In this blog post, I will examine Spain’s intellectual tradition and the issue of modernity, focusing on José Ortega y Gasset’s ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, and summarize the development of his ideas and their literary and philosophical implications.

The Empire Where the Sun Never Sets and the Suffocation of Thought

Whenever I speak about Spain’s intellectual tradition, there is a question I always hear from my listeners. The question is: 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 this book suggests, the fanciful sense of duty among Southern Europeans—that one must never think because thinking makes one grow old—can even sound plausible. The Spanish philosopher María Zambrano (1904–1991) admits that Spain has never possessed a logical and systematic philosophy like that of Germany. However, she argues that this does not mean Spain lacks thought. Rather, she suggests that this thought is simply 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 also laments the paucity of Spanish philosophy in this book. “In the history of European thought, what Spain has 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 lonely philosopher living in a Spain that is ignorant of and hostile toward philosophy.
In fact, Spain has never produced a world-renowned thinker or established a major philosophical school. However, this does not mean that Spain lacked an intellectual tradition. Seneca (Séneca, 4 BC–65 AD) was a native of Córdoba, Spain, and the scholar who presided over the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, acknowledging the divinity of Jesus Christ and establishing the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, was Osio (256–357), who was the bishop of Córdoba at the time. 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 flourished in which Christianity, Islam, and Judaism coexisted, Spain bore even richer intellectual fruits. Ibn Rushd (1126–1198), a native of Córdoba, provided a masterful interpretation of Aristotelian philosophy, exerting a profound influence on the Scholastic philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and the Renaissance. Maimonides (Maimonides, 1135–1204), also from Córdoba, is regarded as the most important Jewish philosopher of the Middle Ages for synthesizing Jewish thought while embracing Aristotelian philosophy.
Spanish philosophy, which had been carried on by figures such as Luis Vives (1492–1540), a proponent of Erasmus’s philosophy, and Francisco Suárez (1548–1617), a master of Scholastic philosophy, had kept the tradition alive. However, from the 17th century onward, Spanish philosophy 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 basking in the glory of an empire on which the sun never set, coinciding with the dawn of the Atlantic Age. However, looking back through history, Queen Isabella (1451–1504), who drove out the Arabs and completed the Reconquista while dreaming of a unified Catholic kingdom, had 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. Yet, 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 played a leading role in ushering in the modern era through the discovery of the New World, ultimately rejected modernity—reached its peak with the defeat in the war against the United States in 1898. This was the era of the Restoration (1875–1917), following the collapse of the First Republic (1873–1874), which 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 reignited 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 sole 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 group of intellectuals known as the “Generation of ’98.” Formed naturally after the 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 Generation of ’98. While advocating for the eradication of ignorance and poverty, the Generation of ’98 particularly championed an educational revolution. Julián Sanz del Río (1814–1869) was a pioneer in Spanish educational reform. By introducing the philosophy of the German thinker Krause, he attempted 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 School of Education (Institución Libre de Enseñanza) and the Student Residence (Residencia de Estudiantes). The first edition of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ was also published by the Student Residence’s publishing house. Intellectuals of the Generation of ’98, led by 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, held up 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 follow.
Ortega y Gasset can be said to have inherited the concerns and spirit of the Generation of ’98. Furthermore, Ortega even claimed to be 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, such as Unamuno, Ramiro de Maestu, 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 rather 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 been stifled by the “restoration of the monarchy.” Emphasizing the need for education to drive political reform, he founded a political organization called the “Spanish League of Political Education (Liga de Educación Política Española)” to rally intellectuals who would lead the reform effort; these figures would later be known as the “Class 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 Maderia, and Manuel Azaña (1880–1940), who would later become Prime Minister of the Second Republic, among the era’s leading intellectuals, writers, and artists.
The 1914 Generation was generally 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,” a term meaning “the 1900s.” So why 1914? 1914 was the year World War I began, and in Spain, it marked the start of the consolidation of opposition forces as criticism intensified against the political system of the Restoration, which had been governed by an ineffective two-party system led alternately by liberals and conservatives. Ortega’s lecture, as we saw earlier, served as the catalyst. In this context, in 1914, Azorín declared the arrival of a new generation 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 famous writer and journalist who inherited the management of ‘El Imparcial’ from his father-in-law. Because of this background, Ortega y Gasset says he was born “on top of a printing press.” His family enjoyed vacations traveling by car throughout Spain and going hunting. It is this background that explains the hunting metaphors found in this book. Born into a financially prosperous and culturally sophisticated family, 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, completing his high school education there. His parents sent their two sons to this school because they valued Spanish traditions and the Catholic faith. Ironically, however, Ortega grew so weary of 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), whom he had devoured since childhood, likely played a role in this. 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 ( later renamed the Complutense University of Madrid). To transfer, he took an entrance exam at the University of Salamanca, where his interviewer was Miguel de Unamuno. Ortega majored in philosophy at the University of Madrid and graduated with his bachelor’s degree in 1902, earning his doctorate in 1904 at the age of 21. He began his career as a critic in 1902 by writing his first review for the magazine ‘Vida Nueva’, and in 1904, he published an essay on the Belgian poet Maurice Maeterlinck (1862–1949) in ‘El Imparcial’.
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 encountered Hermann Cohen and Paul Natorp (1854–1924). After encountering Neo-Kantianism, Ortega became briefly involved in socialism and even attended the 1908 national convention of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE). Ortega studied the history of philosophy and Kantian 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 desperately 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—academia, culture, and ways of thinking—was absolute. He even gave his eldest son, who was born in Marburg, the name “Germán,” meaning “German.” In 1923, Ortega founded the journal ‘Revista de Occidente’ to introduce European thought, and the philosophy he primarily featured was German. Commentaries 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, at the time, knowing German was a source of great pride among those who considered themselves well-educated. 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. During their second meeting, Ortega reportedly took Paz by the arm and said with a serious look in his eyes, “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 faculty is the “concept.” Concepts impose order on seemingly individual and ambiguous objects, rendering them clear. Through concepts, we come to recognize and possess things with certainty. The act of thinking is the first step toward overcoming the irrationalism of Spain, where everything is vague and uncertain. Ortega thus finds the path to becoming a “conceptual human” 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 became a professor of metaphysics at the University of Madrid Central through a competitive examination. In 1910, Ortega visited Germany to continue his research on Kant, and after returning home the following year, he engaged in active social criticism through the press and public lectures. In 1913, driven by his belief that social reform goes hand in hand with education, he founded the Political Education League and began full-scale political activities. This was influenced by Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746–1827), who advocated for public education, and by Natorp, who argued that community transformation was possible through education. This period also saw the birth of his two sons and one daughter. While residing in Germany in 1911, 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). 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 embarked on 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 essays 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’ (1921) and ‘The Revolt of the Masses’ (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 most widely known of Ortega’s works. The author diagnoses that Spain has become divided and plunged into crisis because the ordinary, herd-like masses do not follow the intellectually and morally superior minority. He also warns that this phenomenon, which is a crisis manifesting across all of Europe, could lead to the emergence of totalitarianism. Here, the distinction between the elite minority 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 significant influence not only in Spain but also on the intellectual circles of Latin America. As the title, meaning “Western Review,” suggests, it 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, but 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. Initially supporting the coup under the pretext of eliminating incompetent and corrupt politics, Ortega 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 close the university and began giving public lectures. When the military dictatorship ended in 1930 and the Second Republic under a socialist government was established the following year in 1931, Ortega founded a political party called the “Agrupación al Servicio de la República” (Association in the Service of the Republic) together with Gregorio Maragón, and Pérez de Ayala. He was elected to the Constituent Assembly representing the province of León. However, he became disillusioned with the Republic’s policies, which he felt failed to achieve social integration and instead accelerated division, leading him to harbor doubts about his country’s future. In December of that same year, Ortega criticized the Republican government in his famous essay “Rectification of the Republic,” after which he resigned from his parliamentary seat and dissolved his 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, major works such as ‘The Theme of Our Time’ (1923) and ‘The Dehumanization of Art’ (1925) were published during this period. ‘The Dehumanization of Art’ partially builds upon the themes explored in ‘The Revolt of the Masses’. Ordinary people, when confronted with works they cannot 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 significant 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. These philosophers, who were particularly active between 1933 and the outbreak of the Civil War in 1936, 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 elections, they formed the Popular Front, a left-wing coalition, and won the general election in 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 with the United States in 1898. However, at its core, 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 hearts of the Spanish people had been filled with hatred, inciting war, and thus foreshadows the civil war. As a solution, he appeals for people to abandon hatred, rekindle the spark of love, understand others, and restore a sense of unity. However, his voice is 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 set out from Spain into exile. As someone who detested dogmatism that imposed a single viewpoint, Ortega could not bear the situation in his homeland, which was engulfed in violence and hatred, whether from the right-wing coup or the left-wing intimidation. Ortega y Gasset left Spain by ship from Alicante on the Mediterranean coast, traveling via Marseille to Paris. He then passed 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. From then on, he distanced himself from politics, and his reinstatement as a university professor was not permitted. Instead, 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 at 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 theme 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 Martin Heidegger—who was then considered Ortega’s academic rival—at a conference in Darmstadt. His lecture in Venice in 1955 was his final public address. Although Ortega’s international reputation grew over time, he became socially and academically isolated in Spain, shunned by both the left and the right. His works were deliberately ignored in Spain, and he faced financial difficulties. Ortega passed away in Madrid on October 18, 1955, from stomach and liver cancer. As his remains were taken 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.

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” 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 by Husserl’s phenomenology. He identified the causes of Spain’s lag in modernization as 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 diseases of the 19th century and of Spain. He called for the modernization of Spain by introducing objective and universal truths through reason. Ortega argued that this required a transformation of the spirit, which could be achieved through education and culture. He presented the objectivism, self-restraint, and intellectual clarity and precision he had learned from the Neo-Kantian school as virtues that the Spanish spirit must adopt. In Ortega’s view, there is no doubt that what was most needed to overcome Spain’s irrationalism was the German spirit, “as clear as a spring morning.” Furthermore, it is by no means surprising that Ortega, who pursued scientific and objective truth, was captivated by socialism (liberal socialism) at the time. However, Ortega soon encountered an intellectual impasse. This was because his rejection of subjectivism led to restrictions on the rights of the subject and the individual, and because the socialism he had 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
“Kant’s prison.”
The second phase, “perspectivism,” spanned from 1914 to 1923 and was a period of seeking ways to overcome rationalism and modernity. “Meditations on Don Quixote” can be seen 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, yet he simultaneously 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 adopted by Ortega was first proposed by Leibniz and later taken up by Nietzsche. Perspectivism critiques 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 scientifically validated by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, published the year after ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ (1915). Perspectivism is distinct from simple relativism or subjectivism. While relativism leads to skepticism by claiming that it is impossible to reach universal truth, thereby rendering everything untrustworthy, subjectivism blocks the path to universal knowledge by reducing the categories of cognition to the personal level.
Ortega y Gasset argues that perspective is itself the raw material of reality and a sign of the times, and this perspectivism, when expanded historically, leads to the recognition of the distinctiveness of various nations with different environments. In other words, every race possesses a unique way of life and sensibility as an irreplaceable historical unit without a hierarchy of superiority or inferiority; as Julián Marías put it, “a nation 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 the environment, and we can understand the phrase “I am myself and my environment,” which encapsulates all of Ortega’s philosophy. 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 distinct perspectives arise from each environment, and that countless realities can exist depending on those perspectives. Even “concepts,” which clearly reveal the order of the world, are merely “perspectives within a network of historical relationships.” Therefore, a specific perspective on understanding the world emerges 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 the meaning of the world around us and of 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 is difficult 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 “environment” and “perspective” discussed in the previous stage. In ‘The Task of Modernity’, Ortega identifies human life as the ultimate reality and asserts that the “task of modernity” is to make reason follow life. Vital reason, which is the union of life and reason, rejects Cartesian rationalism but does not reject reason itself. It is a form of reason that is both full 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 variable entities shaped by time, possessing individual experiences, physical characteristics, and perspectives. This is why Ortega broke away from a priori phenomenology and adopted “secular phenomenology (fenomenología mundana).” Secular phenomenology is synonymous with vital 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 vital reason, is neither conceptual nor biological; it can only be understood from an experiential and historical perspective. Consequently, vital 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.
Thus, unlike Unamuno’s position, for Ortega, “reason” and “life” are not terms with opposing concepts. Reason is merely a natural function of life, just like the body’s senses. This can be seen as consistent with the thinking 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 primary 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 construct their lives using the objects 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 objects.

“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 and it was neglected, it has been reevaluated over time and is now regarded as a foundational text for understanding Ortega’s overall philosophy. Although it belongs to the second stage chronologically, it synthesizes his earlier thought, foreshadows the ideas he would later develop, and, furthermore, anticipates the currents of early 20th-century European thought. At the time he was writing this book, Ortega’s primary concern was “salvation”—specifically, the salvation of Spain, which had fallen into ruin. To this end, he conceived of a ten-volume “Salvation” series as an experiment in seeking a new Spain. However, he changed the title of the series to “Reflections.” Moreover, the series as originally planned was never fully realized. It is likely that he lacked the time due to his abundance of ideas and activities across various fields.
‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ consists of three parts: the “To the Reader…,” which serves as the preface; “Preliminary Reflections”; and “The First Reflection,” subtitled “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 theory, but to ponder the problems of Spain together with them. The reason he initially considered the title “Salvation” is closely related to his motivation for writing this book. Salvation means guiding all things and reality toward a fullness of meaning. This is achieved through a new and enriched perception of objects, thereby transforming the world. At the time, Ortega faced the challenge of saving Spain—a nation in decline following a war 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 asserts that “salvation”—the act of revealing 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 uniting with God, which brings us happiness. Of course, uniting with God is an impossible feat. 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 the essence of philosophy as Ortega conceives it, and that it is connected to love. We can also surmise the two purposes of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’: namely, to advance toward the salvation of Spain through philosophy that illuminates 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 a thing with substance, but merely the perspective from which the world is viewed. Even God is merely a perspective and a system of classification. 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 the external environment. We must view the environment surrounding us as it is. However, the environment is not an object unrelated to my existence. Humans 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 that is projected upon us. The act of shaping one’s life using the things provided by the environment is referred to as “reabsorbing” the environment.
‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ is an intellectual journey of a project to reabsorb the Spanish situation. 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 of merely preserving it as a taxidermied specimen—is what deserves condemnation. Ortega argues that this is the very essence of reactionism. Reactionary thought summons 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 “disavow Spain while discovering another Spain.”
Ortega y Gasset states in this book that he is dealing not with ‘Don Quixote’ itself, but with Don 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 Cervantes-ism that created Don Quixote. For Ortega, Don Quixote is a sad parody of a lonely Christ, tormented by modern anguish. He also states, “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 environment. Through Don Quixote—the common link 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 “situation” of Spain, approached things and created a style as a new method of deepening 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 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, the “Preliminary Reflections” can be seen as presenting the specific methodology for doing so. This connects to 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 began writing ‘Preliminary Reflections’ at the Monastery of El Escorial. This “grand, gray edifice,” built during the Golden Age and representing Spain’s fossilized history, is both a symbol and the very essence of Spain. Yet Ortega’s descriptions of the forest surrounding this building are brimming with vitality and unparalleled beauty. Upon entering the forest, which shifts through shades of bronze, gold, purple, and deep green, one hears the babbling of clear water and the chirping of nightingales. The forest is a synthesis of intense and rapidly shifting sensations. Ortega begins his contemplation in search of the forest’s true reality, which pulses beneath the surface while concealing its true nature. It is a reflective adventure undertaken to view the forest through the lens of the individual tree. However, the deep reality alone does not constitute the 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 behind it. Humans set out to discover the mysterious, invisible deep world within the sensory, material world. In other words, they lift the veil of truth that is concealed through passive, sensory vision. This is precisely the vision through concepts. While sensory vision provides impressions of objects, conceptual vision is the true vision that allows us to grasp things in themselves. Furthermore, conceptual vision enables us to grasp structure—the order in which things are arranged. In a Spain where everything is uncertain, the nation 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 Spain were to give up even its unique form of impressionism, that too would not be faithful to its own destiny. Ortega merely rejects the “outdated” Spain and argues for the discovery of 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 back at the past, but to observe Spain’s present and view the world from Spain’s perspective. Perspectivism serves as the concrete methodology for this. To this end, the figure Ortega focused on is Don Quixote. As Ortega himself put it, the primary reason he became so engrossed in ‘Don Quixote’ was the monumental question: “What, after all, is Spain?” This work reveals the destiny of the nation of Spain. This is because Ortega felt that the fate that befell Don Quixote was the very problem facing Spain in his own time. In this sense, ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ is, in essence, a “reflection on Spain.”
The “First Meditation,” which corresponds to the final chapter of ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’, is a text that analyzes ‘Don Quixote’ not as a subject but as a genre, as indicated by its subtitle, “A Brief Consideration of the Novel.” Whereas 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. This was 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 walls of Jericho. He begins with the largest concentric circle—that is, the history of literary genres—and narrows down the subject from there.
Ortega believes that the essential subject of art is humanity, and that the genre—which can be considered the ultimate aesthetic subject—is a 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 sensibility of their time and are 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 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 set a new course; what emerged from this was the medieval chivalric tale, in which knights set out in search of adventure. For the authors of chivalric tales—which Ortega described as “the last great bud to bloom from the ancient trunk of the epic”—the primary concern was crafting compelling tales of adventure, that is, storytelling. However, unlike the epic or chivalric tales, the novel no longer focuses on creating stories. Instead, the novel places greater emphasis on the manner in which the story is told. In other words, the novel prioritizes form over content, “how” rather than “what,” 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 continues 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 post-modern 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 modes of behavior imposed by custom, tradition, or, in a word, biological instinct.” He is one who harbors the aspiration 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, materialistic dimension, turning him into a comic figure. Unlike the epic world, human life—in which everyone harbors remnants of the hero within—is a continuous struggle against such forces, despite 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 fights the puppets of Maese Pedro. Although his life is a tragic one, subject to ridicule, he seeks ideals in the face of the materialism and vulgarity surrounding him, and lives in 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 against the fatal siren songs of the past and against Darwin’s determinism, which has driven heroes to extinction and reduced life to mere objects. It is at this point of reabsorbing modernity that the design of 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 he was an elite philosopher whose writings were difficult to understand. Furthermore, his ideas were not treated with due respect and were disparaged 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. Socially isolated and physically afflicted by illness, Ortega was forced to spend his final years in even greater misfortune due to this political backdrop. 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, listing ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ and ‘The Revolt of the Masses’ as essential reading and lavishing praise on him, 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 remained close to Ortega both personally and academically throughout his life, also held Ortega in high regard, attributing his achievements to his originality in harmonizing, complementing, and expanding upon German and French cultures. In addition, Ortega’s influence on the intellectual circles of Latin America was immense; leading intellectuals of the continent, such as Octavio Paz, Henríquez Ureña (1884–1946), and Alejo Carpentier (1904–1980)—some of the continent’s foremost intellectuals—have paid tribute to him, stating that Ortega’s writings have served as their intellectual “environment.” 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’, a work by a philosopher, included in the World Literature Collection? In fact, it is difficult to distinguish whether this book should be viewed as a literary work or a philosophical treatise. However, strictly speaking, 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 one because the content of the essays, which cover a vast range of topics, is somewhat complex and difficult. That said, it is also difficult to view this book—which discusses everything from Socrates to Husserlian philosophy—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 a book 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.” That is, 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 abundant understanding. ‘Meditations on Don Quixote’ shows us not the 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 discipline. 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 asserts that Ortega y Gasset is a true essayist, and indeed “perhaps the greatest essayist in the Spanish-speaking world.” In fact, the essay is 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.”