Talk:Miguel de Cervantes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Miguel de Cervantes article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
WikiProject_Spain
Portal:Spain
 Spain Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Spain which aims to to expand and organise information better in articles related to the history, languages, and cultures of Spain. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments
Core This article is listed on this Project's core biographies page.
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, which collaborates on articles related to the Roman Catholic Church. To participate, edit this article or visit the project page for details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Langlit article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] misc

I don't see Beethoven in the Ludwig Beethoven page.--AN

A page on famous hispanics http://coloquio.com/famosos/alpha.htm Got any others? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.213.111.51 (talk • contribs).

Spanish capitalization - please stop capitalizing the titles of his works in Spanish as if they were English. Spanish capitalizes only the first word and proper names. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deisenbe (talk • contribs).

[edit] Cervantes' sexual orientation

i heard he was gay —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.224.46.142 (talk • contribs).

That is controversial, at best. Because of the uncertainties it does not warrant a prominent place as user Haiduc has in mind. For instance, Haiduc claims that Cervantes was ransomed for 500 escudos (that's Portugese coinage, right? Odd...) because the Algerian bey fancied him. Whereas all other sources including the Encyclopedia Brittanica say that this was because he had letters of recommendations from high-placed people on him when he was captured. The meaning of the words "my beloved" cannot be interpreted as an indication of homosexuality per se. Facts about some gay cardinal should be on a seperate page. Cervantes had to flee to Rome, possibly because of a duel as several sources claim, not because of some 'sinful acts' insinuating homosexuality. Haiduc says there was no offspring but the EB says he had a daughter. Haiduc writes he married her for her money but the EB says her dowry was minimal (it included 'one cock', but let's not make a row about the meaning of that :-). Don Quixote had "no interest whatsoever in women". So what? The man was crazy, right?

If there are doubts about Cervantes' sexuality put them down in a seperate section and don't present them as 100% facts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.163.166.47 (talk • contribs).

The problem with your critique is that you are expressing an opinion, whereas the material I brought in has been obtained from works published by historians through established publishing houses, in English as well as in French. Furthermore you are being inconsistent. Having asked for, and received sources for the info, you persist in removing corroborated information from this article. So I suggest that we come to some consensus on what to keep and what to remove. Where you have conflicting information I will gladly renounce that claim. But where you do not, it should stand. That's how things are done around here, lest I be mistaken. Haiduc 03:27, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It is you who is opinionated. The same article you reference says "he might have been", "there is much to support". There is no certainty proclaimed there so this issue should not be presented in an encyclopedia as a fact. For instance, I could not find any Cervantes biographies on the Internet where there is even a hint of his assumed homosexuality. One could make point by point rebuttals as you seem to ask but it is not worth the effort. Please understand that the point you are trying to make is too controversial at this stage. Why not spend time on cases more deserving of your time such as Leonardo, Oscar Wilde, Alexander the Great or ancient Greece in general? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.163.166.47 (talk • contribs).
I think there is a connotational difference between expressing an opinion and being opinionated. The Dynes book you are refering to is not as up-to-date as the French material. But I think your earlier suggestion is appropriate, to put this material, with references, in a separate paragraph, indicating that this is new information that has not gained universal currency. Haiduc 13:46, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

But enough about his sexual orientation, I heard he liked fish and his favorite colour was blue. Anyone thinks that should be in the article? Piet 15:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

  • regarding the "my beloved" phrase referenced in an earlier comment, I want to point out that if this refers to any phrase "Mi querido.." in a Spanish document, that can also be translated as "my dear..." and has no such connotatons of "beloved" (cf. English "my dear sir", etc.)
  • Where has the sexuality section gone, anyway? Nothing on the page now. glasperlenspiel 21:45, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
    • I removed the header since it didn't contain anything Gkhan 22:00, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ana

I was reading the introduction to Don Quixote as written by Motteux and I was very astonished by what he wrote on Cervantes's life. I know that Motteux was a very unreliable source, but what he says I do not know if it is true or not. He writes that Ana Francisca de Rojas, the mistress or girlfriend of Cervantes, was a converted Christain, he had met her in Algiers and brought her back to Madrid with him. She was Muslim and a Moor. If this is true, which I don't know if it is, why can't we add it into the article? Sandy June 21:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shakespeare and Cervantes

Any objections to de-bolding the text in this section? Conversely, any reason it was bolded in the first place? Hiberniantears 16:18, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cervantes on Hu:

According to a check on hu interwiki to 1616, Cervantes is for consistency to be - on that particular Wikipedia! - the page hu interwiki to Miguel Cervantes, which however like hu interwiki to Miguel de Cervantes does not exist yet either. The hu: / Magyar interwiki when it finally does exist should be to M Cervantes in other words, not M(iguel) _de_ Cervantes. If the anon who's been adding many Magyar interwikis over en:, most of them helpfully, sees this, please note this with (my) sincere thanks. Schissel : bowl listen 12:39, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Self-citing

Keithlaw deleted my book from the bibliography and said I had put it there myself and this was vanity. I didn't put it there! I don't know who did. But I HAVE put it back. Daniel 16:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tone of first paragraph

Although I am a huge fan of Cervantes, I find the first paragraph of this article a little unencyclopedic:

which is considered by many to be not only the first modern novel, but also one of the greatest works in Western literature and certainly the greatest of the Spanish language. He is arguably, the Spanish Language equivalent of William Shakespeare.
  1. "the Spanish Language equivalent of William Shakespeare" seems to me to be superfluous.
  2. "one of the greatest works in Western literature and certainly the greatest of the Spanish language" - define and defend, then give sources and avoid opinion.
  3. "the first modern novel" - first you need to define "modern"; what about "one of the first" ?

-- NYArtsnWords 06:40, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

  • In Prof. Daniel Burt's book The Novel 100, he names Don Quixote as the greatest novel of all time, and identifies its publication as the birth of the modern novel. I don't think that that part of the intro is out of line. It is certainly the first Western novel. "One of the first novels" or "one of the first modern novels" would be inaccurate unless we can identify predecessors. Similarly, I don't see it as unencyclopedic that DQ is "one of the greatest works in Western literature," because that is a widely held if not universally held opinion. | Keithlaw 21:11, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The real identity of Cervantes

Very little is known for sure about Cervantes. He said to have been born in no less than five different places, so no one knows where it was. All encyclopedias say Alcalà de Henares because at mid 20th century, historians decided this agreement (with strong oppositions remaining). One Miguel de Cervantes living in Alcalà de Henares existed, there is no doubt about it, but he was poor and with little education. At the moment of his death he owned only three books. His doughter could not read. However, in year 1590 Cervantes sent a memorandum asking for a high employement in the government (with the rank of governor of a province, or similar), arguing that he wanted to serve his king as his ancestors did. Probably two Miguel de Cervantes existed, but only one of them is the writer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.212.29.67 (talk • contribs).

  • That's wrong. There were not two Miguel de Cervantes. It has been found that the Alcalá de Henares origin is based on a fake document. The certificate is of someone named Caravantes, but the word "Miguel" is written with a different ink (different color) and with another handwriting. The original name has been scratched out. 62.57.141.163 20:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


excuse me my english, it's not my mother tongue.. I heard that the writer was from Catalan-Aragonese crown and the novel Don Quixote was wtien originaly in catalan. One prove about it, in the III chapter of the second book, it's mentioned that "i sino que lo digan Portugal, Barcelona y Valencia, donde se han impreso más de doce mil libros de la tal historia" translated (aproximately) is: "in Portugal, BARCELONA and Valencia are twelve thousand impressed books" The editions of Portugal and Valencia were founded but the edition of Barcelona was never founded, and for replace it was created the edition of Madrid. What do you think about a crazy man who travels around the country, fighting against giants, against wind mill, and, when he arrives at Barcelona (Catalan-Aragonese crown) recovers of its madness. And in all the novel appears constantly words of another language, concretely Catalan. My opinion is the novel was written in other language, in concretely Catalan, the censors of that time applied a brutal censorship in the original novel and the result is the novel which all of you know. as a matter of interest, the originally title of the novel was "EL CUIXOT" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.61.208.11 (talk • contribs).

  • Please note that fake editions were pretty usual then. Suppose you want to sell a forbidden book. You print it with a fake origin and a fake date, which happens to be one or two years before the ban was issued. When the inquisition find your stock of books, you can claim you printed them legally. This trick was also used to avoid paying the author. 62.57.141.163 20:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On the current Article

I just finished reading the article on Cervantes and I have several things to say about it. First of all i'd like to say that I enjoyed it, but there's several critiques to be made on it. To begin with: the diction is much too latinized. I sometimes got the impression I was reading Samuel Johnson or some such writer. The author should consider reducing the amount of latinate words. As for the architecture of syntax: I found it a bit antiquated. It reads more like an 18th century critical essay than a 21st century one. There are also extended sections in which the author talks alot but doesn't say much. He should consider condensing his ideas and doing away with any filler material whatsoever. Another good idea would be to divide the long paragraphs into shorter ones, thus making the essay as a whole more accessible. -- I should hope the author will not take the preceding critique amiss: i've simply tried to throw out some constructive criticism out there.

Erik M. C. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.159.219.9 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 24 September 2005.

[edit] Cleanup tag

I slapped a {{cleanup}} tag on this article for the very reasons the prior poster mentioned. The section on his works is unreadable. It was either translated from another language (Spanish, I presume) or it's just not well written. It should be about half its current length and the florid language should be eliminated. Before I break out the machete, I thought I'd post here and see if anyone has comments or objections. | Keithlaw 21:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Update 10/30/05: I moved the section on La Numancia to the article for that work, which was just a one-line stub, and I began to pare the section on Don Quixote. The opinions of the article's writer make up more than half of the article's content, so I'm deleting some paragraphs entirely to try to strip it down to the facts. Any analysis of DQ belongs in the article for the novel itself, not in an article about the author. | Keithlaw 15:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It is interesting to note that most of this article comes word for word from other sources, such as [1]. This article desperately needs a cleanup and complete reorganization. --69.142.56.219 19:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

One thing that needs to be done is to massively cut down the Don Quixote section - it links to a article on the subject so there is no way there should be two pages discussing it here, one paragraph is all that is needed, or we are just going to have large amounts of duplicate/overlapping information. The tone of much of it is wrong as well, suggestions on the best tone for a translator to take approaching the work doesn't seem very encyclopaedic (citations from an expert on the work as to which existing translations are more accurate to the original would however be ok imo, at least for such a major work anyway). Sfnhltb 15:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone mind moving the tag to the appropriate section(s), where it would be less obtrusive? Piet 12:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Idiotic comment

"Cervantes signed his surname as "Cerbantes," but he accepted the spelling "Cervantes" which typesetters (often much better spellers than authors) put on the title page of all of his published books."

This comment is retarded. Whether or not typesetters spell better than authors is of no relevance here. First of all, a person's name does not subject to any particular spelling rules, and, second, there is no distinction between the sounds "b" and "v" in the Spanish language. I have not deleted the comment so that others can form an opinion. (Excuse my harsh language, but I was annoyed by the comment.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.211.7.138 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Pointless facts

He died in Madrid on April 23, 1616; coincidentally William Shakespeare also died on that date, though Cervantes died ten days earlier than Shakespeare, Spain being on the Gregorian calendar and England being on the Julian calendar calendar. In 1850 William Wordsworth died on April 23 and in 1915 Rupert Brooke died on the same date.

One has to wonder why this was included. I can see slight relevence in the peculiar dates of deaths for each of these men, but the article is on Cervantes. If someone wishes to find the date of death of Rupert Brooke, William Wordsworth, or Shakespeare, I would think they would go to their respective articles. In any case, if someone wants to rephrase the above paragraph in a more literate fashion, go ahead. I'm deleting it right now, so add it back in.--69.142.56.219 19:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Converso origins?

What evidence is there that his mother was a converso (descendant of Jews who converted to the Catholic faith?

- random guy (68.239.148.191)

== Don Quixote is the first true modern novel, a "systemical" and "structural masterpiece" in fact "coded in kabalistical keys". Yes it is true, absolutely true. But it would be right to mention name who made this discovery in 1967 : Dominique Aubier. More informations about it ont http://www.lucafilms.es/El-secreto.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.156.22.102 (talk • contribs).

"Coded cabbalistic keys"? Are there any second oppinions on that besides those of Dominique Aubier and/or Prof. MacGaha? --Plumcouch Talk2Me 17:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date of Death

It is well known now (see Encyclopaedia Britannica, Encarta, etc.) that Cervantes died on April 22, not 23, of 1616. The latter was the date of his burial. I've changed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.55.110.161 (talk • contribs).


[edit] The Introduction and biography section

Does the fact that Ben-Gurion and Dostoevsky were big fans of Cervantes really belong in the introduction? I think that this is information for the historical significance or trivia sections, but not the introduction. Also, in the middle of a paragraph about his childhood it is stated that Shakespeare probably read Cervantes. Should this be moved somewhere else? Where? I will probably edit this article soon but I would appreciate comments. Academic Challenger 03:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Is the Ben Gurion story true? I have heard it about Sigmund Freud, not Ben Gurion. --Error 19:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Did a google search and was unable to find a source to confirm the Ben-Gurion claim. Couldn't even confirm that he knew Spanish. Added a citation request to the article. Javadane 21:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First Novel in the Western Literary Canon and Date of Death

I deleted the claim that Don Quixote is the first novel in the Western Literary Canon, because it is false, ignorant, and meaningless. It directly contradicts other parts of this article (for example, in the introduction, where Don Quixote is said to be considered by some to be the first modern novel - clearly implying that there were novels before it, and in any case that it is not a "universally considered" fact as was formerly stated) and the one on Don Quixote itself, in which I do not believe this claim was ever made.

Also, in the Spanish version of this article it says that Cervantes died on the 22 of April or something, one day earlier than his death in this article. This is significant because the date here listed is also the date of the death of Shakespeare, but in the Spanish version it clearly states that it is false that Shakespeare and Cervantes died on the same day, but people often list the date of Cervantes death incorrectly, leading to this belief. I don't know which version is right, but since this issue is specifically addressed in the Spanish version and not here, I'd tend to be more willing to believe that one. eeesh98 138.16.15.138 20:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cultural depictions of Miguel de Cervantes

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 16:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy with no refernce

For the world at large interest in Cervantes centres particularly in "Don Quixote", and this has been regarded chiefly as a novel of purpose. It is stated again and again that he wrote it in order to ridicule the romances of chivalry and to destroy the popularity of a form of literature which for much more than a century had engrossed the attention of a large proportion of those who could read among his countrymen and which had been communicated by them to the ignorant. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03543a.htm Alhoori 20:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Excommunication

The article does not seem to have any info on his excommunication and later recommunication by the Church. -- Jordi·✆ 23:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/i/g/Talk%7EMiguel_de_Cervantes_36db.html"