No one's actually read Don Quixote, right?

Attached: 1502602959690.jpg (500x500, 48K)

Is Don Quixote considered difficult? I found it a very easy read. On one hand I read it in a very recent translation (Grossman) but on the other hand I trust Bloom not to endorse a translation that dumbs down a great work of literature.

Not difficult, just long

A few people.

I'm absolutely convinced I'm the only person who's ever read La Galatea though.

I have. It’s a bit overly long and not super rewarding, but I’m glad I read it.

It's Putnam or nothing, right?

Don Quickoates. A cruel and crude old book.

Attached: Get nabbed on nigger.jpg (688x933, 431K)

Don Quixote isn't hard at all. It's just long (that's not even fair since it's actually two kinda-lengthy books stuck together) and most of the translations are older and therefore use older English. But even the older translations are relatively easy.

This dude's retarded. Saying Don Quixote is a work of cruelty is like saying Ed Edd 'n Eddy is a work of cruelty.

Why don't you guys recommend Don Quixote as a starter? It's long, sure, but it's not especially hard to read and it's a wonderful book.

Attached: 1365475090228.jpg (747x1417, 418K)

I've read it three times, using three different translations. It's not that difficult, especially if you read a contemporary translator like Grossman. It's also the greatest novel ever written.

Attached: 1517329123558.png (690x527, 462K)

I read it for pleasure, do I get a PhD now?

>In a village of La Mancha, the name of which I have no desire to call to mind, there lived not long since one of those gentlemen that keep a lance in the lance-rack, an old buckler, a lean hack, and a greyhound for coursing. An olla of rather more beef than mutton, a salad on most nights, scraps on Saturdays, lentils on Fridays, and a pigeon or so extra on Sundays, made away with three-quarters of his income.
Why is this opening so good?

Specific detail, parallelism, the rhythm inherent in writing lists lists, and a confident authorial/narrative voice.

Which translations? Which one did you like best? Which one did you read first?

Such a boring book

It's mandatory at least at some point during your education to read it in most spic countries.

Wow this sounds awful in English.

I'll tell you a secret, user. No one has ever read a book ever. They're all just big liars.

why is everyone saying it's long? did I accidentally buy some cucked revised edition or something? if you can't tell I'm pretty new to reading more seriously. It's the Charles Jarvis translation if that helps answer my question

I know a Spaniard who did. Mighty patrician book I'm told. How does it compare to Soledades ?

It's bad. I stopped halfway through because I had better stuff to read.

How many pages is yours?

Most people ar afraid of thick books

280 which doesn't isn't long at all. But I read a synopsis of the story just then and everything written there I did read. So I guess I just got a shortened version?

haven't read it but I just bought it and my version (Grossman Translation w/ red cover and knights helmet) is easily 900+ pages. You must've got the abridged version or something. Usually it's worthwhile to read the full thing

Yeah you got cucked. Even if you only got Volume 1 it should be like 400 pages. Both volumes is over 800.

damn well I guess I'll have to try and find a better, full version then. Do any anons have recommendations of a good translation to get?

Not what he meant, brainlet.

Read the ormsby translation. Volume 2 was pretty humorous, but it was important for me to read it because of its recurrence in so much following art. It’s very easy to read and entertaining. My only criticism is that it can sometimes become trivial and repetitive, but I don’t regret reading it at all.