>Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 20:25:05 -0600 >From: Diana Wilson <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: RE: Re: De nuevo la alegoria y Cervantes? (de Bryant Creel) >To: "'A. Robert Lauer'" <[log in to unmask]> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 >Importance: Normal >Original-recipient: rfc822;[log in to unmask] > > Let me add cuatro palabras to Bryant Creel s wise response to > your exchanges on allegory. My study of PERSILES, titled ALLEGORIES OF > LOVE (Princeton UP, 1991), exhaustively explored the history of allegory > as it filtered down to Cervantes, from Greek hyponoia to Quintilian s > notions of allegory as extended metaphor to El Pinciano s claim that one > could exprimir allegory from certain texts. The root meaning of allegory > is other-than-at-the-marketplace speech. It need not be ethical, nor > moral, nor religious. Just other. Within the Renaissance exegetical > traditions of allegory, we encounter the notion that all literature is > susceptible to the exegetical readings commonly given to Scripture. > > Vale, > > > >Diana de Armas Wilson, > >Professor Emerita > >English & Renaissance Studies > >University of Denver > >Work phone: 303.871.2266 > >E-mail: [log in to unmask] > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Coloquio Cervantes [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of A. >Robert Lauer >Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 6:14 PM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Fwd: Re: De nuevo la alegoria y Cervantes? (de Bryant Creel) > > > > > >Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 20:09:31 -0400 >From: Bryant Creel <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Re: De nuevo la alegoria y Cervantes? (de Jesus G. Maestro) >X-Sender: [log in to unmask] >To: "A. Robert Lauer" <[log in to unmask]> >Cc: [log in to unmask] > >I'm a little worried about the dogmatic [anti-cervantine] tone of these >pronouncements, to say nothing of the many misconceptions involved (e.g. >allegorizing an ironic work does not have to be done along moral lines, >nor even ethical, much less moralistic. There are myriad typed of >allegories, i.e. figurative meaning. It can just be making a metaphorical >interpretation of the work, which has to be possible insofar as the work >has meaning [i.e. reference]). > >Bryant Creel