Cervantes Says Via His “friend” /alter Ego In

Cervantes says via his friend /alter ego in the prologue to Don Quijote I, that a writer must not predicar a ninguno, mezclando lo hu homoo con lo divino . To what bound does the text of El celoso extremeno respect this dictum? GARRETH HAYE 00007499 Dr. Lal Narinesingh 19th March, 2002                  Ni tiene para que predicar a ninguno, mezclando lo humano con lo divino, que es un género de mezcla de quien no se ha de vestir ningún cristiano entendimiento.         (Miguel de Cervantes, Don Quijote, Part 1, pp. 84, 2000)         The suspense of lo divino vs lo humano is perhaps unrivaled that acutely affected Cervantes than it did (and continues to affect) the involveer. This is so beca utilise for Cervantes, the issues raise by this question (lo divino vs lo humano) were of swell importance to the Cervantine novel and they whole converged on one focal point: the purpose and responsibilities of literature. The bargain to produce right art was a tariff which was confront squarely by Cervantes. The seriousness of this obligation is evident in the claims and propositions he makes in the prologues of his works. In the prologue to Don Quijote, his direct conjunction that the primary purpose of literature is not to propagate teaching of any kind whether religious or otherwise right off opposed the seventeenth-century Spanish pr workice that literature must be put to the service of judaico-moral indoctrination. It is Cervantes alternative approach to literature that brings us to discuss the place of lo divino and lo humano in Cervantine literature.

        Cervantes claims that the reader will be able to sacar algún ejemplo provechoso from these stories; after all, they are novelas ejemplares. However, in the comparable prologue he suggests that if the reader is interested in moral indoctrination, he would be better of in church (Narinesingh transcript 4). These two statements to the uncritical observer whitethorn seem contradictory alone really are not. Cervantes has separated the act of preaching change the act of moralizing, asking us to follow suit and pit between ill conceived dogma and the literatures authority to inform. Essentially, Cervantes has rejected the doctrinaire purposes of literature replacing it with verdades que dichas por senas. So spot the authors task is not to preach good literature must present a better hatful of the world, contri saveing to mans knowledge of himself while stimulating independent thought.

        So, while recognizing the characteristics of good literature, Cervantes presents them to us through the use of ejemplos provechos and verdades que dichas por senas. The things which matter to literature are fundamental human truths (Narinesingh 1990, 4) that afford to mans knowledge of himself and examples that motivate the reader to sound off critically of human nature and the human situation. It includes a institution of human problems and identifies proposals.

        It is difficult to offer a formula that contains the wholly meaning of the work, inclusive of authorial intent and its messages; however, Cervantes does offer somewhat assistance. Firstly, Cervantes has placed the intention of his work in the prologue which invites us to confuse our morally judgmental attitudes adopting instead an attitude that welcomes intellectual and esthetic fulfillment. Secondly, he does not preach to his audience as we deport him not to. Instead he moralizes on the social mores of his time. In the text the human and social values transcend stringently religious ones. This is evident at the end of the novella where Carrizales discussion of faith, love, goodness and freewill appears to reveal the moral exemplarity of El Celoso Extremeno (Davis 641). He (Cervantes) skillfully presents a lesson of self-realization negotiated in the public system of rules of values. As Davis states in her paper, Marriage and Investment in El Celoso Extremeno: Although other literary treatments of real or perceived adultery and the honour theme lead us to anticipate Carrizales cleansing of his dishonour with the blood of the offenders, Cervantes has the old man opt for a novel resolution of the dilemma. He acknowledges of his own fault in establishing the confining marriage. Next he revises his will so that all he has invested in the marriage will not be wasted                  (Davis 640) Carrizales attains were quite unexpected. Possibly Cervantes is suggesting that there will countermand moments in our lives where we will transcend ourselves, exercising some extra-ordinary index finger with which we have all been endowed. As such I skin that Cervantes intentions were morally didactic. The reader is expected to learn from the characters actions. Whether we laugh or cry at the end of the story we are invited to think.

        To a great extent Cervantes decision to allow Loaysa to run of to the Indies implies that one day he (Loaysa) will become a Carrizales, as Carrizales had once been a Loaysa. This cyclical nature of human doings suggests a kind of fatality in human action/decision and not only has implications for Loaysas future but also for those who try to stamp down and dominate the lives of others. Man may be subjugated to physical dominance by another, however, no amount of precautions and measures (like Carrizales house) can keep him spiritually and morally bound.



This mankind comes forcefully to Carrizales at the end of the story where he rebukes himself for his failed efforts to control Leonora: mas como no se puede prevenir con diligencia humana el castigo que la voluntad divina quire dar a los que en ella no ponen del todo en todo, sus deseos y esperanzas                  (Cervantes 1990, 292) The imperativeness that a distinction be drawn between the act of moralizing and the act of preaching provides the only framework in which Cervantes respect for the dictum (as presented in the question) can be fittingly explored. The text no doubt has to be examined also inside the context of seventeenth-century Spanish Christian society because the Catholic church building was considered the bastion of correct moral teachings. However, the text rejects to hide bathroom a cloak of Christian doctrine and to a great extent Cervantes has used his literature as a fomite to present his alternate view of humanity and morality. What makes his message unlike however, is his approach to literature. With all that he has presented it is certainly correct to read El Celoso Extremeno as affirming the individuals right to freedom, and his responsibility to exercise his liberty and respect that for others (Lambert 225). El Celoso Extremeno tells of a man who did not respect the freedom of others, who brought about his own surrender by attempting to impose his scheme upon the world. By demonstrating that one taking over of events can legitimately evoke contradictory responses the story warns us to beware of imposing schemes which attempt to deny the freedom of good deal to be complex and unpredictable, whether in reality or simile (Lambert 230).

Work Cited Davis, Maria Cox., Marriage and Investment in El Celoso Extremeno, Romanic Review, 86 No. 4 (November 1995) pp. 639-655.

Lambert, A.F., The two versions of Cervantes El celoso extremeno: ideology and Criticism, Bulletin of Hispanic studies, 57 (1980) pp. 219-231.

Miguel de Cervantes El Celoso Extremeno in Las Novellas Ejemplares ed. Fernando Gutíerrez, Barcelona: 1990.

Miguel de Cervantes Don Quijote de la Mancha, Part 1, ed. John Jay Allen, Madrid, 2000.

Narinesingh, Dr. Lal, The prologues of siglo de oro prose legend: some aesthetic and perennial implications, Presented to the Twelfth Annual Caribbean conclave of Hispanists at the University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago, (April 1990) _________. Course Transcripts, Las Novelas Ejemplares. 2000

If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com



If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper