A number of Cervantine references in the early part of the novel are obvious and very superficial 'señor y escudero' (408); 'ventanas y claraboyas del hispano horizonte' (410); 'caballería andante' (412) and the Sancho-esque refranes of Licurgo.
J. Chalmers Hermann, «Quotations and Locutions from Don Quijote in Galdós' Novels», HBalt, XXXVI (1953), 177-181; A. H Obaid, «La Mancha en los Episodios de Galdós», HBalt, XLI (1958), 42-47.
Gullón, op. cit., pp. 54-57. See also J. F. Montesinos, Galdós, Madrid, Castalia, 1968, passim.
V. S. Gilman's review, RF, LXX (1958), 455-465. Professor Gilman's perceptive «Las referencias clásicas de Doña Perfecta», NRFM, III (1949), 353-362, confirms from a slightly different perspective some of the interpretations suggested in this paper.
Apud G. de Torre, Cursos y conferencias (Buenos Aires, 1943), xxiv.
A number of critics have pointed to immaturities in the style and organization of Doña Perfecta. Professor Cardona, for example, draws attention to the fact that conflict between plot -in which Pepe emerges as the obvious hero -and characterization- in which Doña Perfecta and her associates emerge as the heroes -is one of the main weaknesses of this otherwise excellent early novel» (op. cit., p. 262, n. 17). Professor Terry has suggested to me that Galdós is guilty of over-plotting in the final half of the novel, especially in the chapters where Rey corresponds with his father. One might object that it is precisely here that Rey comes to accept his moral guilt for the chronic state of affairs obtaining in Orbajosa. Dr. A. Yates has written to me with the persuasive argument that:
«Doña Perfecta is a progressive improvisation on Cervantine themes which becomes richer as the novel goes on and as Galdós settles down... Galdós is still very much an apprentice, uncertain about handling many parts of his stock-in-trade.»
This very proper observation may well help account for the discrepancy between the theoretical programme of the Observaciones and the way in which some of the practice in the early novels does not fulfil Galdós' own very clearly formulated ambitions for himself and his novels.
Since going to press J. V. Falconieri Las advanced similar general arguments concerning Galdós' intentions in 'un capítulo de Galdós que no se le olvidó a Cervantes', REH, VI, 1 (1972), 145-151. His study of the Cervantine treatment: of chapter one confirms my own comments on p. 44 and note 29. While Falconieri is clearly correct he seems to overlook the Superficial nature of the Cervantine glosses. Galdós' skin resides in those other techniques of fictional representation that are studied in some detail in the body of this study.
Ricardo Gullón, Galdós, novelista moderno (Madrid, 1966), 66.
Joaquín Casalduero, «Auguste Comte y Marianela», Smith College Studies in Modern Languages, XXI (1939-1940), 16.
W. T. Pattison, Benito Pérez Galdós and the Creative Process (Minneapolis, 1954), 114-36.