{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03550295857988166, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004733727810650888, 'mean_word_length': 4.834482758620689, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Celestina As a Funny Book: A Bakhtinian Reading

Literary criticism is no laughing matter. On the contrary, the more "classical" the text, the more serious the treatment it seems to deserve. This has of course been the case with most Medieval and Renaissance works, from Chaucer's Canterbury Tales to Rabelais' Gargantua and Pantagruel and Cervantes' Don Quijote. Thankfully, within the serious business of literary criticism, Peter Russell's plea to read "Don Quixote as a Funny Book" (1969) carne as a refreshing reminder that laughter and literature are not mutually exclusive. The result is not to trivialize Cervantes' masterpiece nor, in Peter Russell's words, to deny it "either profundity as a work of art, or its own kind of seriousness." It is in this spirit that I have adapted the title of Peter Russell's article to head this essay.