Véase el estudio onomástico de Clark Colahan, quien llega a conclusiones similares acerca de la proyección cristológica de la figura de Magsimino: «Magsimino, reformado en el momento de su muerte, es el salvador que, en su sabiduría y santidad, muere una muerte generosa, como Cristo, para que Persiles y Sigismunda puedan salvarse» (31).

Véase Steven Hutchinson, quien observa que «el discurso sobre los deseos constituye un tema recurrente en todas las novelas de Cervantes» (54) y que «en las novelas de Cervantes... el movimiento continuo del alma propulsada por el deseo es una condición, quizá la condición, de ser en el mundo; el reposo perfecto no encuentra lugar aquí» (57).

Distintos tipos de elementos visuales aparecen en otros momentos del texto como formas narrativas. Un ejemplo paradigmático es el lienzo encargado por Periandro que ha de contar «todos los más principales casos de su historia» (281). En un trabajo reciente, Michael Nerlich («Die Macht») estudia brillantemente el episodio del lienzo encargado por Persiles en Lisboa en el contexto de su interpretación de la novela como un ejemplo de literatura heterodoxa. De acuerdo con Nerlich, «esta pintura alegórica lleva a reflexiones sobre los límites de la representación visual... Del uso moral aunque limitado de la imagen (el lienzo sirve para ilustrar la narración de los acontecimientos), Cervantes extiende la discusión al problema del abuso (ideológico y comercial) del arte» (95).

En La cultura del barroco, Maravall se refiere con frecuencia a la importancia que cobran los elementos extrarracionales en la captación de voluntades: «El barroco procura conmover e impresionar, directa e inmediatamente, acudiendo a una intervención eficaz sobre el resorte de las pasiones... Hay que mover al hombre, actuando calculadamente sobre los resortes extrarracionales de sus fuerzas afectivas» (170).

Many thanks to Diana de Armas Wilson and Cynthia Kuhn for their steadfast encouragement and thoughtful criticisms of earlier drafts of this essay.

Author's Introduction to the third edicion, 171.

Citations from Don Quixote are from the translation of Burton Raffel. Citations will be documented parenthetically in the text by part, chapter, and page number. In the cases of Don Quixote, Cide Hamete, and Agi Morato, I have opted for the traditional spellings over those in the Raffel translation.

See Round's «Toward a Typology of Quixotisms» for a treatment of influence in terms of «appropriation» versus «availability.» My understanding of Don Quixote's influence on Frankenstein is akin to what Round designates as the second development of appropriation: instances where the prototype is integrated «in terms which become progressively more abstract» (20).

I have opted in favor of arguments for «creature» in place of the traditional designation «Frankenstein's Monster,» as it is the name by which the creature refers to itself. See Close for an introduction to the debate between soft Romantic readings and hard intentionalist interpretations of Don Quixote. For an example of a recent attempt to bridge the controversy, see Resina.

Mary Shelley's journals first arrived in print as part of Shelley and Mary, a compilation of the Shelleys' papers, letters, and journals which were censored, —136→ edited, and privately distributed by Lady Shelley, Mary's daughter-in-law, in 1882. Until very recently, the only other printed assemblage of the journals available to readers was that of Jones. The Preface and Notes to Jones's edition reveal his unmistakable bias toward Percy Shelley, as well as his unmistakable irritation with the reserved quality of the journal entries. According to Jones, the journals are important «in spite of... limitations» -which he identifies as Mary's failure to exhaustively detail the scandals surrounding the Shelley household and her habit of skipping entire days- as «an invaluable source of information concerning what [Percy] Shelley read and when he read it» (Preface xiv).

A more even-handed introduction to the journals, one that focuses on the importance of the notebooks as a means to better understand Mary Shelley, became available in 1987 with Paula K. Feldman's and Diana Scott-Kilvert's The Journals of Mary Shelley. All further in-text references to and quotations from the journals are based upon the Feldman and Scott-Kilvert edition.