From: Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America
1.1-2 (1981): 120-23.
Copyright © 1981, The Cervantes Society of America
Cervantine Bibliography
BOUT FOURTEEN
YEARS AGO, in the late fall of 1968, I began to compile material
for an annotated bibliography on Don
Quixote.* At that time I made the
erroneous assumption that the criticism of Cervantes' masterpiece had been
rather well taken care of up to the end of the nineteenth century, since
Leopoldo Rius' three large volumes contained such a wealth of excerpts of
Cervantine criticism up to that time. For that reason, my procedure was to
gather only critical material written after about 1893.
Experience has since convinced me that while
Rius' works are invaluable, they do not put Quixote criticism in a
proper chronological or ideological perspective. To correct this error in
part, Paolo Cherchi has recently (1977) drawn upon Rius' work and other sources
in producing his study of the reception of the Quixote from its
publication up to the year 1790 (Capitoli di critica cervantina
[1605-1790], Rome: Bulzoni).
Thus at this time we have a mass of gathered
material since the end of the nineteenth century, and a comprehensive study
up to 1790. It appears, therefore, that one serious gap in Quixote
criticism is the time-span 1790-1895. This is not to say that there have
not been various attempts to outline this critical era, as well as detailed
studies of individual Cervantine movements in the nineteenth century:
romanticism, socio-political idealism, krausismo, etc. However, as
we all
* This
report, subsequently somewhat modified, was presented at the annual meeting
of the Society in Houston in December 1980.
120
|
| 1 (1981) |
Report: Cervantine Bibliography |
121 |
|
know, in the period from 1790 to 1895 one finds the source of many important
interpretations of the Quixote, or if not actually the source, at
least the time-span in which these interpretations reached their true
development.
Thus my first recommendation is that Cherchi's
admirable work be followed up by a serious study of the nineteenth-century
interpretations. This is an area in which those of you with Ph.D. candidates
could be of immense assistance, for several dissertations on the various
Cervantine movements in that century could lead to the publication of an
overall work on Don Quixote criticism, 1790-1895. Even the mere
compilation of a list of significant works written on the Quixote
during that era would be of the highest practical value. When the late eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries have been studied, and the material properly arranged
and analyzed, we will find ourselves in a position to undertake a thorough
study of the past eighty-five years.
Now let me move to a second large gap in Cervantine
bibliography. When I began to compile and arrange the crititical material
on the Quixote I decided that, as a general rule, I would omit critical
works which dealt only with one episode. Exceptions were made, of course,
especially with regard to the first chapter of the 1605 Quixote, the
“Cave of Montesinos” adventure, the death of Don Quixote, and a
few other episodes. There are many excellent works on a given episode of
Cervantes' masterpiece. In fact, the major portion of Quixote criticism
appears to be of this type. What I would propose is that the membership of
the Cervantes Society of America undertake the project of an
“episodic” bibliography of the Quixote. Many of you have
written on a given episode and thus already have an essential working
bibliography pf a particular episode, or of several episodes. With a modicum
of effort your bibliographies could be brought up to date. What I contemplate
is that these individual bibliographies could be published individually in
Cervantes, not necessarily in chronological order at first. These
could be accompanied by brief narrative accounts of the principal problems
involved in the interpretation of a given episode. When the individual
bibliographies have been completed, they could be compiled and edited in
one volume.
A third gap exists in the area of Cervantes'
so-called “minor” works. As you know, my original specialty was
the Novelas ejemplares, and my first effort was an annotated (or
“critical”) bibliography on these twelve stories. That 1968 work
had several serious shortcomings:
|
| 122 |
DANA B. DRAKE |
Cervantes |
|
it was repetitious and was not organized as it should have been. I am happy
to announce that the second, revised, and updated version of the 1968 effort
has now appeared: Cervantes' “Novelas ejemplares.” A Selective,
Annotated Bibliography (New York: Garland, 1981). This new volume, after
a section dealing with general works on the Novelas ejemplares, deals
with each story separately. It is my belief that this second edition will
be of much more practical value to you all.
The Persiles was bibliographically examined
by Tilbert Diego Stegmann in 1971, in a very able way: Cervantes Musterroman
“Persiles” (Hamburg: Hartmut Lüdke Verlag). In addition,
Cervantes' dramatic works are the subject of an unpublished bibliographical
study by George Ray Pappas, in 1973. It would be most helpful if this work
were put into print. The Galatea and the Viaje del Parnaso
have not received the necessary bibliographical attention. In the area of
minor works, we again have the problem of keeping the bibliographical material
up to date. I am quite willing to be personally responsible for maintaining
the Novelas ejemplares on a current basis. Let me suggest, therefore,
that another worthy project would be a bibliographical dissertation on the
Galatea and on the Viaje del Parnaso, and that individual members
of our Society be placed in charge of keeping the bibliographical material
on the Persiles, the Viaje, La Galatea, and the dramatic
works up to date.
Now that I have got you all working,
I will make a brief report on what I am attempting in the area of the
Quixote at the moment. As you know, Volume III of the Quixote
bibliography appeared in June, 1981, published by Garland. It deals almost
entirely with the reception of Cervantes' masterpiece by later novelists,
playwrights, poets, and script writers. It contains over five hundred items.
After a general section on the overall importance of the Quixote in
later literature the material is arranged geographically. As many of you
are no doubt aware, Ernesto Giménez Caballero published an excellent
work in 1979 on the same theme: Don Quixote ante el mundo (y ante
mí) (San Juan: Inter-American University Press). This work is
interestingly written and contains a multitude of references to adaptations
of the Quixote. To a certain extent, his work and my effort involve
duplication. However each contains a significant amount of material not found
in the other. In the area of the influence of the Quixote on later
writers I am again willing to attempt to keep the bibliography up to date.
The other large project which I have before
me is the fourth and I
|
| 1 (1981) |
Report: Cervantine Bibliography |
121 |
|
hope final volume of the criticism of the Quixote since 1893. It will
include a wide variety of studies, and will be arranged according to subject
matter: Cervantes and his times; the Quixote figure; psychological and
psychiatric studies of the Don; philosophical interpretations; socio-political
studies of Cervantes' masterpiece; the themes in the Quixote, etc.
This project is being undertaken with the kind help of Professor Frederick
Viña of the University of Texas, Arlington, who is especially well
qualified in Latin American criticism of the Quixote. My estimate
is that this fourth volume will be ready for submission to the publisher
in the late fall of 1981.
There is one final problem in Cervantine research
that has been a source of annoyance to us all —there is at least a
nine-month time lag in the appearance of recent bibliographical material
on Cervantes. This is so in spite of the very conscientious work of the MLA
bibliographers, who must assemble, edit, and double-check all the items and
then await publication. I have contacted Professor Oliver T. Myers of the
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, the MLA bibliographer, regarding obtaining
of Cervantes items early —in late February instead of September of a
given year. Professor Myers has been kind enough to suggest a mutual exchange
of items. It would of course be to our great advantage to obtain such items
as early as possible. However, in order for this procedure to be agreeable
to Dr. Myers, our membership must be willing to give quid pro quo.
It is not within the means of any one member
of our Society to undertake the preparation of a list of Cervantine items
similar to that of the Modern Language Association. Consequently I am now
in the process of developing for our members a system which I hope will provide
us a constantly up-dated bibliographical compilation; we would hope to exchange
our compilations with the bibliographers of the MLA. Not only will this take
some time, but it will probably require some subsequent refinement among
the contributors. However, I anticipate that it will result in a most useful
tool for all of us.
The Constitution
of our Society provides for a standing Committee on Bibliography, and I am
pleased to announce that Professors Frederick Viña and Hensley Woodbridge
will be working with me on the committee.
| VIRGINIA
POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE
UNIVERSITY |