This article was downloaded by: [Umeå University Library]On: 18 November 2014, At: 13:30Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Bulletin of Hispanic StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cbhs19

Narrative and Agency: The RicoteEpisode ( Don Quijote II )Salvador J. FajardoPublished online: 28 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Salvador J. Fajardo (2001) Narrative and Agency: The Ricote Episode ( DonQuijote II ), Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, 78:3, 311-322, DOI: 10.1080/000749001300342115

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/000749001300342115

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoeveras to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of theauthors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracyof the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verifiedwith primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

BHS, LXXVIII (2001)

311

Narrative and Agency: The RicoteEpisode (Don Quijote II)

SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

Binghamton University, SUNY

Recent ‘historicist’ or ideological studies of the Golden Age1 have suggestednew points of entry into this period that offer useful sidelights on someimportant texts. Thus Cascardi, in his essay ‘The Archaeology of Desire inDon Quijote’, reminds us how ‘[i]n early modern Spain, we witness theemergence of a series of culturally ambiguous, displaced, or “marginal”groups (such as the moriscos, conversos, pícaros, and of course women)whose identity cannot be located either in terms of the social order that hasbeen eclipsed or in terms of the emergent order of things’. Individuals inthese marginal groups, as well as other characters in Don Quijote (thoughnot the protagonist who functions still according to caste-based hierarchicalvalues) are apt to find themselves positioned within a network ofrelationships defined by the circulation of desires, including the desire forupward mobility promised by a system of ‘ “free” economic exchange’.2

From this standpoint the Ricote episode (II, 54), though frequentlyexamined in studies that range from the historically exhaustive (MárquezVillanueva) to the methodologically sophisticated (René Quérillac’ssemantic analysis) has been incompletely analysed.3 In my remarks I wantto look at three components of the meeting between Ricote and Sancho:1) how does our own transaction with the text reflect its inner ambiguities;2) how do the two friends resolve the contradictions inherent in theirpositions; 3) what is the overarching narrative and ideological context withwhich the episode connects? Because these questions are intertwined my

1 Such as Walter Cohen, Drama of a Nation: Public Theater in Renaissance Englandand Spain (Ithaca: Cornell U. P., 1985); George Mariscal, Contradictory Subjects: Quevedo,Cervantes, and Seventeenth Century Spanish Culture (Ithaca: Cornell U. P., 1991); andAnthony Cascardi, Ideologies of History in the Spanish Golden Age (University Park, PA:The Pennsylvania U. P., 1997).

2 See Cascardi, Ideologies of History, 184–85.3 Francisco Márquez Villanueva, ‘El morisco Ricote o la hispana razón de estado’, in

his Personajes y temas del ‘Quijote’ (Madrid: Taurus, 1975), 229–329; René Quérillac, ‘Losmoriscos de Cervantes’, Anales Cervantinos, XXX (1992) 77–98.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

312 BHS, LXXVIII (2001) SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

treatment will not be entirely consecutive, as I will address some aspect ofeach at each juncture.

Readers have been puzzled by the powerful ambivalence at the heart ofthe episode: how is it possible for Ricote to express both his intense love forSpain and his anguish at being exiled from it, and, at the same time, praisethe edict of expulsion of the moriscos? Ricote’s ‘double discourse’ seems tocall for a solution in which either one of its aspects is decanted from thewhole: 1) he is insincere in his praise of the edict and in his attachment toSpain and would actually prefer to live in Germany where ‘se vive conlibertad de conciencia’;4 2) he is sincere in his attachment to Spain andinsincere in his praise of the edict, wanting to persuade Sancho to help himand knowing that he cannot hope to gain his help if he sounds disloyal tothe king. Neither of these solutions seems satisfactory. The first onecannot account for the powerful human impact in Ricote’s expression ofdeep sorrow at having to leave his country. The second one does not accordwith the impression of forthrightness that we get from Ricote. This sort ofduplicity seems not to fit with the general tone of the chapter and it wouldunnecessarily reduce the morisco’s stature. In fact, because we think he issincere in his love for Spain, we also grant him sincerity in his praise forthe edict.5 Otherwise we would unwarrantedly ‘flatten’ the character, andwe would thus be reading against the grain of a text that constantly callsupon us to reckon with complexity and ambivalence (is not don Quijote a‘cuerdo loco’? Is not Sancho a ‘tonto agudo’?). For this reason, in thepresent context it would be unprofitable to try to discern Cervantes’ ownputative position in the matter of the moriscos by importing into thisepisode views expressed elsewhere in his works.6 We have learned that inDon Quixote characters—and authorial presences—are wont to surpriseus.7 Here, our disquiet arises from our taking Ricote at his word. For, in

4 El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha, ed. John J. Allen (Madrid: Cátedra),

435. All references are to this edition.5 Márquez Villanueva has written compellingly on this point: ‘La narración de Ricote,

este hombre a la vez romántico y práctico, es un prodigio de autenticidad humana y de virilmodestia. No hay en todo su discurso el menor despunte retórico ni nota alguna desentimentalismo cascado o libresco. Su noble alma es incapaz de abrigar rencores, y eldesdichado morisco ni siquiera reclama el papel de víctima que con tanta justicia lecorresponde’ (‘El morisco Ricote’, 236).

6 As does Quérillac, ‘Los moriscos de Cervantes’.7 This text calls upon our capacity to realize what Keats called Negative Capability:

‘[I]t struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement especially in Literature &which Shakespeare possessed so enormously—I mean Negative Capability, that is when aman is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reachingafter fact & reason’ (letter to George and Tom Keats, dated 27 December 1817 [The Lettersof John Keats: 1814–1821, ed. Hyder Edward Rollins, 2 vols [Cambridge, MA: Harvard U. P.,1958], I, 193). Don Quixote is precisely the kind of text that nurtures such capability in us,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

NARRATIVE AND AGENCY: THE RICOTE EPISODE (DON QUIJOTE II) 313

fact, the episode’s ambiguities radiate from the centre to encompass itsentire constitution, and are only resolved through the paradoxicalconjuncture of Part II’s overarching eschatological disposition and theepisode’s inner core of individual appeal.8 In order to address this paradox,it may be more productive to work from the centre out, by examining thedetail of the episode’s narrative and descriptive components, and by settingit within Sancho’s and Don Quijote’s own trajectories.

In chapter 53 Sancho gives up his governorship, unable to countenanceits constraining impositions, the last of which had him imprisoned ‘entredos paveses’ and asked to thus lead the defence of his beleaguered ‘ínsula’.Immobilized, in the dark, Sancho is trampled and otherwise mistreated asthe presumed battle rages around and over him. The battle is won, but thegovernor has lost all taste for such undertakings: ‘Abrid camino, señoresmíos, y dejadme volver a mi antigua libertad; dejadme que vaya a buscar lavida pasada, para que me resucite de esta muerte presente’ (428), he saysto his tormenting subjects as he leaves Barataria.

Chapter 54 returns us to the ducal palace where arrangements areunderway for Don Quijote’s battle with Tosilos in defence of DoñaRodríguez’s daughter’s honour. Quickly, however, we are told ‘[d]ejémoslospasar nosotros (como dejamos pasar otras cosas) y vamos a acompañar aSancho’ (431). This narrative voice is not Cide Hamete Benengeli’s(reference to the Arab sage will be made later), but that of thesupernarrator or editor.9 By addressing the readers directly and enlistingthem in this narrative shift, the speaker alerts us to a number ofcompositional events: as it does in many of its characters.

8 It is now a commonplace of Cervantes criticism to see an overall eschatologicalthrust to Don Quixote II. Discussions about ends (heaven, hell, judgment, salvation) arefrequent almost from the outset of Part II. For a recent study emphasizing this view seeHenry Sullivan’s Grotesque Purgatory: A Study of Cervantes’s ‘Don Quixote, Part II’(University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania U. P., 1996).

9 In my view James Parr offers the most cogent analysis of the various authorialpresences in Don Quixote: ‘La jerarquía de voces y presencias del coro diegético, en ordendescendente de credibilidad, es la siguiente (dejando fuera al autor histórico extratextual,una presencia): 1) el autor inferido, cuya presencia se deriva del conjunto de voces en eltexto: diegéticas, miméticas, textuales y extraficcionales; 2) el autor dramatizado de losprólogos; 3) el editor o supernarrador; 4) el autor histórico fictivo incorporado al texto poralusión--una presencia; 5) el autor autónomo del “Curioso impertinente”; 6) el científico delos ocho primeros capítulos; 7) el traductor entremetido; 8) el reductio ad absurdum dehistoriadores, Cide Hamete, otra presencia; 9) el lector dramatizado llamado segundo autor,una voz transitoria; 10) la pluma, otra presencia’ (‘Narración y transgresión en el Quijote’, inConfrontaciones calladas, ed. James A. Parr [Madrid: Orígenes, 1990], 107–26 [pp. 120–21];I emphasize item 3). For a more extensive treatment of the topic see also James A. Parr,‘Don Quixote’: An Anatomy of Subversive Discourse (Newark, Delaware: Juan de la Cuesta,1988).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

314 BHS, LXXVIII (2001) SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

1) The forcible abandonment of the don Quijote narrative line which isleft in suspense: we, like don Quijote, will have to wait for thecontinuation of an ‘adventure’ where a key component of theknight’s identity/role will come into play: the defence of a damsel’shonour. The ‘adventure’ also harbours a development unanticipatedby the Duke and Duchess and where surprises await them. Boththe origin (doña Rodríguez’s request to don Quijote) and theoutcome of the battle (Tosilos declares his love for doña Rodríguez’sdaughter) are unplanned by the ducal pair and show thedeployment of subjectivities that escape their power. This surfacingof unanticipated individual behaviour frames an occasion whereSancho will, as well, reveal to the reader unknown features of hisown subjectivity.

2) The comment foregrounds the reading process; it signals to us thatwe must distance ourselves from the story and attend to theimplications of the telling as well as those of the told, to theinterplay of narrative lines, and to the fictional levels of the text.

3) The comment also reminds us to pay close attention to the upcomingevents where Sancho is: a) unmoored from his role as participant inthe ducal games; b) on his own, i.e., not in his complementary role todon Quijote. We are further reminded of this in the next paragraphwhen this narrator says, as Sancho offers his bread and cheese tothe pilgrims, that ‘según dice Cide Hamete Benengeli era caritativoademás’ (432), a trait of his character not previously highlighted.Again, at the same time, we learn that this episode is in the handsof the supernarrator—of course, we know that Cide Hamete isanother character, at most a point of reference for the narration.10

Still, Cide Hamete’s own ‘telling’ appears en filigrane, as anotherpossible rendition.

4) The parenthetical ‘(como dejamos pasar otras cosas)’ insists on yetanother possible rendition, events unrecorded by the choice of thisnarrator that for an instant pique our curiosity while forcefullydisplaying his control, and disclosing the play of recedingauthorship.11 The parenthesis itself, this narrator’s smile, is a nice

10 Cide Hamete is cited as narrating, but actually never narrates himself. Naturally,

when an authorial voice says ‘cuenta Cide Hamete Benengeli ’ it is this voice that narrates,not Cide Hamete (see Parr, ‘Narración y transgresión’, 112).

11 The narrator’s statement would belong to the ‘disnarrated’. James Parr hasaddressed this issue in ‘Antimodelos narrativos del Quijote: lo desnarrado, innarrado einnarrable’, where he says of the disnarrated that it ‘subraya el dominio que tiene elnarrador sobre el desarrollo de la historia. Su poder reside en el manejo de los varios hilosnarrativos bajo su control—en poder privilegiar un hilo sobre los demás, por ejemplo’ (in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

NARRATIVE AND AGENCY: THE RICOTE EPISODE (DON QUIJOTE II) 315

touch that points, in inverse reference, to what may beparenthetical—this episode—but that he does not let pass.Immediately after that the narrator adds ‘entre alegre y triste veníacaminando sobre el rucio a buscar a su amo, cuya compañía leagradaba más que ser gobernador de todas las ínsulas del mundo’(431). The statement, while reasserting the duality Sancho-donQuijote, iterates as well Sancho’s separation from, and temporaryabandonment of, the Duke’s and Duchess’ manipulations.

All in all, the narrative voice has established significant links betweenSancho’s departure from Barataria, the upcoming episode, and thepreparations now taking place at the palace. The linkage appears at firstto reinforce the incidental character of the events of this chapter,incidental, that is, to the central narrative. On the other hand, if weconsider the events preceding and following the present ones as theirframe, we note that Sancho’s encounter with Ricote actually highlights afamily resemblance in the behaviour of the protagonists in the threeepisodes: they escape the intrigues of the first level autores (the Duke andDuchess for the Barataria and Tosilos episodes), as Ricote and Sanchoescape the conflictive situation arising from the edict in the case of themorisco, and occasioned for Sancho by his neighbour’s request for help. Inall three cases the protagonists achieve a modicum of personal autonomyprecisely because they are compelled by contradictory forces.

Let us now attend to the composition of the Ricote episode proper. Freefrom the prison of his ‘empavesamiento’ in Barataria, a strikingly aptimage for Sancho’s imprisonment in the Dukes’ power games, (that is theireffort to contain his restive interiority),12 Sancho, on his way back to thepalace, encounters a group of six pilgrims. Two components of theencounter are immediately foregrounded: Sancho understands only theword ‘limosna’ from their ‘cantar’, and he gives them the bread and cheesethat he had brought from Barataria. The pilgrims also ask for money(‘Guelte, Guelte’). Sancho does not understand this until they show himtheir purses; Sancho then assures them, with a classic, internationalgesture, that he has no money to give. At this moment one of the pilgrimsembraces him and ‘en voz alta y muy castellana’ exclaims: ‘¡Válame Dios!¿Qué es lo que veo? ¿Es posible que tengo en mis brazos al mi caro amigo,

Lecturas y relecturas de textos españoles, latinoamericanos y US latinos. Actas Irvine-92.Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas, ed. Juan Villegas [Irvine: The Regents of the Univ.of California, 1994], V, 185–92 [p. 190]).

12 Sancho shows some resistance to matters of ‘form’ from the beginning: he‘inappropriately’ asks doña Rodríguez to look after the ‘rucio’, and he tells a joke on seatingprecedence that substitutes a class-based, realistic understanding of hierarchical principles(they are matters of wealth and power) for the traditional caste-based notions espoused bydon Quijote and presumably followed by the Duke and Duchess.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

316 BHS, LXXVIII (2001) SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

al mi buen vecino Sancho Panza? Sí tengo, sin duda, porque yo ni duermo,ni estoy ahora borracho’ (432). Sancho does not at first know thisindividual who has to explain to him that he is his neighbour, the moriscoRicote. Impeded, as he says, by the ‘traje de moharracho’ that Ricotewears, Sancho’s recognition is very slow (the text insists on this), which,when Sancho asks how he dares to come back against the king’s ‘bando’,prompts Ricote to point out that if he, his neighbour, did not recognize him,and he does not betray him, he will be safe.

After these preliminaries the group moves away from the ‘camino real’to a nearby grove where the pilgrims, ‘[a]rrojaron los bordones, quitáronselas mucetas o esclavinas y quedaron en pelota, y todos ellos eran mozos ymuy gentileshombres, excepto Ricote, que ya era hombre entrado en años’(433). Here, away from the king’s road, synecdoche for his directjurisdiction, the sanctioned means of transit, they will share a meal. Oncefree of their disguise all appear as ‘gentileshombres’, individuals to adegree.13

The food and the wine elicit conversation, which they manage in a kindof lingua franca: ‘—Español y tudesqui, tuto uno: bon compaño. Y Sanchorespondía: Bon compaño, jura Di! Y disparaba con una risa que le durabaun hora, sin acordarse entonces de lo que le había sucedido en su gobierno;porque sobre el rato y tiempo cuando se come y bebe, poca jurisdiciónsuelen tener los cuidados’ (434). This exchange and the commentary thatfollows highlight everyone’s commonality across borders and the fact thatthe occurrence is a hiatus away from their daily care or personaltrajectories. As well, Sancho’s ability to communicate in the lingua francareveals abilities unsuspected to the reader. Once the wine is consumed thepilgrims fall asleep and Ricote, taking Sancho farther aside, tells him hisstory.

It is this communication by the morisco that has puzzled readers andcritics, for, as mentioned, while he rues the need for abandoning Spain inobedience to the king’s edict,14 he approves the edict proper. Ricote’s wordsare a most poignant expression of exile: ‘Doquiera que estamos lloramospor España; que, en fin, nacimos en ella y es nuestra patria natural; ... y esel deseo tan grande que casi todos tenemos de volver a España, que los másde aquellos, y son muchos, que saben la lengua como yo, se vuelven a ella, ydejan allá sus mujeres y sus hijos desamparados: tanto es el amor que latienen; y agora conozco y experimento lo que suele decirse: que es dulce el

13 I am not referring here to post-Romantic notions of individualism, but merely

suggest that the common pilgrim’s disguise covers individuals whose particularity isprecisely that they are only pilgrims for appearance’s sake.

14 ‘[L]os moriscos de Castilla fueron autorizados a marchar voluntariamente el 28 dediciembre de 1609, si bien la expulsión no se decretó hasta el 10 de julio de 1610’ (MárquezVillanueva, ‘El morisco Ricote’, 248).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

NARRATIVE AND AGENCY: THE RICOTE EPISODE (DON QUIJOTE II) 317

amor de la patria’ (435). These statements are truly heartrending, andtheir emotional impact increases their apparent disjunction with the praiseof the bandos that Ricote expresses in the same breath.

Sancho shows his empathy with Ricote’s plight, especially as hedescribes the departure of his wife and daughter from their village wheneveryone, himself as well, could not but weep at the spectacle. Here, bothSancho and Ricote display a background of shared values, a necessarycommonality before agency can flourish. Following upon the shared meal,which according to Habermas produces ‘socialization into forms of lifestructured by communicative action’,15 this common background lays thefoundation for incipient agency on both their parts.

Still, when Ricote asks him to join him in the recovery of his hiddentreasure, promising him some portion of it, Sancho demurs, saying that heis ‘nada codicioso’, since he could have accumulated much gain in thegovernorship that he has just abandoned.16 This trait of character is newsto the reader, but in this context we can surmise that Sancho has become‘nada codicioso’—for the moment at least—as part of what he has indeedlearned from the experience, the newfound wisdom that extracted himfrom his actual and metaphorical ‘empavesamiento’.17

In this place apart Sancho and Ricote converse as neighbours, one onone, away from the itineraries imposed on Ricote by the king’s power as

15 Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, trans. Thomas McCarthy

2 vols (Boston: Beacon Press, 1984), I, xxii.16 One could surmise that the treasure offers Sancho a promise of movement out of

his subservient position—a possibility already explored by Teresa in her fantasies ofgentility, when she learns of her husband’s good fortune—but his experience as a governorhas exhausted that potential for Sancho. If the treasure is metonymic for socialadvancement, the hierarchical society in which both Sancho and Ricote are embeddeddenies that potential. In fact, Ricote will realize later (chapter 63), when he recovers hisdaughter Ana Félix, that he prizes the latter more than his material treasure: ‘Yo salí de mipatria a buscar en reinos estraños quien nos albergase y recogiese, y habiéndole hallado enAlemania, volví en este hábito de peregrino, en compañía de otros alemanes, a buscar mihija y desenterrar muchas riquezas que dejé escondidas. No hallé a mi hija; hallé el tesoro,que conmigo traigo, y agora, por el estraño rodeo que habéis visto, he hallado el tesoro quemás me enriquece, que es a mi querida hija’ (513). Through the peripeteia of the narrativethe social mobility that his material treasure could not afford Ricote—indeed it may havecontributed to his exile, since the moriscos’ avarice was one of the charges against them—may become accessible to him through the riches of love and beauty represented by AnaFélix.

17 Of course, this is only a temporary condition for Sancho, who will quickly transferhis greed to the payment expected for whipping himself to disenchant Dulcinea. In chapter60 he goes so far as to overcome and threaten don Quijote who was attempting to whip himhimself. Thereafter he tricks his master into paying him for the lashes which, out of donQuijote’s sight, he inflicts upon neighbouring trees with happy abandon.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

318 BHS, LXXVIII (2001) SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

ruler, on Sancho by that of the Dukes, its caricatured reflection.18 Sanchoand Ricote are at the innermost centre of a series of textual, narrative, andsocial frames, yet not held fast by these constraints and therefore able toexpress their interior declivities. The outermost frame is the readingtransaction, foregrounded as we saw by the narrative voice, and which thereader is asked to heed. This frame contains that of don Quijote andSancho’s ‘andanzas’ as background continuity and within it, the episodesstaged by the ducal pair, from which Sancho, in transit between its twocentres of gravity (the ‘ínsula’ and the Palace), is temporarily free. Withinthis frame we already see Sancho escaping our readers’ expectations.

The present moment is itself at the heart of a series of concentric circleswhose function is both metaphorical and propaedeutic. As I mentionedearlier, readers of the text have attended primarily to the ambiguities ofRicote’s discourse, and I will return to them. But for now it will beprofitable for us to focus on Sancho himself and his own gradualtransformation, on the staging of a situation that allows for incipient,unsanctioned aspects of his subjectivity to surge forth. When Sancho firstmeets the pilgrims there is a marked emphasis on his confusion and lack ofunderstanding. Understanding begins when, very gradually, Sanchorecognizes Ricote;19 the pilgrims then divest themselves of their outergarments and turn into ‘gentileshombres’. He begins to communicate withthem as they proceed to eat.

According to Marcel Mauss, exchange is always associated with eatingtogether,20 and there are, indeed, key exchanges that take place here: notmerely exchanges of views, but, more importantly, exchanges of trust. The

18 Ultimately, however, it is his attachment to don Quijote that impels him, an

attachment that, paradoxically, subjects him to the ducal whims and will become as well theorigin of some resistance to those whims.

19 Sancho’s slow recognition of Ricote, besides underlining the excellence of themorisco’s disguise, hints at the reader’s own need to penetrate toward the protagonists’interiorities behind such disguises and roles.

20 Marcel Mauss, ‘Essai sur le don’, in Sociologie et anthropologie (Paris: PressesUniversitaires de France, 1950), 145–279, passim. Mauss had already emphasized theritualistic aspect of the ‘gift’. Later scholars have related the notion to religiousdevelopments, emphasizing the idea of the gift in, for instance, early Christianity: ‘Lechristianisme se veut une économie de la grâce. Notre point est que cette économie de lagrâce est une extension (universalisme), une radicalisation (du don au pardon), unintériorisation (conversion, amour) du système du don. [...] D’où cette tentative “surhumaine”en climat forcément eschatologique [...] de refonder le don ou un substitut par une fuite enhaut [...] Este-ce un hasard si le festin, boire, manger et surtout avec les anciens exclus estun signe du Royaume?’ (Camille Tarot, ‘Repères pour une histoire de la naissance de lagrâce’, in Ce que donner veut dire, ed. MAUSS [Mouvement Anti-Utilitariste dans lesSciences Sociales] [Paris: Éd. la Découverte, 1993], 90–114 [pp. 94–95, 109]; italics in thetext).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

NARRATIVE AND AGENCY: THE RICOTE EPISODE (DON QUIJOTE II) 319

description of the meal is worth quoting in full:

Comenzaron a comer con grandísimo gusto y muy de espacio,saboreándose con cada bocado, que le tomaban con la punta del cuchillo,y muy poco de cada cosa, y luego al punto, todos a una, levantaron losbrazos y las botas en el aire; puestas las botas en su boca, clavados losojos en el cielo, no parecía sino que ponían en él la puntería; y destamanera, meneando las cabezas a un lado y a otro, señales queacreditaban el gusto que recebían, se estuvieron un buen espacio,trasegando a sus estómagos las entrañas de las vasijas. (434)

Now this conjunction of wine drinking and heaven gazing is a descriptivecommonplace21 in Don Quijote, but coupled with the manner of eating, notto mention the avowed—if perhaps not altogether devotional—purpose ofthe young men’s visit to the Peninsula in pilgrimage (they are in pursuit ofgain) gives the meal a slightly sacramental flavour. In fact, theprominence of some ham bones and the abundance of wine turn it into adisplay of Christianity for Ricote. The wine itself, if it induces sleep in thepilgrims, unties the tongue of Ricote and Sancho.

The body once uncovered it is time for the inner man to do the same. Inthe ensuing exchange Ricote reveals to Sancho the intimacy of his sunderedself, and Sancho responds with a corresponding double discourse. Ricote’savowal, born both of friendship and interest—he wants to enlist Sancho inhis enterprise—elicits in Sancho a congruent response from an equallydivided self: he will not help, but he will not betray. Sancho, as subjectedindividual cannot go against the king; as Ricote’s friend he expresses anaspect of the deeper, and new, interiority we have just glimpsed—throughthat portion of his past not known to us, for instance—and will respect theother’s secret. In his dialogue with Ricote Sancho reveals, and realizesalso, that he is not ‘codicioso’. The reader understands this well. He hasbeen prepared for this glimpse into Sancho’s inner self early in the chapterwhen he is told that Sancho preferred don Quijote’s company to all thegovernorships in the world. Both Sancho and the pilgrims (with Ricote) arein transit when they meet. Such transitoriness may be taken as ametaphor for a certain disponibilidad in that, not inhabiting a particularspace, their subject positions are equally undetermined. This is furtherreinforced by the duplicity of their appearance. For instance the pilgrims,once their outer garb is shed, turn out to be strapping young men.Assuming the figure of pilgrims, i.e. the position of religious subjects, theynavigate in freedom the Peninsular space. Sancho himself is moving, as we

21 Nevertheless the possibility of ‘sacramental’ overtones in the gesture remains in

the background. Javier Herrero has convincingly analysed some of these connotations forthe Lazarillo in ‘The Ending of Lazarillo. The Wine Against the Water’, MLN, XCIII (1978),313–19.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

320 BHS, LXXVIII (2001) SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

noted, from a position as the Duke’s subject governor toward his positionas complementary to don Quijote (both, temporarily, subjects of the Duke).Ricote suffers the double and contradictory hortation of his position as theking’s subject (which obliges him to wear a disguise), and his position as aSpaniard, or son of the country. Precisely because these two subjectpositions generate in him an untenable contradiction he achieves as agencythe need to negotiate between them. This human agent is Ricote under thepilgrim’s garb.

This gradual unveiling of identity toward the inner man, the agent whofor a moment frees himself of all social interpellations and acts accordingto human sympathy, has been carefully set out. It begins with thepilgrims’ shedding of their outer garb. Here, already, Ricote isdistinguished from his companions who ‘todos ellos eran mozos’, while he‘era ya hombre entrado en años’ (433). Then both Ricote and Sancho moveaway from the sleeping young men, ‘porque habían comido más y bebidomenos’ (434). As they talk alone Ricote tells Sancho his tragic tale. Sanchoreveals details of his own identity in parallel manner. To the contradictionembodied by Ricote, a morisco travelling in Spain in concealment andapproving of the causes of this situation corresponds the contradictionembodied by Sancho, an illiterate governor (Ricote cannot believe it).

The dialogue between Ricote and Sancho reveals them to one anotheras human agents impelled to negotiate a transit between opposing subjectpositions. Not only does Sancho reveal to us (and to himself) traitspreviously unrealized (lack of greed, a capacity for empathy and friendshipoutside of his relationship with don Quijote), but he gives us as well a viewof himself outside of the ‘andanzas’, that is to say, outside of his subjectposition as complementary to don Quijote. That Sancho is functioning hereat an innermost level of agency is implied by his being set at the centre of,and as mentioned above, escaping from, various interpellating contexts: 1)the ‘historical’ reality, operating both within and without the text(‘bandos’); 2) the level of the ‘andanzas’; 3) within it, the double fiction ofBarataria and don Quijote’s planned battle with Tosilos; 4) the first level ofthe present episode: meeting, meal, communication; 5) the second, innerlevel within it, in a space further apart, where Ricote and Sancho relate asincipient agents and where Sancho’s lifeline extends, as we mentioned,beyond the text, to his pre-don Quijote existence.

The transactions between the two friends take place here. But now afurther positional shift occurs. Ricote, as narrator, places Sancho in aposition of power, not only as listener but as participant in his secret. Hegenerates in Sancho the desire to know, a desire concretely represented bythe treasure that the morisco says he will share. Ricote, in fact, wants todeviate Sancho, attracting him to another quest, another course from theone he is engaged in. Sancho refuses (as he finally refused the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

NARRATIVE AND AGENCY: THE RICOTE EPISODE (DON QUIJOTE II) 321

governorship), preferring don Quijote’s company. What he wants is notwhat may await him at the end of the quest, but the quest proper. Whathe rejects as well is a positioning exclusively as a subject of the king, onewhereby he would have to betray Ricote.22 The new subjectivity is part ofthe general transit of the novel—the quest—the movement betweenassigned spaces. Certain values are then introduced here that go beyondthe positioning as assumed heretofore. These values are components of thepresent agency of Sancho and Ricote, and they return us to the episode’soverarching frame, that of eschatology.

We said earlier that there was a certain sacramental connotation to thesharing of food, and it reflects particularly on Ricote and Sancho who donot fall asleep after the meal. The eschatological context gives theirdiscourse a spiritual dimension. Far apart from the king’s road,23 theyhave also separated themselves from the temporal-religious, so intimatelyconnected in seventeenth-century Spain with the seat of power, especiallyin the question of the moriscos.24 Ricote’s assertion of his wife’s anddaughter’s Christianity, and his own sincere uncertainties (he is waitingfor God to persuade him fully) are perfectly in tune with this eschatologicalthrust as a realm of wider, inclusive spirituality. Such an encompassingreference embraces the common humanity that has connected Sancho andRicote, regardless of the specific temporal accoutrements that presume torepresent those higher ends. These are also the values implicitly referredto by Sancho when he offers his friendship and promises to keep the secret.It is the encompassing background against which a measure of agency maybe achieved by both as they speak from the hearts of men and neighbours.Such is also the context that allows Ricote, for a moment, to regain thespeech that has been denied him (he is travelling as a foreigner in his owncountry, that is to say he has been silenced by the ‘king’s road’).

Ricote and Sancho embrace and each goes on his way. In the next

22 On the general notion of the ‘subject’ and hegemonic power see Paul Smith,

Discerning the Subject (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1988), passim. For ananalysis of this notion in Golden-Age literature see Mariscal, Contradictory Subjects andCascardi, Ideologies of History.

23 In the Diccionario de Autoridades we read: ‘CAMINO REAL. Se llama el masancho, principal, facil y cursado de los passagéros, y el mas público; y por esso tienen laobligacion las Justicias de tenerle llano, y compuesto, y en partes empedrado’.

24 ‘La expulsión de los moriscos quedó acordada por el Consejo de Estado, reunido enLisboa, en septiembre de 1582. El patriarca Ribera se apresuró a manifestar su acuerdo [...]Al advenimiento de Felipe III, Ribera intensificó la frecuencia y el tono de sus quejas acercade aquel ganado roñoso, siempre en favor de las medidas más duras. Sus dos memoriales alrey en 1601 y 1602 son decisivos en la historia de la expulsión [...] La opinión de Ribera ensu memorial de 1602 requería también la formación de un proceso ante el Papa o elinquisidor general para declararlos formalmente apóstatas y herejes dogmatizantes’(Márquez Villanueva, ‘El morisco Ricote’, 263–65).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014

322 BHS, LXXVIII (2001) SALVADOR J. FAJARDO

chapter Sancho falls in the ‘sima’ with the ‘rucio’. The text explicitly linksboth episodes: ‘El haberse detenido Sancho con Ricote no le dio lugar a queaquel día llegase al castillo del duque, puesto que llegó media legua déldonde le tomó la noche’ (439). Thus Sancho cannot see clearly and fallsinto the pit. In his lamentations Sancho recalls don Quijote’s own descentinto the cave of Montesinos, bemoans that he lacks the resources and goodfortune of don Quijote who saw beautiful visions and found himself as if‘con la mesa puesta y cama hecha’ (441), while he ‘falto de consejo ymenoscabado de ánimo’ (441) fears an even deeper fall. Besides thestructural role of Sancho’s words in connecting this descent with donQuijote’s,25 their more immediate function is that they appear to reinsertSancho fully into his squirely role and into the main narrative line. On theother hand, and in contrast with don Quijote who did not move, remaininglinked by a rope to the ‘Primo’ and Sancho above, the latter is, in fact,wholly on his own, disconnected. Yet he does not abandon himself to hisfate. He works and struggles to advance in the tunnel, and it is because hedoes so that don Quijote will find him. Again, Sancho’s agency isforegrounded, precisely as the means to free himself, and contrasts in thiswith don Quijote’s continuing imprisonment by his Montesinos visions.

As we return to the text-reader transaction with which we began werecall how the narrating voice had alerted us to gain distance from theepisode thus better to encompass it. The change in observational site thatwe needed to adopt made the ambiguities of the event, in particular theprofound ambivalence of Ricote’s words, a positive factor. We realize thatthe human heart can encompass such ambivalence (Keats’ NegativeCapability), that those inner contradictions need not refute one another butrather may impel the individual to self-assertion. Ricote can be sincereboth in his love of Spain and in his praise of the ‘bando’. What I haveproposed is a means of accounting for such human ambivalence through areading that encompasses it. For we too, as readers, must take somedistance from the apparent contradictions of the text before we can seethese working positively to reveal fundamental aspects of the humanity ofthe two individuals. These contradictions are resolved at the deepest levelof their shared humanity shorn of customary social garbs—a level whichcorresponds also to the context where such humaneness finds its value, theeschatological thrust of the novel, the ultimate destination of their humanjourney.

25 See chapter I and Appendix C in Henry Sullivan’s Grotesque Purgatory. A Study of

Cervantes’s ‘Don Quixote, Part II’.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

13:

30 1

8 N

ovem

ber

2014