(USC)Cervantes Final Essay

8/3/2019 (USC)Cervantes Final Essay

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/usccervantes-final-essay 1/11

Tim Meester Portfolio

Tim Meester

Roy Norton

Cervantes

6-14-10

Is Sancho Panza’s role in the second part of Don Quixote more complicated than hismaster’s?

The idea that Don Quixote gains depth and complexity in the second part is based

on two principal developments that are commonly misread. The first development is thathe emerges as a paradoxical character and the second development is that he becomes

perpetually melancholic. Upon closer examination, however, it will be discovered that

these two principal developments exist not because they are infused into the Don’s

character, but rather, their existence is predicated solely on the illusion that the reader thinks they are new developments to his character. In truth, Don Quixote is no different

from the first part, as these supposedly new developments have presence in the first part;it is just that certain aspects of his existing personality are given more emphasis by

Cervantes in the second part. The knight is by his very nature static and solipsistic, a

pertinacious resister of external influences trapped in and refusing to let go of an obsolete

fictional history – he is the very essence of obstinacy and is therefore incapable of significant change. The role of the humble squire Sancho on the other hand, is not only

intrinsically more complex than his master in the second part, but his unbridled access to

the external world and his openness to influence and change are attributes which give himthe ability to surpass his master as the authority of the text. He is not only able to mimic

the so-called complex characteristics of his master through his company, but he is able tosurpass them with acquired powers of his own. He is a clever and silent thief, whoappropriates the fulfillment of his master’s ambition and of his role in the story. He is a

needed change, necessary to bear the thematic burden of the second part until its end and

without him the story could not continue because it would barely exceed the static boundsof the chivalry stories that Cervantes is determined to leave behind in the dust. Sancho’s

role in the second part then, is infinitely more complex than his master’s.

The first seeming development to Don Quixote, as I mentioned, is the idea that he

emerges as an ambivalent or paradoxical character. Sampson’s last words, “to live amadman, yet die wise” are eternally intriguing because they cogently express what seems

to be the fundamental paradox of the Knight of La Mancha; an ambivalence derived from

an inherent contradiction in his nature as observed by other people. Indeed, most of thesecondary characters who give much thought in regard to his true nature struggle to

reconcile his evident clear and reasonable intelligence with his childish and absurdly mad

fantasies. The son of Don Diego famously says early on that, “he’s mad in streaks,complete with lucid intervals.”1 The idea that Don Quixote is both “mad” and “wise”

simultaneously is very intriguing and certainly bears a general consistency with the

prominent theme of the novel; that of fictions power blur the line between what is “true”

1 Cervantes, Don Quixote, 981

USC – School of Cinematic Arts MFA – Television & Film Production

2012




and what is “false.” Yet this relationship must technically remain only general , and

consciously so, because the paradox of “mad/wise” is not equivalent to that of

“true/false.” “True” and “false” are related as antonyms whereas “mad” and “wise” arenot even related because they are words describing two different conceptual categories:

one is concerned with mental health and the other deals with intelligence. What happens

is the reader is led to conflate the distinction of “mad/wise,” with “sane/insane” in order to psychologically reconcile it to the theme which is predicated on an antonym, this is all

done through the power of the story-teller’s suggestion. This, of course, parallels Don

Quixote’s acceptance of the Duke and Duchess hoax, in that he reconciles their suggestedfiction with the real world. In this way we are sucked into the quixotic vision, believing

in something more through the power of the imagination and it is through this brilliant

constructed perception of the character that we subconscious identify with a madman.

Since Quixote does fall into the framework of a fiction, it would have been possible tomake him unequivocally “sane/insane,” as it lies within the realm of possibility in fiction;

yet Cervantes can only accomplish his thematic task by making you think of its existence

through suggestion, in other words, by giving you the illusion, because the theme itself is

an illusion; there is nothing at all pragmatically true about the story, but as Shakespearesays, “thinking makes it so.”2 To make him either unequivocally “sane/insane or just

plainly “mad/wise” would not be sufficient to fulfill Cervantes’ thematic task because thesuggestion is necessary to maintain the illusion.

Sampson’s final words about Don Quixote “to live a madman but die wise” then,

is meant to be read ironically because it doesn’t indicate that he actually was both mad

and wise, but that he was a madman who was thought wise. This is written in the contextof a feigned historical record which alarms the close-reader to how “historical truth” is

parodied throughout. Don Quixote, as he recognizes early on, is being constructed as a

fiction due to the limitations of reconstructing histories, in other words, a lot of hisfictitious real characteristics are omitted and new ones are fabricated so that our

conception of him in the fiction doesn’t correspond to the real him. Consider the irony of

what Quixote says about Aeneas and Ulysses in a conversation early on with Sampson, “Iam sure Aeneas was not as pious as Virgil depicts him, nor was Ulysses as prudent as

Homer says."3 A fictional character who was never real, but constructed from the

imagination of a great writer discusses how other famous fictional characters’ real

qualities are obscured by historical generalizations and what is more, Quixote assumes

that both characters actually existed. Cervantes seems to suggest that posterity will judge

Don Quixote with the same historical authenticity as Aeneas and Ulysses, both of whom,

in Western Tradition, have been treated with the same degree of authenticity assomebody like Alexander the Great. He also seems to suggest that any attempt to

approach his fictional character with a level of seriousness will be absurd and futile,

because there is no authentically true Don Quixote, it is just thought so. In order to perpetuate this theme, it is necessary on Cervantes part, on the level of characterization,

to construct his character in such a way that the reader has a sense of comparable

perspectives of him – that of who he really was and how he was perceived by other characters and remembered in history. It is necessary then, to have a sense that beyond

the illusion of being thought “sane/insane,” which is suggested psychologically to the

2 Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2.3 Cervantes, Don Quixote, 504


2012




reader by conflating the distinction of “mad/wise,” Don Quixote is, in the context of the

suggested real story, meant to be read as just plainly mad; otherwise there would be no

points of comparison. Therefore, beyond the subtle illusions constructed by the nature of the story, it follows that Don Quixote is deceivingly simple because he is just plain mad.

With this in mind, I will approach his character beyond the illusion and focus on that

aspect of him which is meant to be read as plainly mad.There are three moments in the novel which reveal to the reader that Don

Quixote, in the context of the story, is just simply mad but thought “mad/wise”. The first

moment is located at the beginning of part two in the episode of the barber. Confounded by the Don’s characteristic ability to exhibit intelligent qualities and then subvert them

with subsequent mad ramblings, the barber tells the story of another mad man who is

characterized almost identically to the Don “he was still mad, with lucid intervals.”4 The

mad man of the story, who undergoes a similar test of sanity, turns out to beunequivocally insane at the moment the chaplain in the story thought him most sane

because even though he was convincingly intelligent, he couldn’t conceal the aspect of

his insanity (the belief that he is Neptune). The Chaplain concludes then that it is

possible to be both insane and intelligent, because they are different concepts and themad man is not both sane/insane, but just simply mad. This is done in the context of

trying to discern the true nature of Don Quixote’s madness.5 Don Quixote, of course,argues that comparisons are always “odious” and “unwelcome,”6 but like his

doppelganger in the story, his intelligent contribution is immediately superseded by an

insane proposition and he inadvertently indicates the nature of his madness and how hecan be compared to the madman in the story.7 The beginning episode both establishesand explains the knight’s paradox with such subtlety that the reader’s mystification with

the knight and the apprehension that there is something “more” to him than mere

madness overshadows the evidence that he is, in fact, simply mad. As the Duke andDuchess seem to indicate with their willingness to go to excesses with their hoaxes, his

madness is so contagious that even the sanest mind can be sucked into the quixotic vision

and become insane.The second piece of evidence to indicate that the Don is just simply mad comes

from the character that is closest to him – his loyal and discerning squire Sancho Panza.

In chapter thirty three, after having spent a great deal with Don Quixote, Sancho revealshis private perception of his master to the Duchess. He says, “I reckon my master Don

Quixote is stark and raving mad, though sometimes he does say things that to my mind

and everyone else’s listening to him are so clever and to the point that the devil himself

couldn’t have said them better, but in spite of all that I’m sure he’s an idiot, really I am.”8

Not only does Sancho indicate that his master is much simpler than people think, but he

also, whether consciously or accidentally, provides the close reader with a clue regarding

how the Don is thought to be more complicated than he really is. The beginning and

4 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 4915 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 4936 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 4937 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 493: “I, mister barber, am not Neptune, the god of water, nor am I a madman

trying to make people believe that I am sane; I am merely striving to make the world understand the

delusion under which it labours in not renewing within itself those most happy days when the order of

knight-errantry carried all before it.”8 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 714


2012




ending opinions are in themselves contradictory because being an idiot (as it has already

been established) and being mad are two entirely different things. The very fact that

Sancho equates them with the same meaning indicates precisely how people come tomisread Don Quixote’s simplicity, by conflating a synonymous meaning between

intelligence and sanity.

The final piece of evidence comes from no other a source than Don Quixotehimself. He admits to his niece before his death that he was unequivocally mad, “I

should like to make myself ready to die in such a way as to indicate that my life has not

been so very wicked as to leave me the reputation as a madman; for even though that isexactly what I have been, I’d rather not confirm this truth in the way in which I die.”9

This seems to be a genuinely honest self-assessment, as he exhibits honesty in a situation

where he seems to have the capacity to fabricate the thing he is most ashamed of – his

madness. He acknowledges the fact that he has been mad, and like a man who hasregained his sanity, he wishes to be remembered as a sane man. The very fact that he is

unequivocally sane in this moment is proof that he cannot be read as a paradoxical

character that is both sane and insane; otherwise he would, even in this moment, exhibit

symptoms of insanity. Furthermore, it cannot be argued that he goes untested either, because all of the major characters who are with him in the village, who have otherwise

spent their time trying to reform him, now are bent on maintaining his insanity. The onlyway to refute the fact that he was just mad, and is now just sane, would require us to

think Don Quixote lies to us in his dying moment. Don Quixote, in his madness, never

attempted to deceive others (although most of the other characters tried to deceive him)

he only deceived himself. So why would he, in his moment of clarity, decide to finallydeceive other characters? Don Quixote then, is not paradoxical at all, but simple. It is

the way the story is told, not the nature of the character that causes us to reach any

contrary conclusion.The second misreading of Don Quixote’s development in the second part is

connected to his seeming developed melancholic disposition. It is assumed that his

change of mood develops from a growing doubt that his internal fantasies do notcorrespond to the accepted reality of the external world and that this newly acquired

skepticism is attributed to his new acceptance of external influences. The Romantics

argue (I think erroneously) that this opens up a new potential to read the book (primarilythe second part, but in hindsight, the first as well) as a tragedy rather than a burlesque

comedy and it’s hero as a tragic rather than a funny hero. Lord Byron says what

generally encapsulates the Romantic approach to the book, “Of all tales ‘t is the saddest –

and more sad,/Because it makes us smile: his hero’s right,/And still pursues the right; --to burb the bad/His only object, ‘gainst odds to fight/His guerdon: ‘t is his virtue makes

him mad!/But his adventures form a sorry sight;/A sorrier still is the great moral

taught/By that real epic unto all who have thought.”10 Byron is arguing that Don Quixoteis a romantic expression of the futility of an idealist living in the real world, an

intrinsically noble, sacrificial Christ-like figure, whose vision of virtue is tragically

ruined by the hopelessness of a vicious, fallen world. The melancholy of Don Quixote isa symptom of his acceptance (persuaded by external, worldly influences) that the world

has no place for idealism, because such ideas are mad, and in doing so, he has his doubts

9 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 97710 Lord Byron, Don Juan, Canto xiii.


2012




about and then ultimately relinquishes his identity as a knight errant. The purpose of the

burlesque and comic elements is to emphasize the tragedy all the more, because we laugh

at a man who takes his idealistic vision seriously and it is our laughter that kills him anderadicates his noble cause.

The perceived development and ironic meaning attached to the Don’s melancholy

is given its primary power through the acceptance of the Romantic interpretation; thisleads ultimately to an assumption that Cervantes intentions exceeded the endeavor to

write just a simple comedy. Without the Romantics, however, the illusion of the Don’s

development and change mostly dies and we are left with just a simple funny man. P.E.Russell, who is opposed to the Romantic interpretation, reminds us that Don Quixote was

originally thought of as a funny book, “For more than one and a half centuries after the

book was first published, readers, not only in Spain but in all Europe, apparently accepted

without cavil that Don Quixote was simply a brilliantly successful funny book.”11 If Don

Quixote was meant to be, or at least had been in its time understood as a funny book

rather than a serious one, its protagonist’s melancholic disposition would not indicate a

lurking tragedy on another level, but simply the wavering delusions of a mad man. At

this time I would not like to engage into the debate between Romantic and Burlesquereadings, as that would be an unnecessary digression. For the purposes of this essay, I

will side with the Burlesque reading just to identify the fact that if we exclude theRomantic interpretation, Don Quixote remains a relatively simple character in this

context.

Outside of the Romantic influence, what seems to make Don Quixote a more

complicated character in regard to his change of behavior is the fact that he doesn’t seemas solipsistic. In the first one, he held firmly to his absurd delusions even though the

other characters tried to convince him otherwise. There seems to be a marked difference

in the second part in that he no longer projects his fantasies onto the real world and thathis delusions are maintained exclusively by the deception of other characters. The logical

conclusion seems to be that Don Quixote is steadily being influenced by the external

reality. As persuasive as this view sounds, I think that it is ultimately faulty and it lendsto the illusion that he is more complicated than he really is.

There is no evidence in the book to argue that there is a causal relationship

between external influences changing the Don’s perception of the external world, becausethroughout it all he remains steadfastly a solipsist. Michael Bell draws the same

conclusion, “rather than being merely a response to his external fortunes, his melancholy

seems increasingly to bespeak an a priori emotional withdrawal from the world in

general.”12 The obvious refutation that Don Quixote’s melancholy is not caused byexternal influences is that he is consistently deceived by other characters in the second

part, most notably by the Duke and the Duchess. It must be noted, however, that they

influence him only in the context of reinforcing his madness, they don’t, for instance,ever convince him that his delusions are false. Probably the best example of this is when

the Duke and Duchess try and convince him that Dulcinea is not real, but only a figment

of his imagination. He refuses to accept their argument and even though he is unable to

11 P.E. Russell, ‘ Don Quixote’ As a Funny Book, p. 312.12 Michael Bell, Sancho’s Governorship and the ‘Vanitas’ Theme in ‘Don Quixote’ Part II , p. 331.


2012




maintain his own consistent idea of her in the context of the conversation, he still never

accepts their idea of her .13

So what is the source of Don Quixote’s melancholy which seems to be soconnected with his changing views of the world? As Harold Bloom says, “we are not

permitted to know.”14 We are not permitted to know because we never have direct access

to his mind, our perception of it, as Michael Bell argues, is shaped by the perceptions theother characters have of him throughout the novel.15 Even then the process is

complicated because the references we have of the narrative is told through the frame of

different narrators who are admittedly deceptive. Yet like the historical researcher, sincewe have no full-proof method of sifting out the authentic “truth,” from one reliable

source, we must accept the limitations and focus on the evidence given to us from the

different manuscripts to draw a general picture of the truth. In this context, it is tempting

to think of Don Quixote as a mysterious and elusive bearer of arcane knowledge andtherefore assume that he is ambivalent and cannot be read as just plain mad or simple, but

the same could be said of all of the other characters who are given the same kind of

representation, so we must analyze them with the understanding in mind that they all fall

within the same elusive frame. Since we are not permitted to know Don Quixote’sthoughts, and there is no serious evidence that external influences are the cause of his

temperamental change, we must accept his changes as something exclusively internal . If we exclude the romantic notions of Don Quixote as a real knight, and acknowledge the

fact that he remains a solipsist through and through, than it follows that, beyond the

illusion, he remains a relatively simple character.

Even if we were to accept the implications that Don Quixote is meant to be readas a paradoxical character and that the Romantics were correct in their interpretation of

his melancholic behavior, the Knight would remain simple in the sense that he lacks any

significant development from the first part, because both of these principal aspects of hischaracter are hardly unique to the second part. The fact remains that Don Quixote’s

ability to confound his peers is nothing new to the second part, although they tend to

develop towards the end of the first part. The two major instances happen in chapter thirty seven16 and thirty eight of the first part.17 In both cases the other characters are

astonished by lucid arguments and confounded by the fact that he could still be mad. It

follows that his perceived paradoxical nature is in fact not a unique development in thesecond part. His self-doubt and change of mood is also something that is not entirely

new. In book one there is evidence that he has doubts about his beliefs, and he does at

13 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 707: “But if we are to believe in the history of Don Quixote that came out not

long ago to the general approbation of the public, we understand from it, if my memory serves me

correctly, that you’ve never seen the lady Dulcinea, and that no such person exists, but that she’s a creature

of fantasy whom you conceived and to whom you gave birth in your mind, and provided with all the

charms and perfections that you choose.”14 Cervantes, Don Quixote, Intro by: Harold Bloom.15 Michael Bell, Sancho’s Governorship and the ‘Vanitas’ Theme II , p. 33216 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 335: “Don Quixote was developing his arguments in such an orderly and

lucid way that for the time being none of those listening to him could believe that he was a madman. On

the contrary, since most of them were gentleman and therefore much concerned with arms, they were

delighted to sit there listening as he continued.”17 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 359: “Those who’d been listening to him were again moved to pity on seeing

that a man who seemed to have a good brain, and could argue clearly about everything he discussed, so

totally lost his senses as soon as the talk turned to his detestable and damned chivalry.”


2012




times come to see the world for what it really is. The most famous example is the first

adventure he has with Sancho when the two encounter the windmills.18 A more subtle

instance which is indicative not only of his doubts, but also his melancholy happens at theend of the first part when he seems hesitant to believe that he fought with a giant at the

inn (which turned out to be wine-skins). When he explains his experience to Dorotea he

stops in half-sentence “killing some paltry giant, however proud he may be, poses few problems, for it was only a few hours ago that I tackled him, and…yet I had better keep

quiet, so as not to be accused of lying.”19 He is hesitant to finish the story because he

doubts that the others will believe the story and he speaks with a melancholy air.What makes the second part seem so different from the first is not that there are

new inventions to Don Quixote’s character; rather, existing aspects of his character are

just more emphasized and seem like inventions. For instance, the topic of his paradoxical

nature is dealt with in almost every scene in the second part, whereas in the first it doesn’tappear too much until the end. We get to see the doubting side of his psyche expressed

more often in the second part in the form of seeing the world for what it really is; so we

can assume there are times even in the first part where he sees the world for what it really

is but chooses to keep it a secret from the other characters (Cervantes hides it from us inhis way of telling the story), likewise, in the second book, although he rarely projects his

fantasies onto the world, his attitude and manner of speaking make it evident that heretains his madness until the end. The Duke and Duchess trick him with their hoaxes

throughout the majority of the second part and more importantly, even after he loses his

battle with Sampson and gives up knight-errantry, he still believes in the resurrection of

Altisidora at the Duke and Duchess’ palace. 20 Don Quixote, in the end, is simple both inthe sense that he hardly develops significantly in the second part from the first, but that

the aspects of his personality that we attribute to his complexity are illusions created by

the nature of how the story is told concealing the fact that he is a simple character.Sancho Panza’s role in the second part, on the other hand, is far from simple. He

is intrinsically more complex than his master (even in the first part) and the fact the he is

receptive to external influences and is shaped by them suggests that his complexity is inconstant development. After spending significant time in Don Quixote’s company, he

learns not only how to mimic him, but how to manipulate him; these acquired attributes

are both examples of and set the tone for how Sancho surpasses his master in the story byappropriating his role, achieving his goals in real ways and ultimately how he is shown as

a necessary presence to bear the thematic burden.

The first example of his mimicry is on the level of characterization and it

underscores how Sancho is intrinsically more complex than his master. Sancho is presented in a similar paradoxical way as the Don is. Whereas the Don is said to be

“mad/wise,” Sancho is said to be “foolish/wise.” It must be noted, that I do not intend to

analyze this paradox in the same way that I did the Don’s, because that would detractfrom my point, which is not to discover whether or not Sancho is simply foolish or wise,

but rather, to see how on the level of characterization he surpasses his master in

complexity. The evidence of Sancho’s complexity in this context is the fact that in the

18 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 63-7019 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 50220 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 939-954


2012






regardless of how obviously insane he is. Yet even in the first part, this power structure

begins to blur and the roles start to shift. As early as the twenty-second chapter of part

one, which is the fulling mill episode, Sancho gains the ability to manipulate his master when he ties the legs of Rociante and blames fate as a way to convince his master to

remain stationary and safe until daybreak.24 This demonstrates Sancho’s ability to both

understand his master’s madness and to exploit it to his advantage. Another example of this in the first part is the scene where he famously lies about delivering the letter to

Dulcinea.25 This carries over to the second part in a more complex way when he finds

himself in a situation trying to convince him that Dulcinea is a peasant girl. In thiscontext two additional implications of his subversion of power and significance can be

drawn. Firstly, we get access to his mind and of his deception through a monologue.

This is interesting not only because Sancho pushes the envelope in his ability to utilize

various literary techniques to express his thoughts (I don’t recall the Don having amonologue), but this monologue closely resembles those commonly done by villains in

plays during the Golden Age (I am certain this is true with English plays during the

renaissance, so I imagine something similar happened in Spain), in that a villain gives us

access to how he/she intends to deceive another character. Also implicated here is thefact that Sancho solidifies Don Quixote’s conception of what Dulcinea looks like

(regardless of she is supposed to be enchanted) something that persists even at DonQuixote’s most imaginative moment in the cave of Montesinos26

In addition to being able to mimic and manipulate his master, Sancho evolves to

the point where he appropriates his master’s place in the story. He does this by fulfilling

his master’s ambitions and stealing his place in the story as the center of focus and bearer of the theme. When the two set off for the first time in the first part we learn that what

persuaded Sancho to accompany his master on the journey was the promise that he would

govern an island once the Don became an emperor.27 Sancho, of course, becomes agovernor at the end of part two, but Don Quixote never becomes the emperor. In this

way Sancho fulfills his ambitions in real ways, whereas the Don fails in his. Of course it

could be argued that Sancho’s governorship is a hoax and is therefore inauthentic, butSancho nevertheless exercises sound judgment and is considered wise by the very people

who are trying to trick him. In addition to that, there are instances during his tenure as a

governor that are not planned. The best example is the episode where the girl dresses as a boy.28 The incident is out of the control of the Duke and Duchess and Sancho resolves

the situation wisely. The most important thing to take away from Sancho’s governorship

is that his prudent policies leave a real legacy.29 Don Quixote’s legacy is confined to a

faulty book of his ridiculous adventures, something maintained solely through theimagination of readers who retain interest. Sancho is remembered in the same way too,

because he is just as much a part of the adventures as his master, but his legacy is further

canonized by his influence in worldly matters (the law) and the Don’s only association tothat is his advice to Sancho about governing: he himself never fulfills the reality of his

24 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 15325 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 280-28826 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 630-63727 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 6128 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 812-82429 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 838: “In short, Sancho made such excellent by-laws that they have remained

in force in the town to this day, and they are called The Ordinances of the Great Governor Sancho Panza.


2012




ambitions because he is incapable of being reconciled to the outer reality. Sancho, who

is the very essence of change and is in continual flux is able to adapt to the new, learn

from his company and as a result eventually surpasses his static master in fulfilling hisambitions.

In the second part, Sancho literally steals the spot light from his passive master.

The Duchess considers Sancho “to be even funnier and madder than his master.”30

Thisis owing to the fact that Sancho’s role becomes more complicated than his master’s, he is

able to find new and varied ways to be funny (not that that is his intention, nor does it

have to be). These are not empty words from the Duchess either, because it is Sancho,not Don Quixote, who is chosen as the subject for her greatest hoax – the governorship.

She is content with leaving Don Quixote in the castle to entertain them with his

predictable knight-errant delusions. Only Sancho is equipped to push the envelope and

he does just that. Not only does he produce fresh comedy, but his character undergoes asignificant change and development. He proves to the world the depth of his potential

and he deals with government matters with full seriousness as his stupidity is almost

completely suspended throughout his duration of governor.

Michael Bell understands Don Quixote and Sancho Panza as vehicles serving agreater theme and that in the second part Sancho starts to take on a more prominent role.

In regard to Sancho’s governorship, he says, “This whole episode is not to be understoodas a farcical interlude, but rather as a Shakespearean sub-plot in which the major theme is

expanded and universalized through repetition in a comic and earthly mode.”31 Michael

Bell argues further that each incident that Sancho encounters as a governor are miniature

repetitions of the greater theme of the novel, that of the ambiguity between truth andfalsehood.32 Bell also seems to concede with the idea that Don Quixote is little

influenced by the outer influences whereas Sancho is shaped and changed by them. This

opinion is expressed by the fact that Quixote is hardly influenced by Sancho, whereasSancho is heavily influenced by the Don.33 The implication to take from this is that Don

Quixote is too simple to bear the thematic burden of the second part; all of his function is

used up mainly in the first part where the theme of dual truth and falsehood are expressedin his absurd beliefs which color the real world, the illusion that he himself is perceived

as an irreconcilable mad wise man and the fact that he begins to doubt his own concept of

the world and exhibits a melancholic disposition. For the deeply philosophical andexpanding demands of the second part, Cervantes needs to implement change and the

only character who has the capacity to bring change is the one who can change – Sancho.

In the second part, the dual theme is expressed in a far more versatile way because the

significance of chivalry (and by extension Quixote) is now almost obsolete as they arenow too stale and predictable. In short, the only way that Cervantes can succeed in

ridding the world of Chivalry novels is to commit Quixote to the flames and replace him

with the versatile essence of Sancho, who embodies the vision of the novel. AnthonyClose characterizes Sancho as a “simpleton-fool” who is threaded in part by a variety of

30 Cervantes, Don Quixote, p. 70431 Michael Bell, Sancho’s Governorship and the ‘Vanitas’ Theme, p. 33232 Michael Bell, Sancho’s Governorship and the ‘Vanitas’ Theme, p. 332-33533 Michael Bell, Sancho’s Governorship and the Vanitas’ Theme, p. 332: “Over the course of the novel as a

whole Sancho is affected in speech and outlook by his association with his master but Quixote, although he

responds to personal pressure of Sancho and is driven to acknowledge the force of his mental outlook,

cannot absorb, in any positive way, the Sanchesque influence.”


2012




other stock-character traits in Golden Age Spanish literature. He writes, “it is because

Sancho is a synthesis of all these literary stereotypes that he is so complex, interesting,

and universally appealing a personification of each one of them.34 What we can takefrom this is not only is Sancho more complex than Don Quixote, but it is evident that he

is probably the most complex character to emerge from Spanish Golden Age literature.

He embodies, in short, the vision of the future of story-telling.In conclusion, Sancho’s role in part two of Don Quixote is more complex than his

master’s. The reader is led to believe that Don Quixote develops significantly in the

second part in two principle ways: first that he can be read as paradoxically “mad/wise”and second that he exhibits a melancholic disposition which is a symptom of his growing

doubts in regard to his strange beliefs. Upon closer examination, however, these two

principal developments are problematic. In the first case, the sense of development that

the reader discerns in regard to the Quixote’s paradoxical nature is not rooted in hischaracter, but through the illusion of story-telling. This illusion is implemented by the

author in order to develop the theme of the novel, as opposed to the complexity of the

actual character. The significance of his melancholic disposition gains its weight almost

exclusively through the Romantic interpretation and if we exclude the latter, he remains arelatively simple character. Furthermore, both perceived developments are nothing

uniquely new to the second part as they have a presence in the first. When stripped of allillusions, we find that Don Quixote is by his very nature a solipsistic mad man, who

refuses to accept external influences in favor of his fictitious and unchanging fantasies of

knight errantry. In contrast, Sancho is not only intrinsically more complex than his

master, but his openness to external influences allows him to develop and therefore gainmore complexity. He both mimics and manipulates his master and as he develops

throughout the second part not only does he fulfill the elusive dreams and ambitions of

his master, but he supplants his role in the story and bears the thematic burden. Thesimplicity of part one, which in its burlesque imitation of chivalry stories, hardly exceeds

them; belongs to the Don. Part two, with its increasing philosophical depth and

versatility necessarily belongs to Sancho, because he is the character, vast and ever changing, which renders the old simple chivalry stories obsolete and plants the seed to a

new vision of story-telling. That was Cervantes mission and it could not be done through

the imagination of a knight deluded by fantasy, but a humble peasant who is preoccupiedwith what is real.

34 Close, Sancho Panza: Wise Fool , p. 357


2012

Documents

(USC)Cervantes Final Essay