Reshaping the Frame Story of the Thousand and One Nights

Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Clark Colahan

La interpretación pan-europea de la personalidad de don Quijote empezó y siguió por todo el XVII enfocada en la comicidad de su locura, pero con el paso de los siglos ha vivido distintas etapas que reflejan las preocupaciones de las culturas que lo consideran hijo suyo.  Los existencialistas del XX, herederos de la exaltación romántica del rebelde individualista, lo veían cuerdo, un modelo moral para imitar en una sociedad corrupta, a pesar de que Cervantes, y con él la crítica historicista, ponía hincapié en la resequedad de su cerebro. En el XXI el posmodernismo, inmerso en rápidos cambios mundiales, lo considera un actor que astutamente transforma su personalidad según las circunstancias.  Madame d’Aulnoy, aristócrata de la corte de Louis XIV, conocía bien el Quijote y vivió un tiempo en España, pero empezó a escribir una historia de marco para una colección de sus cuentos de hadas con el típico desprecio de su clase por un burgués de sueños caballerescos que ambiciona colarse entre los ‘bien nacidos’.  Sin embargo, ella no pudo dejar de percibir las similitudes entre este y su propia situación como forjadora de historias fantásticas, y decide  que su protagonista va a triunfar.  Dando fin a la novela desde una auténtica perspectiva cervantina de haz y envés, se deja llevar, si bien a regañadientes, por el soñador que se imagina un mundo menos exigente.                                                                                                                                     The pan-European interpretation of Don Quixote’s personality began, and continued to be throughout the 17th century, focused on his comical madness, but with the passing of the centuries that view has shifted to various alternatives that reflect the concerns of the cultures that consider him theirs. 20th-century existentialists, heirs to the Romantic exaltation of individualist rebels, saw him as sane, a moral model to be imitated in a corrupt society, in spite of the fact that Cervantes, and with him historicist criticism, stressed that his brain had dried up.  In the 21st century postmodernism, caught up in rapid worldwide changes, consider him an actor who cleverly transforms his personality to fit the circumstances. Madame d’Aulnoy, an aristocrat at the court of Louis XIV, knew Don Quixote well and lived for a time in Spain, but still she began to write a frame story for a collection of her fairytales with typically upper-class scorn for a bourgeois with chivalric dreams whose ambition is to be accepted among the ‘well born,’ and so she decides to have her main character win out.  Writing an end to the novel from an authentically Cervantine perspective of seeing both sides of the coin, she lets herself be carried away, even though she fights against it, by the dreamer who imagines a less demanding world.


1957 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksej B. Ansberg
Keyword(s):  

2006 ◽  
pp. 117-140
Author(s):  
G. Ronald Murphy
Keyword(s):  

2006 ◽  
pp. 99-116
Author(s):  
G. Ronald Murphy
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 475-477
Author(s):  
Citra Fadillah ◽  
Dermawan Syamsuddin ◽  
Rio Sasongko
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emre Özmen

The claim of a Cervantes’ effect in Zayas’s narrative might be regarded as contradictory, especially considering the formal differences in their novelistic structure. At first, one might argue that the absence of a frame in Exemplary Novels places the novel in the opposite category to Honesto y entretenido sarao’s Boccaccian use of a frame tale. However, after a more detailed analysis, I will argue that these works are two sides of the same coin in their way of dealing with narrative problems. In Zayas, the interrelation between the frame story and inserted novels reveals a novelty. Zayas aligns with Cervantes in the rejection of the conventional use of narrative formula, although Zayas opts for the extreme opposite to the omission of the framework. Considering the Cervantine lesson about the internal ties of the novels, Zayas creates a structure where unity is established by the frame story.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 36-55
Author(s):  
Grant Adamson
Keyword(s):  

In the myth as well as the frame story of the Apocryphon of John, Sethian conflict with others is narrativized. For instance, Adam and Eve withdraw from the biblical creator just as John turns away from the temple in Jerusalem after an altercation with a Jewish antagonist. The gnostic authors of the text portrayed the creator so negatively that he is incomparable with most demiurgic figures in Platonism, Judaism, and Christianity. Their ignorant, boastful, jealous and apostate Ialdabaoth was shocking to their ancient opponents. And for modern scholars, this countercultural vilification of the creator makes it difficult to categorize the authors of the apocryphon in Platonic, Jewish, or Christian terms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document