In this blog post, I will examine Spain’s intellectual tradition and the issue of modernity through the lens of José Ortega y Gasset’s ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, and summarize the development of his thought along with its literary and philosophical implications.

The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets and the Suffocation of Thought

Whenever I speak about Spain’s intellectual tradition, there is a question I invariably hear: “Does Spain even have philosophy?” In fact, Spain—a warm Mediterranean country boasting a brilliant sun and golden beaches—and philosophy seem like an incongruous pairing. As the Italian captain quoted by Goethe in his book suggests, the fanciful sense of duty among Southern Europeans—that one must never think because the more one thinks, the older one becomes—can even sound plausible. The Spanish philosopher María Zambrano (María Zambrano, 1904–1991) acknowledges that Spain has never possessed a logically rigorous philosophy like that of Germany. However, she states that Spain is not without thought. It is simply that this thought is diffused by the light of the Mediterranean and expressed through art and literature. Of course, this is an excuse that seems rather feeble. Ortega y Gasset, too, laments the paucity of Spanish philosophy in this book. “In the history of European thought, what we Spaniards have produced is full of nothing but superficial impressions. Concepts have never been our hallmark.” Furthermore, at the beginning of this book, Ortega refers to himself as a philosophy professor “living in a land of unbelievers.” In other words, he is a solitary philosopher living in Spain, a country that is ignorant of and hostile toward philosophy.
In fact, Spain has never produced world-renowned thinkers or formed a philosophical school of thought. That does not mean, however, that Spain lacked an intellectual tradition. Seneca (4 B.C.–A.D. 65), a leading Stoic philosopher during the Roman Empire, was a native of Córdoba, Spain; and the scholar who presided over the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325—acknowledging the divinity of Jesus Christ and establishing the Christian doctrine of the Trinity—was Osio ( 256–357), who presided over the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, recognized the divinity of Jesus Christ and established the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Saint Isidore (San Isidoro, 560–636), described in Dante’s ‘Divine Comedy’ as the Catholic Church’s greatest theologian and doctor, was the bishop of Seville, Spain. During the period when the Arabs ruled parts of Spain and a complex civilization in which Christianity, Islam, and Judaism coexisted flourished, Spain bore even richer intellectual fruit. Ibn Rushd (Ibn Rushd, 1126–1198), a native of Córdoba, provided a masterful interpretation of Aristotelian philosophy that exerted a profound influence on the Scholastic philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and the Renaissance. Similarly, the Jewish scholar Maimonides (Maimonides, 1135–1204), also from Córdoba, synthesized Jewish thought while embracing Aristotelian philosophy and is regarded as the most important Jewish philosopher of the Middle Ages.
Even into the early modern period, figures such as Luis Vives (Luis Vives, 1492–1540), who championed the philosophy of Erasmus, and Francisco Suárez (Francisco Suárez, 1548–1617), a master of Scholastic philosophy, had kept Spanish philosophy alive; however, from the 17th century onward, it entered a period of virtual intellectual barrenness that lasted for about three centuries. Ironically, this intellectual void in Spain began precisely when the country was enjoying the glory of an empire on which the sun never set, coinciding with the dawn of the Atlantic era. However, looking back through history, Queen Isabella (1451–1504)—who, dreaming of a unified Catholic kingdom, drove out the Arabs and completed the Reconquista—had, in effect, already sown the seeds of this intellectual barrenness. Spain’s “religious and ethnic cleansing,” manifested in the expulsion of Jews and Moors and the establishment of the Inquisition, made possible the creation of Europe’s first powerful nation-state. However, due to its religious and ideological exclusivity and insularity, Spain ended up blocking its own path to modernity. In short, this was a rejection of modernity.

“Regenerate the Nation”: The Generations of 1898 and 1914

The decline of Spain—which, despite having been a key player in ushering in the modern era through the discovery of the New World, ultimately rejected modernity—reached its peak with the defeat in the 1898 war against the United States. This occurred during the era of the Restoration (1875–1917), following the collapse of the First Republic (1873–1874), which had lasted only 11 months in Spanish history, and the return of the Bourbon dynasty (Restauración, 1875–1917). Amid severe political instability and social turmoil, conservatives and liberals alternated in seizing power. Under a weak government, Spain lost all its overseas colonies—including Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico—and, as the poet Antonio Machado put it, became an empire reduced to a mere shell, clad in rags. And amidst these ruins, the embers of philosophy that had never quite died out were rekindled by Ortega y Gasset. For this reason, the contemporary thinker José Luis Abellán (1933– ) asserts that Ortega y Gasset is the founder of Spanish philosophy and, furthermore, Spain’s only philosopher. To be precise, Ortega y Gasset can be considered the first thinker to engage in a serious discussion of Spanish modernity. Believing that Spain was endlessly descending into a “spine-less, flaccid existence,” he cried out: “Awaken, or you will be trampled underfoot on the path toward modernity.”
Of course, there were patriotic intellectuals who had called for Spain’s reconstruction even before Ortega. These were the intellectuals known as the “Generation of ’98.” Formed naturally after Spain’s defeat in the war with the United States, the intellectuals and writers of the Generation of ’98 sought to propose solutions to the national crisis while criticizing the political establishment, the existing system, and the privileged classes.
The Romantic writer Mariano José de Lara and the reformist politician Joaquín Costa (1846–1911) were pioneers who greatly influenced the ’98 Generation. While advocating for the eradication of ignorance and poverty, the ’98 Generation particularly championed an educational revolution. Julián Sanz del Río (1814–1869) played a pioneering role in Spanish educational reform early on. By introducing the philosophy of the German thinker Krause, he sought to transform Spain based on principles of rationality, morality, and liberalism. The progressive educational institutions established in Madrid to realize Krause’s ideals were the Free Institute of Education (Institución Libre de Enseñanza) and the Students’ Residence (Residencia de Estudiantes). The first edition of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ was also published by the Students’ Residence’s publishing house. Intellectuals of the Generation of ’98, including Miguel de Unamuno, advocated for national identity and, as part of this effort, called for a rediscovery of the homeland. In particular, they elevated the region of Castile—the heart of Spain and a key player in the Reconquista—to the status of the driving force of Spanish history and the core of the Spanish spirit. Unamuno, in particular, presented ‘ Don Quixote” as a symbolic figure of Castile, presenting his indomitable will, rejection of individualism, and renunciation of materialism as the exemplary spirit Spain should emulate.
It can be said that Ortega y Gasset inherited the concerns and spirit of the Generation of ’98. Furthermore, Ortega even identified himself as a member of the Generation of ’98. In fact, through the newspaper ‘El Imparcial’, Ortega maintained close relationships with key members of the Generation of ’98, including Unamuno, Ramiro de Maestru, Azorín, and Pío Baroja. However, considering his age and political leanings, Ortega can be regarded not as a member of the Generation of ’98 but as a central figure of the “Generation of 1914,” which emerged later. Through various lectures and writings, Ortega diagnosed the total failure of Spanish politics and rebelled against the corrupt political establishment. In March 1914, four months before the publication of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, he delivered a lecture in Madrid titled “Old Politics and New Politics.” In that lecture, quoted in the book, Ortega lamented that Spain’s national vitality had come to a standstill due to the “restoration of the monarchy.” Emphasizing the need for education to drive political reform, he founded a political organization called the “Spanish League for Political Education (Liga de Educación Política Española)” to rally intellectuals who would lead the reform effort; these individuals would later be known as the “Generation of 1914.” Among them were key figures of the Generation of ’98—such as Baroja, Antonio Machado, and Azorín—joined by Pérez de Ayala, Juan Ramón Jiménez, Gabriel Miró, Ramón Gómez de la Serna, Eugenio Dorcs, Enrique Díez Canedo, Americo Castro, Salvador de Maderaga, and Manuel Azaña (1880–1940), who would later become Prime Minister of the Second Republic—all among the era’s foremost intellectuals, writers, and artists.
The “1914 Generation” generally consists of those born around 1880, placing them chronologically between the “Generation of ’98” and Spain’s new poetic movement, the “Generation of ’27.” This generation is also known as “Novecentismo,” meaning “the 1900s.” So why 1914? 1914 was the year World War I began, and in Spain, criticism of the political situation—marked by the restoration of the monarchy under an inept two-party system in which liberals and conservatives had alternated in power—gained momentum, leading to the consolidation of opposition forces. Ortega’s lecture, as we saw earlier, served as the catalyst for this. In this context, in 1914, Azorín declared that a new generation had arrived, one characterized by “greater methodological rigor, systematic thinking, and scientific interest.”

The Life of Ortega y Gasset: Scholarship Dedicated to His Homeland

Ortega y Gasset was born on May 9, 1883, into a distinguished Madrid family that had produced journalists and politicians. His maternal grandfather, Eduardo Gasset, was a journalist who founded the influential liberal newspaper ‘El Imparcial’, and his maternal uncle, Rafael Gasset, was a lawyer and journalist who served as minister of agriculture, Industry, and Trade. His father, José Ortega Munilla (1856–1922), was a renowned writer and journalist who inherited the management of ‘El Imparcial’ from his father-in-law. Because of this background, Ortega y Gasset said he was born “on top of a printing press.” His family enjoyed their vacations by traveling throughout Spain by car and going hunting. It is against this backdrop that the hunting metaphor appears in this book. Born into a financially well-off family with deep cultural sophistication, Ortega could be described, in modern terms, as a “silver spoon” who was born into good fortune.
From 1891 to 1897, Ortega attended the Jesuit school (San Estanislao) in the southern Spanish city of Málaga alongside his older brother Eduardo, where he completed his high school education. His parents sent their two sons to this school because they valued Spanish traditions and the Catholic faith. Ironically, however, Ortega grew so disillusioned with the Jesuits’ strict and narrow-minded traditions during his time there that he broke with the Catholic faith at an early age. Of course, the influence of Nietzsche and Joseph Ernest Renan (1823–1892), whose works he had devoured since childhood, likely played a role in this as well. After leaving Málaga, Ortega enrolled at the University of Deusto in Bilbao to study philosophy and law. However, after attending for only one semester, he took an entrance exam at the University of Salamanca to transfer to the Central University of Madrid (Universidad Central de Madrid, later renamed the Complutense University of Madrid). To transfer, he took a qualifying exam at the University of Salamanca, where his interviewer was Miguel de Unamuno. Ortega majored in philosophy at the Central University of Madrid, graduating with his bachelor’s degree in 1902 and earning his doctorate in 1904 at the age of 21. In 1902, he wrote his first review for the magazine
‘Vida Nueva’ in 1902 and published an essay on the Belgian poet Maurice Maeterlinck (1862–1949) in ‘El Imparcial’ in 1904, thus embarking on his career as a critic.
Ortega’s life took a new turn while he was studying in Germany. In 1905, he spent eight months at the University of Leipzig, and in 1906, he traveled to Nuremberg, Munich, and Cologne. The following year, after briefly attending classes at the University of Berlin, he began new studies in Marburg. At the University of Marburg, then known as the “stronghold of the Neo-Kantian school,” he studied under Hermann Cohen and Paul Natorp (1854–1924). After being exposed to Neo-Kantianism, Ortega briefly became involved in socialism and even attended the 1908 national convention of the Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) in 1908. Ortega studied the history of philosophy and Kant’s philosophy under Cohen, and psychology and pedagogy under Natorp. His time in Marburg was a precious period during which he built the philosophical foundation and training he had so earnestly sought. That is why he confessed that he “spent my youth in this city and owe it at least half of my hopes and almost all of my scholarship.”
However, it can be said that Ortega owed a debt not only to Marburg but to Germany as a whole. Throughout his life, Germany’s influence on every aspect—including scholarship, culture, and ways of thinking—was absolute. He even named his eldest son, born in Marburg, “Germán,” which means “German.” In 1923, Ortega founded the journal ‘Revista de Occidente’ to introduce European thought, with German philosophy being the primary focus. Commentaries on and translations of the works of Brentano, Fichte, Hegel, Dilthey, Johannes Hessen, Exkil, Husserl, Max Müller, Simmel, Max Scheler, Spengler, and Sombart. The publication of commentaries and translations of their works in this journal sparked a “German boom” in Spain, and figures such as Einstein, Probenius, Max Planck, and Heisenberg even visited Spain in person. As Abellán noted, among the educated elite of the time, knowing German was a source of great pride. Ortega’s attitude remained unchanged until his death, as evidenced by the recollections of Octavio Paz (1914–1998), the Mexican poet who won the 1990 Nobel Prize in Literature. After attending a lecture by Ortega in Geneva in 1951, Paz met with him twice at the hotel where he was staying. Paz recounts that during their second meeting, Ortega took his arm and, with a serious look in his eyes, said, “Learn German. And think deeply. You can ignore everything else.”
In this book, Ortega distinguishes between the Germanic and Latin human types as the contemplative and the sensory, respectively. He criticizes Spaniards for being too sensual and impressionistic. Unlike Germanic culture, which is profound and clear in every aspect, Spanish culture is superficial and shallow. Ortega argues that Spain cannot develop because of its impressionistic culture, and he urges people to think and reflect. For the contemplative type, the most important tool is the “concept.” Concepts impose order on things that appear individual and ambiguous on the surface, thereby rendering them clear. Through concepts, we come to recognize and truly grasp things. The act of thinking is the first step toward overcoming the irrationalism of Spain, where everything is hazy and uncertain. Ortega thus finds the path to becoming a “conceptual human being” in the German spirit.
The year 1910 was likely the most significant year for Ortega y Gasset. In April of that year, he married Rosa Spottorno (1884–1980), the daughter of a wealthy Madrid businessman, and in November, he was appointed professor of metaphysics at the University of Madrid Central through a competitive examination. In 1910, Ortega visited Germany to continue his studies of Kant, and after returning home the following year, he engaged in active social criticism through the press and public lectures. In 1913, guided by his belief that social reform goes hand in hand with education, he founded the Political Education League and began full-fledged political activities. This was influenced by Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746–1827), who advocated for public education, as well as by Natorp, who argued that societal change is possible through education. This period also saw the birth of his two sons and one daughter. In 1911, while he was staying in Germany, his eldest son, Miguel Germán Ortega Spottorno (1911–2006), who would later become a doctor, was born; in 1914, his daughter Soledad Ortega Spottorno (1914–2007) was born; and in 1916, his youngest son, José (José Ortega Spottorno, 1916–2002) was born. Soledad established the “José Ortega y Gasset Foundation” in 1978 and served as its honorary president, while José became a publisher and journalist who founded the renowned publishing house Alianza and launched the influential daily newspaper ‘El País’.
Having established himself at the university and started a family, Ortega y Gasset pursued a prolific writing career. In 1914, he published his first book, ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, and in 1916, he released the first volume of ‘El Espectador’, a collection of political commentary that continued through eight volumes until 1934. In 1915, he founded the magazine ‘España’, and in 1916, he co-founded the newspaper ‘Sol’. Ortega compiled the articles he contributed to this newspaper into two of his most important works: ‘Spain Without a Spine’ (España invertebrada) in 1921 and ‘The Revolt of the Masses’ (La rebelión de las masas) in 1929. ‘ ‘Spain Without a Spine’ is a book that analyzes Spain’s crisis by explaining characteristic phenomena in Spanish history. ‘The Revolt of the Masses’, which builds upon and expands the themes of this book, is the best-known of Ortega’s works. The author diagnoses that Spain became divided and fell into crisis because the ordinary, herd-like masses failed to follow the intellectually and morally superior minority. He also warns that this phenomenon, which is a crisis manifesting throughout Europe, could lead to the emergence of totalitarianism. Here, the distinction between the minority elite and the masses is based not on class of origin, but on the level of consciousness, such as values and ethics.
‘Revista de Occidente’ is a magazine that exerted a profound influence not only on the Spanish intellectual sphere but also on that of Latin America. As its title—meaning “Western Review”—suggests, the magazine featured not only the German scholars mentioned earlier but also philosophers and scientists from various European countries, such as Johan Huizinga, Carl Jung, and Bertrand Russell, as well as the latest literary and artistic trends of the time. ‘Revista de Occidente’ was published by Ortega until 1936, when it was suspended due to the outbreak of the Civil War; however, it was revived in 1962 and is still published 11 times a year. The current publisher is José Varela Ortega, Ortega’s grandson.
The year 1923, when ‘Revista de Occidente’ was first published, also marked the beginning of General Primo de Rivera’s military dictatorship. Although Ortega initially supported the coup, which was justified on the grounds of eliminating incompetent and corrupt politics, he joined the resistance as repression intensified—including the closure not only of the National Assembly but also of the Ateneo, the cultural hub of Madrid. Resisting the military regime primarily through his writings in ‘Revista de Occidente’, he resigned from his professorship at the University of Madrid Central in 1929 when the regime attempted to shut down the university and began giving public lectures. In 1930, the military dictatorship ended, and the following year, in 1931, the Second Republic—a socialist government—was established. Ortega then founded a political party called the “Agrupación al Servicio de la República” (Association in the Service of the Republic) alongside Gregorio Marañón, Pérez de Ayala, and others. He was then elected to the Constituent Assembly representing the province of León. However, disappointed by the Republic’s policies—which failed to achieve social integration and instead accelerated division—he grew skeptical about his country’s future. In December of that same year, after criticizing the Republican government in his famous essay “Rectification of the Republic” (Rectificación de la República), Ortega resigned from his parliamentary seat and dissolved his political party.
Although he failed as a politician, Ortega y Gasset, as a scholar, engaged in prolific research until the outbreak of the civil war. In addition to the books mentioned earlier, it was during this period that he published major works such as ‘The Theme of Our Time’ (1923) and ‘The Dehumanization of Art’ (1925). ‘The Dehumanization of Art’ partly builds upon the themes explored in ‘The Revolt of the Masses’. Ordinary people, when confronted with works they do not understand, feel jealousy and hatred toward the elite minority. Having grown accustomed to the superficial realism of the 19th century, they are unable to comprehend the transcendent and playful new avant-garde art. ‘The Dehumanization of Art’, which analyzed the “art for the few” trend in early 20th-century avant-garde aesthetics, had a major influence on the emergence of the Generation of ’27. Meanwhile, as eminent scholars such as Xavier Zubiri, José Gaos, and María Zambrano gathered around Ortega, Spanish philosophy entered an unprecedented golden age. In particular, these philosophers—who were highly active between 1933 and 1936, when the Civil War broke out—are referred to as the “Madrid School (Escuela de Madrid).” In this sense, Francisco Romero (1891–1962), hailed as a pioneer of Latin American philosophy, asserts that the Spanish philosophical tradition began with Ortega.
Although Spanish socialists lost power to a right-wing coalition in the 1933 election, they formed the Popular Front—a left-wing coalition—and secured victory in the general election of February 1936. On July 17 of that year, the military, feeling threatened by the left’s victory, staged a coup under the command of General Francisco Franco (1892–1975). This marked the beginning of a brutal civil war (1936–1939). It was the eruption of the pent-up feelings of helplessness, division, and hatred that had dominated Spain since its defeat in the war against the United States in 1898. Fundamentally, however, it was an explosion of the historically accumulated conflicts between the “two Spains”—conservatives and progressives, the interior and the coast, faith and reason. In this book, Ortega y Gasset laments that, for some time, the Spanish people’s hearts had been filled with hatred, fueling the war, and thus foreshadows the civil war. As a solution, he appeals for people to abandon hatred, rekindle the spark of love, understand one another, and restore a sense of unity. However, his voice was ultimately drowned out by the madness of the times. A week after the publication of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, World War I broke out, and 22 years later, a fratricidal civil war erupted.
Three days after the civil war began, Communist Party members armed with pistols stormed into Ortega y Gasset’s home and forced him to sign a statement supporting the Republic. While Ortega refused to meet with them, his daughter Soledad persuaded them to draft a less political and more concise statement, and Ortega eventually signed the revised document. A few days later, despite being seriously ill, Ortega left Spain and went into exile. For Ortega, who detested dogmatism that imposed a single perspective, the situation in his homeland—engulfed in violence and hatred, whether from a right-wing coup or left-wing intimidation—must have been unbearable. Ortega y Gasset left Spain by ship from Alicante on the Mediterranean coast and traveled via Marseille to Paris. He then traveled through the Netherlands and Argentina before settling in Lisbon, Portugal, in 1942. In 1945, Ortega returned to his homeland under Franco’s dictatorship after nine years in exile. Afterward, he distanced himself from politics, and he was not permitted to resume his position as a university professor. Instead, in 1948, Ortega founded the Institute of Humanities (Instituto de Humanidades) in Madrid in 1948, where he lectured to students and liberal intellectuals. In 1949, he visited the United States after being invited as the keynote speaker to the 200th anniversary celebration of Goethe’s birth, held in Aspen, Colorado, and organized by the University of Chicago. He was also invited, along with Thomas Mann (1875–1955), to a conference on the same topic held in Germany. Between 1951 and 1953, he gave lectures in various German cities and received an honorary doctorate from the University of Marburg, his academic home. Notably, in 1951, he met the philosopher Heidegger—who was then considered Ortega’s academic rival—at a conference in Darmstadt. His lecture in Venice in 1955 was his last. Although Ortega’s international reputation grew over time, he was shunned by both the left and the right in his home country, leading to his social and academic isolation. His works were deliberately ignored in Spain, and he also faced financial difficulties. Ortega died in Madrid on October 18, 1955, from stomach and liver cancer. As his remains were transported to the cemetery, countless students followed behind, leading to student unrest. This is said to have been the first demonstration against Franco’s dictatorship. General Franco held them responsible and dismissed the Minister of Education and the President of the University of Madrid Central.

The Development of Ortega’s Thought: From Objectivism to “Vital Reason”

Octavio Paz, referring to Ortega y Gasset’s vast and diverse philosophical and literary world, states: “A philosophy that can be summarized in a single sentence is not philosophy, but religion. Or else it is ideology, a counterfeit of religion.” Ortega is clearly neither a religious figure nor an ideologue, but a thinker of immense breadth. His philosophy is usually divided into three stages.
The first stage is the “Objectivism (objectivismo)” period, spanning from his graduation from university in 1902 to 1914. During this time, he was greatly influenced by the Neo-Kantian school of the German philosopher Hermann Cohen and the phenomenology of Husserl. He attributed Spain’s lag in modernization to emotional and subjective individualism and premodern Catholic faith, and sought a way to remedy this and modernize Spain through reason—the foundation of the Neo-Kantian school. He regarded individualism and subjectivism as the maladies of the 19th century and of Spain itself. He called for the modernization of Spain by introducing objective and universal truths through reason. Ortega argued that this would first require a reformation of the spirit, which he believed could be achieved through education and culture. He presented the objectivism, self-restraint, intellectual clarity, and precision he had learned from the Neo-Kantian school as virtues that the Spanish spirit must embrace. From Ortega’s perspective, there is no doubt that what was most needed to overcome Spain’s irrationalism was the German spirit, which was “as clear as a spring morning.” Furthermore, it is by no means surprising that Ortega, who pursued scientific and objective truth, was fascinated by socialism (liberal socialism) at the time. However, Ortega soon encountered an intellectual impasse. This was because his rejection of subjectivism ended up restricting the rights of the subject and the individual, and because the socialism he believed in was a value incompatible with liberalism. Upon encountering phenomenology, Ortega developed a critical perspective on the idealism of the Neo-Kantian school and soon broke free from the “Kantian prison” in which he had been confined for ten years.
The second phase, “perspectivism” (perspectivismo), spanned from 1914 to 1923 and was a period dedicated to finding ways to overcome rationalism and modernity. ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ can be regarded as the work that fully launched the discussion on perspectivism as a reaction against the Neo-Kantian school and idealism. Ortega regarded rationalism as the foundation that made European modernity possible, but at the same time believed it had led to the decline of European culture. Ortega, who had previously championed Western modernity and advocated for the Europeanization of Spain, shifted his stance to seek a critique of Western modernity, which had reached a point of collapse. The year 1914 marked a period when negative perceptions of European civilization and modernity—which had reached a dead end with the outbreak of World War I—were spreading. The publication of Spengler’s ‘The Decline of the West’ (Parts I and II) in 1918 and 1922 can also be seen as an expression of the same sense of crisis shared by Ortega. Ortega himself stated that his ideas were “developed with remarkable originality in Spengler’s ‘The Decline of the West’,” and he even wrote the preface to the Spanish translation of ‘The Decline of the West’. The alternative that Ortega proposed to the sense of Western collapse—a defining symptom of the era—was perspectivism.
The perspectivism embraced by Ortega was first proposed by Leibniz and later taken up by Nietzsche. Perspectivism criticizes the epistemological egocentrism and positivist thinking that formed the foundation of modernity, and, premised on the subjectivity of cognition, acknowledges diverse perspectives and interpretations. Perspectivist thinking was also scientifically validated by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, published in 1915—the year following the release of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’. Perspectivism is distinct from mere relativism or subjectivism. While relativism asserts that it is impossible to arrive at universal truth, thereby giving rise to skepticism that renders everything untrustworthy, subjectivism cuts off the path to universal knowledge by reducing the categories of cognition to the personal level.
Ortega y Gasset argues that perspective, as the very raw material of reality, is a sign of the times; this perspectivism has expanded historically to recognize the distinctiveness of various nations with different environments. In other words, every people is an irreplaceable historical unit possessing a unique way of life and sensibility without any hierarchy of superiority or inferiority; this is because, as Julián Marías put it, “a people is matter as a vantage point—that is, a reality that each individual must construct for themselves.” Here, we can see that perspective arises directly from the perception of one’s environment, and we can understand the statement that encapsulates Ortega’s entire philosophy: “I am myself and my environment.” The environment does not refer to the limited space surrounding me, but rather to everything that constitutes me and engages in dialogue with me. Ortega states that a distinct perspective arises from each environment, and that countless realities can exist depending on those perspectives. Even a “concept,” which clearly illustrates the order of the world, is merely a “perspective within a network of historical relationships.” Therefore, a specific perspective on understanding the world arises from a specific environment. The world is neither matter nor spirit. The world is merely a perspective. A perspective can be described as an inclusive rationale—neither dogmatic truth nor skeptical absurdity. And it is only when we accept this that we can finally find meaning in the world around us and in ourselves.
The third stage of Ortega y Gasset’s thought spans from 1924 until his death in 1955 and can be described as the era of “racio-vitalism.” José Gaos sometimes divides this period into four stages, distinguishing between the time before and after the outbreak of the Civil War in 1936. However, since there were no significant changes in Ortega’s thought after his exile in 1936, it would be unreasonable to distinguish this as a separate stage. “Racio-vitalism,” which forms the central idea of the third stage, also emerged as an extension of the concepts of “environment” and “perspective” discussed in the previous stage. In ‘The Task of Modernity’, Ortega recognizes human life as the ultimate reality and asserts that the “task of modernity” is precisely to make reason follow life. Vital reason—the union of life and reason—rejects Cartesian rationalism but does not reject reason itself. It is a form of reason that is both complete and rigorous, transcending both rationalism and irrationalism. Vitalistic reason differs from Nietzsche’s irrationalist vitalism because it acknowledges reason—which thirsts for truth and objectivity—as part of human nature. Furthermore, vitalistic reason differs from the pure reason of rationalism because all living beings are changeable entities shaped by time, each possessing individual experiences, physical characteristics, and perspectives. This is why Ortega moved away from a priori phenomenology and adopted “secular phenomenology (fenomenología mundana).” Secular phenomenology is synonymous with vitalistic reason, a concept Ortega had already outlined in ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’. Thus, Ortega effectively anticipated Husserl’s later concept of the lifeworld (Lebenswelt). Life, which is the central theme of vitalistic reason, is neither conceptual nor biological; it can only be understood from an experiential and historical perspective. Consequently, vitalistic reason is linked to historical reason (razón histórica). According to German historicism, history is the most important element for humanity, and human beings are history itself, constituted through the flow of time. Historical reason overcomes abstract rationalism and blind modernity while pursuing human reality as a historical construct.
Therefore, unlike Unamuno’s position, for Ortega, “reason” and “life” are not terms with opposing concepts. Reason is merely a spontaneous function of life, just like the body’s senses. This can be seen as consistent with the thought of Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947), who, in ‘The Function of Reason’, understood reason as the body’s primordial “function” aimed at a better life. Whitehead states that reason is not an “entity” but a “function” for the “enhancement of the art of living.” He goes on to say, “The primordial function of reason is precisely to direct that assault toward the environment.” Here, humanity’s active assault on the environment would correspond to the “reabsorption of the environment” emphasized by Ortega. Humans, who shape their own lives using the things provided by the environment, transform “simply what is around me”—that is, the environment—into a real world and into a unique human life by projecting meaning onto those things.

“Meditations on Don Quixote” and the Salvation of Spain

Published in 1914, ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ marks the beginning of the second stage of Ortega y Gasset’s three-stage philosophy and is his first major work. Although its significance was once overlooked by readers, the work has been reevaluated over time and is now regarded as a foundational text for understanding Ortega’s overall philosophy. This is because, while it belongs to the second stage chronologically, it synthesizes his earlier ideas, foreshadows the ideas he would later develop, and, furthermore, anticipates the currents of early 20th-century European thought. When he was originally writing this book, Ortega’s primary concern was “salvation”—specifically, the salvation of Spain, which had fallen into ruin. To this end, he conceived a ten-volume “Salvation Series” as an experiment in seeking a new Spain. However, he changed the series’ title to “Meditations.” Moreover, the series as originally planned was never fully realized. It is likely that he lacked the time due to his numerous ideas and activities across various fields.
‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ consists of three parts. The “First Meditation,” which serves as the preface, is subtitled “To the Reader…,” “Preliminary Meditations,” and “A Brief Consideration of the Novel.” First, the title “To the Reader…” is significant in itself. The author attempts to approach readers in a friendly manner, not to unilaterally teach philosophical theories, but to ponder Spain’s problems together with them. The reason he considered the title “Salvation” from the very beginning is closely related to his motivation for writing this book. Salvation is the process of guiding all things and reality toward a fullness of meaning. This is achieved through a new and rich understanding of objects, which in turn transforms the world. At that time, Ortega faced the challenge of saving Spain—a nation in decline following a military defeat, where the people’s hearts were filled with hatred that was fueling further conflict. Ortega calls for the restoration of solidarity through love as the solution.
However, Ortega states that “salvation”—which reveals the full meaning of given things—is none other than the purpose of philosophy. He explains this through the concept of “intellectual love.” Originally a concept from Spinoza, intellectual love carries a pantheistic meaning: recognizing the essence of things is equivalent to union with God, which brings us happiness. Of course, union with God is impossible. However, Spinoza argues that through reason-based intellect—that is, understanding—humans can become free and attain salvation, and that through intellectual love, our minds can become one with nature. By quoting Spinoza, Ortega asserts that philosophy is the universal science of love. Ultimately, we can see that the salvation of Spain is not vastly different from what Ortega considers the essence of philosophy, and that it is connected to love. We can also surmise the two purposes of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’: namely, to advance toward Spain’s salvation through philosophy that elucidates the meaning of the world.
Ortega y Gasset states that philosophy provides a way of viewing things anew—that is, a perspective. Furthermore, for him, the ultimate reality of the world is not things with intrinsic substance, but merely the perspective from which the world is viewed. Even God is merely a perspective and a classificatory system. This perspective becomes more perfect as the number of viewpoints increases. Here, we can better understand Ortega’s statement: “I am myself and my environment.” This sentence expresses the philosophical relationship between humans and their external environment. We must view the environment surrounding us as it is. However, the environment is not an object unrelated to our existence. Human beings form an interactive and dynamic relationship with the external environment. Here, we can find meaning in what surrounds us and participate in the human destiny projected upon us. The process of shaping one’s life using the things provided by the environment is referred to as “re-absorbing” the environment.
‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ is an intellectual journey as part of a project to reabsorb the Spanish context. Spain is a land that fears and rejects change. Of course, a conservative attitude that respects the past and seeks to preserve tradition is not inherently bad. However, the inability to bring the past to life—instead leaving it stuffed and lifeless—is what truly deserves condemnation. Ortega argues that this is the very essence of reactionary thought. Reactionary thought conjures up the past to dominate the present. In contrast, Ortega regards the past as a living force and treats it as a way of life. As he puts it, this is an attempt “to discover another Spain by negating Spain.”
Ortega y Gasset states in this book that he is dealing not with ‘Don Quixote’ itself, but with Quixotism. In other words, this book does not aim to provide a commentary or analysis of ‘Don Quixote’, but rather to illustrate Quixotism. More precisely, it could be described as the “Cervantesism” that created Don Quixote. For Ortega, Don Quixote is a sad parody of a lonely Christ, tormented by modern anguish. He states that “whenever Spaniards—sensitive to the intellectual poverty of the past, the vulgarity of the present, and the bitter hostility of the future—gather in small groups, Don Quixote descends among them.” As Julian Marías explains, this sentence is the author’s justification of the book’s theme from the perspective of the Spanish context. It suggests that through Don Quixote—the common thread shared by the Spanish people and the key to Spain’s destiny—people come to understand their environment while simultaneously seeking a new Spain. Ortega examines how Cervantes, within the “context” of Spain, approached subjects and created a new style as a means of delving deeper into them. This is an effort to shatter the prejudice that ‘Don Quixote’ is superficial and to establish a concept that Spain has long been criticized for lacking by revealing the “depth of the novel.” Therefore, in ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, ‘Don Quixote’ is not an end in itself but a means; it is not an object of analysis but an object of “salvation.” Furthermore, this work is intended to provide a clear view of the present, not the past of Cervantes’s era.
If Ortega y Gasset revealed his ambition to grasp the “concept” in the preface dedicated to his readers, it can be said that in the “Preliminary Reflections,” he presents the specific methodology for doing so. This ties in with the book’s title, ‘Reflections’. Ortega argues that the essential difference between German and Latin cultures lies in the fact that the former is a culture of depth, while the latter is a culture of the surface. He defines “reflection” as the act of thought that breaks free from the sensory and impressionistic surface to delve into a deeper reality.
In this sense, it is significant that Ortega begins his “Preliminary Reflections” at the Escorial Monastery. Built during the Golden Age and serving as a showcase for Spain’s fossilized history, this “grand, gray edifice” is both a symbol and the very essence of Spain. Yet Ortega’s description of the forest surrounding this building is brimming with vitality and unparalleled beauty. As one enters the forest, which shifts from coppery hues, golden, purple, and deep green, where clear water babbles and nightingales sing. The forest is a synthesis of intense and rapidly shifting sensations. Ortega begins his contemplation in search of the forest’s true reality, which lies pulsating beneath the surface, concealing its true nature. It is a reflective adventure undertaken to view the forest through the lens of the trees. However, the deep reality is not the only true world. In other words, there is no hierarchy between the superficial and the deep worlds; the true world encompasses both the manifest world of pure impressions and the latent world that lies behind it. Human beings set out to discover the invisible, mysterious deeper world within the sensory, material world. In other words, they lift the veil of truth that is concealed by a passive, sensory perspective. This is precisely the perspective gained through concepts. While sensory perception provides impressions of objects, conceptual perception is the true vision that allows us to grasp things in themselves. Furthermore, conceptual perception enables us to grasp structure—the order in which things are arranged. Spain, where everything is uncertain, must clarify its path and destiny through concepts.
This does not mean that Spain should abandon everything from its past and adopt the Germanic spirit. For if it were to give up even its unique form of impressionism, it would not be remaining true to its own destiny. Ortega merely rejects the “outdated” Spain and argues for discovering another Spain—the true Spain. This is the integration of impression and concept, the union of the Latin and the Germanic, and the fusion of past and present. Therefore, this book is not intended to look at the past, but to observe Spain’s present and to view the world from Spain’s perspective. Perspectivism serves as the concrete methodology for this purpose. To this end, the figure Ortega focused on was Don Quixote. As Ortega himself stated, the primary reason he became so engrossed in ‘Don Quixote’ was the monumental question: “What, exactly, is Spain?” This work reveals the destiny of the nation of Spain. This is because Ortega felt that the fate that befell Don Quixote mirrored the problems facing Spain in his own time. In this sense, ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ is, in essence, a “reflection on Spain.”
“First Meditation,” which corresponds to the final chapter of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, is—as its subtitle, “A Brief Consideration of the Novel,” suggests—an analysis of ‘Don Quixote’ not as a subject but as a genre. While in the preceding “Preliminary Reflection” Ortega asked, “What is Spain?”, at the beginning of the “First Reflection” he asks, “What is the novel?” In fact, he had long been interested in the subject of the novel, because he believed that the flourishing of the novel was the most characteristic phenomenon of his era, marked by the emergence of the masses. Having posed the question about the novel, Ortega adopts the methodology used by the Israelites when they attacked the city of Jericho. He begins with the largest concentric circle—that is, the history of literary genres—and gradually narrows down the focus.
Ortega believes that the essential subject of art is humanity, and that genre—which can be considered the ultimate aesthetic subject—is the perspective that captures the flow of human nature. A specific era gives rise to a specific interpretation of humanity and leads to a preference for certain genres. Therefore, according to Ortega, literary genres express the sensibilities of their time and represent the destiny of that era. Viewed in this light, the novel stands in contrast to the genre of the epic poem. The theme of the epic poem is chronological time—that is, not time connected to the present, but an idealized “absolute time.” Consequently, the epic hero is also a being belonging to a closed, idealized past that transcends time. However, as humans gradually adopted rational thought and the worldview that had served as their foundation crumbled, the epic abandoned mythology and charted a new course; this gave rise to the medieval chivalric tales of knights setting out in search of adventure. For the authors of chivalric tales—which Ortega described as “the last great sprout to blossom from the ancient trunk of the epic”—the primary concern was creating fascinating tales of adventure; in other words, storytelling. However, unlike the epic or chivalric tales, the novel is no longer concerned with simply creating a story. Instead, the novel places greater emphasis on the way the story is told. In other words, the novel prioritizes form over content—not “what” but “how”—and can be considered a modern invention that describes the present rather than narrating the past. Furthermore, ‘Don Quixote’, which takes writing itself as its subject, is the first modern novel.
Ortega goes on to examine the meaning of the hero through the genres of epic poetry, tragedy, comedy, tragicomedy, and the novel. Unlike the superhuman heroes of epic poetry or the noble heroes of tragedy, the postmodern hero is someone who resists the given reality and possesses the will to transform it. As Ortega puts it, the hero “refuses to repeat the patterns of behavior imposed by custom, tradition, or, in a word, biological instinct.” He is one who harbors a yearning to overcome the environment imposed upon him and become a unique “self.” Thus, the hero gives meaning to the world while battling his environment. However, reality seeks to reduce the hero to a vulgar and materialistic dimension, turning him into a comic figure. Unlike the world of epic poetry, human life—in which everyone harbors remnants of the hero within—is a continuous struggle against an uncertain future. In this sense, Don Quixote is the hero of the newly born modern era. Despite the derision of superficial and shallow modern epistemology, he charges at the monstrous windmills and battles Maese Pedro’s puppets. Though his life is a tragic one, subject to ridicule, he seeks ideals in the face of the materialism and vulgarity surrounding him, and and inhabits a deeper world invisible to the modern eye. He does not accept his given circumstances but becomes his true “self” by plunging into adventure and imbuing it with new meaning. Ortega projects the fate of Spain onto Don Quixote. Just as Don Quixote refused to compromise with reality and created his own world, Ortega hopes that Spain will vigorously sing the legends of history—standing up to the fatal songs of the past that the Sirens sing, and to Darwin’s determinism, which has driven heroes to extinction on Earth and reduced life to a mere object. It is at this point of reabsorbing modernity that the design for a new Spain will begin.

Europe’s Greatest Writer Since Nietzsche

It is said that Ortega y Gasset was an excellent philosopher but not a great teacher. This implies that he was an elite philosopher whose writings were difficult to understand. Furthermore, because he returned to his homeland under the Franco regime—which had won the Civil War with the help of Hitler and Mussolini—and remained silent, his ideas were not given their due and were disparaged. Socially isolated and plagued by illness, Ortega was forced to spend his final years in even greater misfortune due to this political context. Nevertheless, there is no dispute that Ortega y Gasset was an outstanding philosopher and writer. Furthermore, it is often noted that the 1978 Spanish Democratic Constitution, enacted after Franco’s death, reflects Ortega’s ideas.
Ortega’s ideas gained greater international renown than they did in his native Spain and exerted a significant influence on great writers such as Thomas Mann, Hermann Hesse, and Albert Camus. Camus, in particular, was captivated by Ortega; he listed ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ and ‘The Revolt of the Masses’ among his required reading and praised him highly, calling him “perhaps the greatest European writer since Nietzsche.” Some scholars, including Gil Villegas of Mexico, regard Ortega and Lukács as precursors to Heidegger. Furthermore, Curtius, who maintained a close personal and academic relationship with Ortega throughout his life, also held Ortega in high regard, attributing his achievements to his originality in harmonizing, complementing, and expanding both German and French cultures. In addition, Ortega’s influence on the intellectual circles of Latin America was immense, extending to figures such as Octavio Paz, Henríquez Ureña (1884–1946), and Alejo Carpentier (1904–1980)—some of the continent’s foremost intellectuals—have paid tribute to Ortega, stating that his writings have served as an intellectual “environment” for them. This reaffirms Ortega’s status as the preeminent thinker of the Spanish-speaking world in the first half of the 20th century.
Why was Ortega’s ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ included in the World Literature Collection? In fact, it is difficult to distinguish whether this book should be viewed as a work of literature or a philosophical treatise. Strictly speaking, however, this book—which traces the flow of literary history from ancient epic poetry to 19th-century novels—is not a philosophical treatise. It merely appears to be a philosophical work because the content of the essays, which cover a vast range of topics, is somewhat complex and challenging. That said, it is also difficult to view this book—which discusses everything from Socrates to the philosophy of Husserl—as a work of literature. Therefore, I apologize to any readers who picked up this book expecting an analysis or critique of ‘Don Quixote’. Paradoxically, however, this work is intended to provide a fundamental understanding of ‘Don Quixote’ and the country of Spain. As mentioned earlier, in this book, ‘Don Quixote’ is not the object of analysis but the object of “salvation.” In other words, in accordance with the meaning of salvation as defined by Julián Marías, the author enriches the meaning of ‘Don Quixote’ and leads readers to a new and enriching understanding. This is because ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ shows us not the individual trees within ‘Don Quixote’, but the forest of ‘Don Quixote’ itself. Therefore, this work is both a philosophical essay and a bold meta-critique.
Ortega states that while this text was written out of a philosophical desire, it is not philosophy—that is, it is not an academic treatise. This book is a “simple essay” and a text that cannot be proven conclusively. For this reason, he employs an everyday, delicate style and a distinctive tone. Furthermore, he has no intention of imposing his writing as truth upon readers. He merely seeks to “offer possible ways of looking at things anew.” In this sense, Octavio Paz says that Ortega y Gasset is a true essayist, and in particular, “ ‘the greatest essayist in the Spanish-speaking world.’” In fact, the essay was Ortega’s preferred genre. This is because it is accessible to readers unaccustomed to dense, academic texts and is well-suited for publication in newspapers and magazines. Consequently, Ortega defines the essay as a bridge between knowledge and literature and as scholarly writing “without footnotes.”