Andrew Stutts
Miguel de Cervantes used “Don Quixote” as a means to critique long-standing and venerated literary forms, specifically the Chivalric Romance genre. Outwardly it appeared that this was only a story of an impassioned mad man that aspired to live the chivalrous life of a knight. However, Cervantes skillfully used his crafty writing style to parody the rigid epics and knighthood narratives. He attempted to portray “Don Quixote” as a translation based on older documents and strived to lead readers through the purported history records of Don Quixote. Cervantes started the story by recounting Don Quixote’s beginnings and providing his background. This pattern was a well-established tradition in old epic tales, where the linage of the hero served as a starting point concerning their status and consequent destiny in the accounts.
Oddly enough, Cervantes purposely used a vague and indistinct setting for the hero. The following is the ambiguous description of the location; “In a village of La Mancha, the name of which I have no desire to call to mind, there lived not long since one of those gentlemen that keep a lance in the lance-rack, an old buckler, a lean hack, and a greyhound for coursing” (Cervantes Vol. I, I). One can note from the preceding passage that Cervantes endeavored to spoof the manner in which the classical literary forms followed a patent arrangement established by a non-progressive tradition. Furthermore, in “Don Quixote” the author in a peculiar fashion halted mid-story to allude to a historical credibility to his sources. This was done in an effort to insinuate that the “Don Quixote” story was indeed valid and legitimate. However, the emphasis on the amount of past information is offset by the fact that his sources were farfetched and sometimes incomplete as shown in this passage from “Don Quixote; “But it spoils all, that at this point and crisis the author of the history leaves this battle impending, giving as excuse that he could find nothing more written about these achievements of Don Quixote than what has been already set forth. It is true the second author of this work was unwilling to believe that a history so curious could have been allowed to fall under the sentence of oblivion, or that the wits of La Mancha could have been so undiscerning as not to preserve in their archives or registries some documents referring to this famous knight; and this being his persuasion, he did not despair of finding the conclusion of this pleasant history, which, heaven favouring him, he did find in a way that shall be related in the Second Part.” (Cervantes Vol. I, VIII). This method is employed by Cervantes to ridicule the incessant use of history and the consecration of the past in traditional literary forms. Furthermore, Cervantes is making the point that this overemphasis on the past undercuts the credibility, creativeness, and overall appeal of a story.
In “Don Quixote”, Cervantes offered a tale that is an obvious caricature of the chivalry tales. This story has all the familiar trappings except instead of the hero endeavors ending in triumph they usually wound-up being pitiful defeats. It is interesting that the character Don Quixote became delusional by reading the same literary genre that Cervantes is criticizing through parody.
In “Gargantua and Pantagruel”, Francois Rabelais used this extravagant, comical, and overly embellished tale to present an earnest meditation into the incongruities of both the Medieval and the Renaissance man. Furthermore, by observing the manner in which he advances his own ideals of Humanism in his writing we are able to better understand Rabelais’ scrutiny into the paradigms of his own generation. To begin to comprehend “Gargantua and Pantagruel” it is first necessary to first recognize Rabelais’ distinguishing use of satire. Rabelais lived his life during the period between the Middle-Ages and the Renaissance that had enormous changes in patterns of thinking. There were numerous changes in the societal institutions of Rabelais’s era, predominately in education and religion. The admiration of great philosophical thinkers, the move towards science and humanism greatly influenced this transition in thought. Through the use satire, parody, fantasy, and grotesque comedy, Rabelais was able to ridicule the institutions of his day without being too overt about it. He aimed to entertain his readers by poking fun at the ideas and institutions of his generation.
The main characters in Rabelais’s story are giants who interestingly enough are similar to people of the Medieval Ages. In the first book he begins with the following genealogy of Gargantua; “I must refer you to the great chronicle of Pantagruel for the knowledge of that genealogy and antiquity of race by which Gargantua is come unto us. In it you may understand more at large how the giants were born in this world, and how from them by a direct line issued Gargantua, the father of Pantagruel: and do not take it ill, if for this time I pass by it, although the subject be such, that the oftener it were remembered, the more it would please your worshipful Seniorias; according to which you have the authority of Plato in Philebo and Gorgias; and of Flaccus, who says that there are some kinds of purposes (such as these are without doubt), which, the frequentlier they be repeated, still prove the more delectable…Would to God everyone had as certain knowledge of his genealogy since the time of the ark of Noah until this age” (Rabelais I). This genealogy is quit lengthy and is meant as a spoof on the Medievalist obsession with lineage. Rabelais’ comical criticism of the scholars of the Medieval era was even more expressive in his account of Gargantua’s education. The following passage relates the manner in which Gargantua was taught Latin Letter by a Sophist; “Presently they appointed him a great sophister-doctor, called Master Tubal Holofernes, who taught him his ABC so well, that he could say it by heart backwards…After that he read unto him the book de modis significandi, with the commentaries of Hurtbise, of Fasquin, of Tropdieux, of Gualhaut, of John Calf, of Billonio, of Berlinguandus, and a rabble of others; and herein he spent more than eighteen years and eleven months, and was so well versed in it that, to try masteries in school disputes with his condisciples, he would recite it by heart backwards, and did sometimes prove on his finger-ends to his mother, quod de modis significandi non erat scientia” (Rabelais XIV). Here Rabelais is critiquing the overemphasis of rote memorization in the educational institutions. This social commentary on Medieval scholastics is satirically continued throughout the rest of “Gargantua and Pantagruel”.
Rabelais transitioned from his animated commentary of Medieval education to commence portraying Renaissance scholastics and thought. This shift becomes evident in the story when Grandgousier recognized the limitations of his son’s education and changes his teacher to Ponocrates. In turn, Ponocrates recognizes Gargantua’s short comings as a result of his Medieval education. However, he was cautious not to administer change too quickly for fear of making him feel out step and disoriented. One can presume that Rabelais was illuminating on the disorientation felt by his generation as they transitioned from Medieval to Renaissance paradigms of thinking. This is evident from the following extract from the story; “When Ponocrates knew Gargantua’s vicious manner of living, he resolved to bring him up in another kind; but for a while he bore with him, considering that nature cannot endure a sudden change, without great violence” (Rabelais XXIII). The solution Ponocrates comes up with is to administer a magical herb to make Gargantua forget all he had previously learned. What is insinuated by this is that the Renaissance learning was so superior to Medieval learning that it was best to drop all that was learned or absorbed from the latter.
Despite the advocating for the superiority of Renaissance education over the Medieval model, Rabelais found material in the Renaissance method to scrutinize with satire. He pointed out that even good things can be overdone with the following description of Gargantua’s day; “This done, he was apparelled, combed, curled, trimmed, and perfumed, during which time they repeated to him the lessons of the day before. He himself said them by heart, and upon them would ground some practical cases concerning the estate of man, which he would prosecute sometimes two or three hours, but ordinarily they ceased as soon as he was fully clothed. Then for three good hours he had a lecture read unto him” (Rabelais XXIII). Furthermore, Gargantua’s day was depicted as a never ending lesson covering every conceivable subject and everything done is to the utmost make him accomplished at a variety of tasks. This was certainly a social commentary by Rabelais on the neurotic need to be well-rounded in Renaissance society. In “Gargantua and Pantagruel”, Rabelais is basically providing commentary, albeit in satirical form, on two schools of thought, Medieval and Renaissance. Furthermore, he makes the assertion that both periods had their shortcomings and these deficiencies are further accentuated by their excesses.
Works Cited
Cervantes, Miguel de. Don Quixote. 2004 EBook
Cervantes, Miguel de. The History of Don Quixote, Volume II., Complete. EBook
Machiavelli, Nicolo. The Prince. EBook
Montaigne, Michel de. The Essays of Montaigne, Complete. EBook
Rabelais, Francois. Gargantua and Pantagruel, Complete.. Project Gutenberg, 2012. eBook. <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1200/1200-h/1200-h.htm