Loyola and Teresa de Ávila.

This book has, therefore, a quasi-nationalistic aim, which may weary the non-Spanish reader. But it survives as one of the greatest works of criticism written on Spain’s greatest book.

The title of Vida de Don Quijote y Sancho is usually rendered in English as Our Lord Don Quijote; and this title, though not literal, does ample justice to Unamuno’s project. In this work Unamuno undertakes to write a full, chapter-by-chapter commentary on Cervantes’ novel; but his commentary is no conventional literary criticism. Unamuno declares his belief that Don Quixote and his squire were real, and that Cervantes did a grave injustice to their lives by writing it as a farce. In reality, the Don was a hero of the highest order, a saint and a savior, and Unamuno aims to reveal the holiness of the Knight of the Sorrowful Countenance for his readers.

Unamuno is, thus, the most quixotic of interpreters. He claims to see naught but pure nobility and heroism in the great knight from La Mancha. And yet the grandiose and ludicrous claims of Unamuno, and the farcical nature of Don Quixote himself, put the reader on guard: this commentary, like the great novel itself, is laden with delicate irony—an irony that does not undermine Unamuno’s literal meaning, but complements and complicates it.

You might call this Cervantine irony, and it is difficult to adequately describe, since it relies on a contradiction. It is the contradiction of Don Quixote himself: perhaps the most heroic character in all of literature, braver than Achilles and nobler than Odysseus, and yet laughably ridiculous—at times even pitiable and pathetic. We are thus faced with a dilemma: applaud the knight, or ridicule him? Neither seems satisfactory. At times Quixote is undeniably funny, a poor fool who tilts at windmills; but by the end of the novel—an ending more tragic than the darkest of Shakespeare’s tragedies—when he renounces his life as a knight and condemns all his adventures as insanity, we cannot help but feel profoundly sad, and we plead along with Sancho that he continue to live in his fantasy world, if not for his sake than for ours.

This is the paradox of idealism. To change the world you must be able to re-imagine it: to see it for what it might be rather than for what it is. Further, you must act “as if”—to pretend, as it were, that you were living in a better world. How can you hope to transform a dishonest world if you are not honest yourself, if you do not insist on taking others at their word? Quixoticism is thus the recipe for improving the world. Dorothea, from Middlemarch, is a quietly quixotic figure, only seeing pure intentions in those around her. But paradoxically, by presupposing only the best, and seeing goodness where it is not, she creates the goodness that she imagines. Confronted with a person who sees only the most generous motives, those she meets actually become kind and generous in her presence.

We then must ask: Is Dorothea a fool? And if so, does it matter? And what does it even mean to be a fool? For as Lionel Trilling pointed out, Cervantes posed one of the central questions of literature: What is the relationship between fiction and reality?

Human reality is peculiar: We acknowledge an entire class of facts that are only facts because of social agreement. The value of a dollar, for example, or the rules of football are real enough—we see their effects every day—and yet, if everyone were to change their opinion at once, these “facts” would evaporate. These “social facts” dominate our lives: that Donald Trump is president and that the United States is a country are two more examples. You might say that these are facts only because everyone acts “as if” they are: and our actions constitute their being true.

The reality that Don Quixote inhabits is not, in this sense, less real than this “normal” social reality. He simply acts “as if” he were residing in another social world, one purer and nobler. And in doing so, he engenders his own reality—a reality inspired by his pure and noble heart. What is a queen, after all, but a woman who we agree to treat as special? And if Don Quixote treats his Dulcinea the same way, what prevents her from being a queen? What is a helmet but a piece of metal we choose to put on our heads? And if Don Quixote treats his barber’s bowl as a helmet, isn’t it one? We see this happen again and again: the great knight transforms those around him, making them lords and ladies, monsters and villains, only by seeing them differently.

In this way, Don Quixote opens a gulf for us: by acknowledging the conventional nature of much of our reality, and the power of the imagination to change it, we are left groping. What does it mean for something to be real? What does it mean to be mistaken, or to be a fool? To improve the world, must we see it falsely? Is this false seeing even “false,” or is it profoundly true? In short, what is the relationship between fiction and fact?

To me, this is the central question of Cervantes’ novel. But it remains a dead issue if we choose to see Quixote merely as a fool, as he is so commonly understood. Indeed I think we laugh at the knight partly out of self-defense, to avoid these troublesome issues. Unamuno’s worshipful commentary pushes against this tendency, and allows us to see the knight in all his heroism.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

¿Preguntas? Is it better to “sanchizado” Don Quijote than to “quijotizado” Sancho Panza? Sanchopancismo versus quijotesco. Which is better?

¿Pregunta? Your feet on the ground, pragmatic, down-to-earth, and of the people (sanchizado) or your head in the sky, lofty, absurd, and surreal (quitotizado)? That is the bigger question asked by Miguel de Unamuno.

Yep, philosophical questions about our favourite Spanish bard by one of Spain’s early 20th century writers. A commentary on the 300th anniversary of that famous caballero andante. Deep and deeper.

I am happy to state that Unamuno added Sancho back into the title, because Don Quijote is truly nothing without his counterpart. Like Batman and Robin, we always need our sidekick to get us through thick and thin.

When the Spaniards left for America in search of riches, Don Quijote mounted his Rocinante in search of fame and glory. For Sancho Panza, there is nothing better to mock that same fame and glory. The hero is nothing more than a big child filling his head with big adventures from all those books he reads. Damn books!

You really have to have faith when your master asks you to come on a quest, promises you glory and the first thing he does is to mistake windmills for giants. Yep, a lot of faith. Or pragmatic stupidity. Or stupid pragmatism. Can you be completely crazy to take seriously the world? If so, wouldn’t we all be crazy? Not don Quijote, rather “don tonto.”(Unamuno’s words, not mine).

¿Preguntas? A barber’s bowl or a helmet? Peace or war? Depends on your point of view. Are we making comedy or just mocking people? Is Sancho mocking the don; vice versa? Is the sad knight truly sad in his quest to win the hand of Dulcinea of Toboso, someone he barely saw twelve years ago? Or just a dreamer? Is Sancho nothing more than a schemer? Comedy or tragedy? Or both?

Truth or dare? Pick one. Don Quijote, the crazy or Alonso Quijano, the Good? Faithful Sancho or Sancho the liar? Dulcinea de Tobosa, the fair maiden or Aldonza Lorenzo, the maid of the pigsty? All these dualities. All these deceits. Cervantes, Cide Hamete Benenggeli, or whoever wrote this deed, did you really understand this mess? Are you playing with us?

Reality check. Life is a dream. Can death be a dream? Is your dream immortal? Is it worth it?

La respuesta. Cervantes was born to tell his tale. Unamuno was born to comment on Cervantes. A perfect argument.

And that is the crux of the story. Unamuno loves an argument.

And this comes to why I chose this book. A few weeks ago I saw the 2019 Spanish film, Mientras dure la guerra (While at War). The story is about Miguel de Unamuno, who at first supported Franco, then when his friends, family and fellow citizens went missing, he changed his views. There is a scene where Unamuno spends an afternoon arguing with a friend. He points out that Spaniards love to argue but as his friend points out, Unamuno loves to argue, perhaps even more.

I had read Niebla a year or two ago and having reread Don Quijote early in the pandemic, I knew this would be a perfect follow-up. It was so enlightening, playful, well written (they played this up in the movie), and his arguments were so good. Sometimes dated. A little heavy on religion at times (hey it reflects the time). What can I say? A classic on a classic. A treat to read!

PS I read the E-bookarama Edition which features those charming windmills on the cover. Bueno!

4.5

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Tu nu știi încă, dragul meu prieten, că toți singuraticii, fără să se cunoască, fără să se privească-n față, fără să-și știe unii altora de nume, merg împreună ajutându-se între dânșii. Ceilalți vorbesc unii de alții, își dau mâna, se felicită satisfăcuți, se ridică în slăvi și se ponegresc, cârtesc în sinea lor, dar fiecare își urmează calea. Și fug de mormânt.
Tu nu ții de maghernița lor, ci de batalionul cruciațiilor liberi. De ce-ți lipești urechea de scândura magherniței s-asculți ce se cotcodăcește acolo? Nu prietene, nu! Când treci pe lângă ei astupă-ți urechile. Spune-le ce ai de spus și zorește înainte pe drumul spre mormânt. Și în cuvintele tale să freamăte toată setea, toată foamea, tot dorul și toată iubirea ta."

[izaro díaz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Es una de las lecturas más agradables que he hecho en mucho tiempo. Ahora, como Unamuno, me recojo a la fe de don Quijote y Sancho.

«Si la vida es sueño, ¡déjame soñarla inacabable!».

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

(Español primero. . . English below)

Esto fue un libro sumamente difícil de entender, no solo porque lo leí en mi segundo idioma, pero también por los conceptos super-abstractos que Unamuno persigue sin descansa. Es el último de los libros unamuneanos que quería leer, y puedo decir por cierto que admiro al hombre y pensador mucho más que disfruto de sus obras.

Llegué a Unamuno a través de Erich Fromm, quién contó en su librito On Disobedience del famoso episodio entre Unamuno y el general José Millán-Astray en la Universidad de Salamanca el 12 de Octubre, 1936. Para ellos que no sepan, el general lidió un grito falangista en el auditorio, y Unamuno respondió asi:

«Estáis esperando mis palabras. Me conocéis bien, y sabéis que soy incapaz de permanecer en silencio. A veces, quedarse callado equivale a mentir, porque el silencio puede ser interpretado como aquiescencia. Quiero hacer algunos comentarios al discurso -por llamarlo de algún modo- del profesor Maldonado, que se encuentra entre nosotros. Se ha hablado aquí de guerra internacional en defensa de la civilización cristiana; yo mismo lo hice otras veces. Pero no, la nuestra es sólo una guerra incivil. Vencer no es convencer, y hay que convencer, sobre todo, y no puede convencer el odio que no deja lugar para la compasión. Dejaré de lado la ofensa personal que supone su repentina explosión contra vascos y catalanes llamándolos anti-España; pues bien, con la misma razón pueden ellos decir lo mismo. El señor obispo lo quiera o no lo quiera, es catalán, nacido en Barcelona, y aquí está para enseñar la doctrina cristiana que no queréis conocer. Yo mismo, como sabéis, nací en Bilbao y llevo toda mi vida enseñando la lengua española, que no sabéis...»

En este punto, el general José Millán-Astray (el cual sentía una profunda enemistad por Unamuno), empezó a gritar: «¿Puedo hablar? ¿Puedo hablar?». Su escolta presentó armas y alguien del público gritó: «¡Viva la muerte!» (lema de la Legión). Millán habló: «¡Cataluña y el País Vasco, el País Vasco y Cataluña, son dos cánceres en el cuerpo de la nación! El fascismo, remedio de España, viene a exterminarlos, cortando en la carne viva y sana como un frío bisturí!». Se excitó de tal modo hasta el punto que no pudo seguir hablando. Pensando, se cuadró mientras se oían gritos de «¡Viva España!».

Se produjo un silencio mortal y unas miradas angustiadas se volvieron hacia Unamuno, que dijo: «Acabo de oír el necrófilo e insensato grito "¡Viva la muerte!". Esto me suena lo mismo que "¡Muera la vida!". Y yo, que he pasado mi vida componiendo paradojas que excitaban la ira de algunos que no las comprendían he de deciros, como experto en la materia, que esta ridícula paradoja me parece repelente. Como ha sido proclamada en homenaje al último orador, entiendo que va dirigida a él, si bien de una forma excesiva y tortuosa, como testimonio de que él mismo es un símbolo de la muerte. El general Millán-Astray es un inválido. No es preciso que digamos esto con un tono más bajo. Es un inválido de guerra. También lo fue Cervantes. Pero los extremos no sirven como norma. Desgraciadamente en España hay actualmente demasiados mutilados. Y, si Dios no nos ayuda, pronto habrá muchísimos más. Me atormenta el pensar que el general Millán-Astray pudiera dictar las normas de la psicología de las masas. Un mutilado que carezca de la grandeza espiritual de Cervantes, que era un hombre, no un superhombre, viril y completo a pesar de sus mutilaciones, un inválido, como he dicho, que no tenga esta superioridad de espíritu es de esperar que encuentre un terrible alivio viendo cómo se multiplican los mutilados a su alrededor. El general Millán-Astray desea crear una España nueva, creación negativa sin duda, según su propia imagen. Y por eso quisiera una España mutilada (...)».

En ese momento Millán-Astray exclama irritado «¡Muera la intelectualidad traidora! ¡Viva la muerte!»

Unamuno, sin amedrentarse, continúa: «¡Este es el templo de la inteligencia, y yo soy su sumo sacerdote! Vosotros estáis profanando su sagrado recinto. Yo siempre he sido, diga lo que diga el proverbio, un profeta en mi propio país. Venceréis, porque tenéis sobrada fuerza bruta. Pero no convenceréis, porque para convencer hay que persuadir. Y para persuadir necesitaréis algo que os falta: razón y derecho en la lucha. Me parece inútil el pediros que penséis en España. He dicho».

A continuación, con el público asistente encolerizado contra Unamuno y lanzándole todo tipo de insultos, algunos oficiales echaron mano de las pistolas... pero se libró gracias a la intervención de Carmen Polo de Franco, quien agarrándose a su brazo lo acompañó hasta su domicilio. Ese mismo día, la corporación municipal se reunió de forma secreta y expulsó a Unamuno.

Me choqueó tan fuerte ese último comentario, y me pareció tan heróico decirlo en ese ambiente, tanto que salí de uno para averiguar todo sobre Unamuno, y para leer sus escritos mas emblemáticos. Y mientras no me han interesado tanto sus libros (por ser bastante ocultos y abstractos), es obvio el genio que los inspiró a todos.

Esto, Vida de Don Quijote y Sancho, fue lo más difícil por lejos. Fue más bien una elogia, alardeando los bondades del Caballero de la Mancha, y se puso tedioso después de un rato. Primero estaba un poco escéptico sobre esta idea, no solo presente en Unamuno pero también en todos los críticos de Cervantes, que de algún modo logró Cervantes meter esta inspiración divina en su obra maestro. Unamuno lo lleva aún más alla, diciendo que Cervantes ni estaba conciente de la divinidad que estaba creando con sus leyendas de protagonistas, que Cervantes de hecho no los trataba lo suficiente bueno, que los negaba e insultaba. Es una perspectiva bastante ridícula en la superficie, pero si puedes permitir a Unamuno su locurita, utiliza la idea con efecto interesante.

Lo que más me impresionó del libro fue la idea que Unamuno escriba con una actitud igual al héroe con quién está obsesionado. Como el Quijote lee sus libros de caballeros convencido que sean historias verdaderas, tambien Unamuno lee Don Quijote presumiendo que Quijote y Sancho son personas autenticamente vivas. Es un espejo fascinante, porque a través de Unamuno se ve una versión real del proceso ridículo de enloquecimiento que sufrió Don Quijote en la novela.

A parte de esto, me dío el libro algunos buenos conceptos alrededor de Don Quijote. El amor que tiene Unamuno para los dos es sin duda contagioso, y si yo no hubiese leido este libro como compañero de la novela, es muy probable que se habría entendido como nada mas que una triste broma. Pero gracias a Unamuno y su amor (y fe), yo veo la nobleza de Don Quijote y Sancho, y la ofensiva injusticia de sus burladores.

Todavía me parece extremo analizar al libro hasta este punto (digo lo mismo sobre otras criticas tan serias), y no puedo recomendarlo a ninguna persona que no esté estudiando con un(a) profesor(a), pero hay que admitir que me iluminó mucho alrededor de una de las más famosas novelas en la historia del mundo.


******


This was an extremely difficult book to understand, not only because I read it in my second language, but also because of its incredibly abstract concepts and language. It's the last of Unamuno's books that I wanted to read, and I can say without doubt that I admire Unamuno the man and thinker much more than I actually enjoy his works.

I got to Unamuno through an otherwise forgettable little book by Erich Fromm called On Disobedience. In it, Fromm recounts a famous confrontation between Unamuno and General José Millán-Astray at the University of Salamanca on October 12, 1936. The General led a Falangist cheer to which Unamuno responded in front of the whole auditorium:

"You are waiting for my words. You know me well, and know I cannot remain silent for long. Sometimes, to remain silent is to lie, since silence can be interpreted as assent. I want to comment on the so-called speech of Professor Maldonado, who is with us here. I will ignore the personal offence to the Basques and Catalonians. I myself, as you know, was born in Bilbao. The Bishop," Unamuno gestured to the Archbishop of Salamanca, "whether you like it or not, is Catalan, born in Barcelona. But now I have heard this insensible and necrophilous oath, "¡Viva la Muerte!", and I, having spent my life writing paradoxes that have provoked the ire of those who do not understand what I have written, and being an expert in this matter, find this ridiculous paradox repellent. General Millán-Astray is a cripple. There is no need for us to say this with whispered tones. He is war cripple. So was Cervantes. But unfortunately, Spain today has too many cripples. And, if God does not help us, soon it will have very many more. It torments me to think that General Millán-Astray could dictate the norms of the psychology of the masses. A cripple, who lacks the spiritual greatness of Cervantes, hopes to find relief by adding to the number of cripples around him."

Millán-Astray responded: "¡Muera la inteligencia! ¡Viva la Muerte!" ("Death to intelligence! Long live death!"), provoking applause from the Falangists.

Unamuno continued: "This is the temple of intelligence, and I am its high priest. You are profaning its sacred domain. You will win, because you have enough brute force. But you will not convince. In order to convince it is necessary to persuade, and to persuade you will need something that you lack: reason and right in the struggle. I see it is useless to ask you to think of Spain. I have spoken."

The whole exchange, but especially his last words, impressed me so much with their heroism that I had to go and learn everything I could about the man who uttered them, and read his best-known books. And while his books haven't interested me greatly (being as erudite and abstract as they are), the genius behind them is unmistakable.

The Life of Don Quixote & Sancho was the most difficult by far. It was more of an elegy, singing the praises of the Knight of La Mancha, and it got old. I began skeptical of this idea, not only by Unamuno but by many other critics of Cervantes, that Cervantes somehow tapped into a divine fountain of insight in order to produce this work. Unamuno takes it even further, proposing that Cervantes wasn't even conscious of the divine natures of his creations, that he actually didn't treat them with enough respect or devotion, that he insulted and neglected them in his ignorance. The idea is pretty ridiculous on its face, but if you grant Unamuno his little eccentricity, he produces some interesting results.

What most impressed me about the book was seeing how Unamuno writes with the same exact attitude as the hero about whom he's writing. Just as Quixote reads books of chivalry convinced that they are true stories, so does Unamuno read Don Quixote with the premise that Quixote and Sancho are real people. It's a fascinating mirror because through Unamuno you see the real-life version of the ridiculous process of going crazy that Quixote suffers in the book.

Apart from this, Unamuno's book gave me some good understandings about the novel as I read it. The love that Unamuno shows for the two protagonists is contagious, and if I hadn't read this book alongside the novel (see my review), it's very probable that I would have experienced the world classic as nothing more than a sad, tiresome joke. Thanks to Unamuno, and to his faith and love, I can see the nobility in Quixote and Sancho, and the offensive injustice of his mockers.

It still seems extreme to analyze Don Quixote to the degree that Unamuno and many other critics have done. Unamuno's 3oo-plus page "essay" certainly qualifies as obsession (whether unhealthy or not I can't say). Nor can I recommend it to anyone who's not actively studying with the aid of a professor. But I have to admit that despite my struggles and my unabashed relief at finally finishing it, it has illuminated much for me about perhaps the most famous novel of all time.

Not Bad Reviews

@pointblaek

[Elena Lapesa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dice Unamuno:

Mi rendo conto che in molti aspirano a vedere un’umanità che non sia toccata da crimini e non gli importa se i sentimenti malvagi continuano ad avvelenare le anime, invece io spero che Dio ci dia forti passioni d’odio, d’amore, d’invidia, di ammirazione, di asceti e di libertini, nonostante tali passioni daranno dei frutti, com’è naturale.

Bisogna dunque turbare lo spirito del prossimo, frugandolo fino al midollo, e portare a compimento l’opera di misericordia di svegliare i dormienti quando si avvicinano a un pericolo o quando si presenta alla contemplazione una qualche bellezza. Bisogna inquietare gli spiriti e infondere in essi forti aneliti, pur sapendo che non raggiungeranno mai ciò che anelano. Bisogna prelevare Sancho da casa sua, strappandolo a moglie e figli, e far sì che corra in cerca di avventure: bisogna renderlo uomo.

[Guille · Rating 5 out of 5]

An exegetic analysis of Don Quijote, drawing parallels to Christ, Santa Teresa and Ignacio de Loyola. Unamuno is fantastically insane, much like a certain hidalgo.

[Socrate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Care povesteşte despre firea şi felul de viaţă al vestitului hidalgo Don Quijote de La Mancha.


Nu ştim nimic despre naşterea lui Don Quijote, nimic despre copilăria şi tinereţea lui, nici despre cum s-a plămădit sufletul Cavalerului Credinţei, al aceluia care ne face cu nebunia sa înţelepţi. Nu ştim nimic despre părinţii lui, despre neam şi obârşie, nici despre cum i-au intrat în cap nălucile
întinsei câmpii a Manchei, pe unde obişnuia să vâneze; nu ştim nimic despre răsunetul pe care l-a avut în sufletul lui priveliştea lanurilor ce se desfăşurau înainte-i împestriţate cu maci şi cu crăiţe; nu ştim nimic despre tinereţea lui.
S-a pierdut orice amintire despre neamul, naşterea, copilăria şi tinereţea lui; nu ne-au păstrat-o nici tradiţia orală şi nici vreo mărturie scrisă; iar dacă a existat cumva vreuna, ea s-a pierdut sau zace undeva sub colbul veacurilor. Nu ştim de-a dat sau nu vreo dovadă, încă din fragedă pruncie, că avea un suflet cutezător şi eroic, în felul acelor sfinţi din naştere care, de sugaci chiar, nu sug vinerea şi-n zilele de post în semn de umilinţă şi de bun exemplu.
Cât despre neam, chiar el i-a spus lui Sancho, tăifăsuind cu acesta după ce dobândise coiful lui Mambrino, că măcar că era hidalgo, boier de viţa veche şi vestită, cu moşie şi acareturi . (...) Şi-n adevăr, nu-i nimeni care până la urmă să nu se tragă din regi, şi încă din regi detronaţi. Dar el era din neamurile ce sunt şi nu au fost. Neamul lui cu el începe.

[Nathaniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

«Y he de añadir aquí que muchas veces tenemos a un escritor por persona real y verdadera e histórica por verle de carne y hueso, a los sujetos que finge en sus ficciones no más sino por de pura fantasía, y sucede al revés, y es que estos sujetos lo son muy de veras y de toda realidad y se sirven de aquel otro que nos parece de carne y hueso para tomar ellos ser y figura ante los hombres. Y cuando despertemos todos del sueño de la vida, se han de ver a este respecto cosas muy peregrinas y se espantarán los sabios al ver qué es la verdad y qué es la mentira y cuán errados andábamos al pensar que esa quisicosa que llamamos lógica tenga valor alguno fuera de este miserable mundo en que nos tienen presos el tiempo y el espacio, tiranos del espíritu.»

[Jon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Clara crítica al positivismo y racionalismo de la época. Lo real está en el obrar; obrar movidos por la fe, por lo que queremos.
Para Unamuno, lo más ideal es lo más real y es por eso que cree que Don Quijote es más real que Cervantes. Personalmente, no me vendría mal un poquito de locura quijotesca.

[Juan Saborido modia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Q grande Unamuno. Explica el Quijote y mucho de lo español.

[Piero Marmanillo · Rating 5 out of 5]

¡Hermoso libro! ¡Viva la andante caballería de Don Quijote de la Mancha y su escudero Sancho Panza! ¡Inmortales!

[Jesús Pérez · Rating 4 out of 5]

Unamuno extrae de la ficción cervantina a la pareja más ilustre del hispanismo para incluirlo en su propio discurso. Un texto que va a caballo entre el ensayo y la ficción donde Unamuno relata las hazañas de estos dos héroes por capítulos, sin embargo, romperá la pared ficcional para compararlo, principalmente, con Íñigo de Loyola, que según el escritor es una de las principales fuentes de la leyenda del caballero errante. Un texto importantísimo para la prevalencia de la vida del cervantismo y del quijotismo, aunque Miguel de Unamuno discrepe con Cervantes hasta tal punto de considerarlo verdaderamente muerto y no a su creación. Quijotización, amor ante Aldonza o Dulcinea, nobleza, locura, caballerosidad, toda esta enumeración enlazada a una visión deísta de Alonso Quijano, comparado con la figura de Jesucristo.

[حسن الجزائري · Rating 3 out of 5]

موضوع الكتاب غريب حيث يؤمن الكاتب أن شخصية دون كيخوته هي شخصية حقيقية و ما الرواية التي كتبها ثربانتس إلا توثيق تاريخي لحياة دون كيخوته مع التعليق عليها.
يتميز الكتاب بمجموعة من الأفكار الفلسفية العميقة و الغريبة أيضا.

[Maher Razouk · Rating 5 out of 5]

لقد قيل منذ زمن إن الجوع والحب هما نابضا الحياة الإنسانية. والراقصون لا يرقصون إلا بدافع الجوع أو الحب، الجوع الجسدي، والحب الجسدي أيضاً.

[Ignacio]

Después de varios meses he acabado con “Vida de Don Quijote y Sancho” de Miguel de Unamuno. Pese a haber tardado tanto,incluso llegando a hacérseme bastante bola,he disfrutado bastante de estas reflexiones y casi “delirios” por parte de Unamuno.Como siempre,me resulta un autor que,si bien tiende a la boutade y la exageración, expone unas reflexiones bastante profundas e interesantes que hacen eco en mí. Creo que incluso ha conseguido cambiar mi opinión sobre los personajes de la gran obra de Cervantes.Yo que desde que leí el Quijote siempre me había considerado Sanchopancesco,he descubierto en este ensayo un Quijote(o Alonso Quijano) verdaderamente virtuoso y referencial. Unamuno diviniza la figura del Quijote hasta el paroxismo y establece una especie de tríada de personajes entre Cristo, San Ignacio de Loyola y el mismo Quijote.Al final,el autor propone que Sancho encarna el alma de su recién fallecido señor, que sirve de arquetipo para cualquier español del futuro. El ensayo es en conjunto un popurrí de ideas de Unamuno que si bien permanecen conectadas al tratarse de comentarios de una sucesión de capítulos,plantean ideas bastantes dispares y ambiciosas que hacen difícil mantenerle el pulso al autor. Pese a ello,creo que es una obra interesante y que proporciona nuevas dimensiones al inabarcable libro del Quijote de la Mancha. Me gustaría volver a revisarlo y leerlo en un futuro,quizá no de una tirada pero sí un buen repaso.

[laurentiu]

0

[Simona Moschini · Rating 1 out of 5]

Illeggibile, abbandonato per sfinimento.

[Gregorio Redondo]

literatura / literatura contemporánea / narrativa española contemporanea del xix al xxi / colmenar estudio estantería derecha 5ª balda

[pchvsk · Rating 5 out of 5]

Una maravilla.

[Patrick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Better and more thoughtful than the source text. Has, unlike Cervantes, the perspicacity to recognize when the story is spinning its wheels.

[Jorge Esquivel · Rating 3 out of 5]

realmente sería dos y medio pq i cannot stand this puta