The Name of the Rose, by Umberto Eco. This was a hefty tome that was recommended to me over a year ago. I wrote the name down and have been meaning to buy and read it ever since. Finally I attempted it, and although it was long and difficult book, I was very satisfied with the book by the end, having trouble putting it down.
It is the story of a murder mystery in an Italian Dominican Abbey in 1327. It is told from the point of view of Adso of Melk, writing the story when he was an old man, although he was a young teenage novice when the events happened. He accompanied William of Baskerville, a Franciscan monk that was in charge of investigating the murders. William used reason and logic to try and piece together the clues, instead of the superstition and diabolical leanings of the monks. It takes place over the course of seven days, and there are new developments every night, as monk after monk is mysteriously killed.
The main reason why William was at the Abbey was actually to attend a debate between a delegation of Franciscan monks and representatives of the Pope in Avignon. The Franciscan's wanted the pope to accept the notion that Jesus was poor and owned nothing, and therefore ensure the safety of their Order. The Pope, however, did not want to admit that, otherwise all his riches would seem contrary to teachings of Christ. That is the underlying subtext, and so William must hurry to solve the murders so they do not interfere with the meeting, for if the meeting does not go well, the Franciscans could be found guilty of heresy and hunted down.
The web unravels for William as he discovers that the murders revolve around a mysterious book that had been taken out of the forbidden, labyrinth library. William and Adso discover the map of the library, and decipher a riddle that allows them to enter a secret room. There they discover the murderer, Jorge of Burgos (a reference to Jorge Luis Borges, one of my favorite writers), who had poisoned the pages of the book, so anyone reading it would touch the page, and touch their mouth, and soon die. The book is Aristotle's lost work on Comedy, and how laughter can be beneficial. Jorge does not believe in laughter, and thinks that it would lessen the fear and devotion to God. He runs off with the book, eating the pages as he goes, and William and Adso give chase, but accidently set the library on fire. Jorge burns with the book, and William and Adso escape, but the entire Abbey soon catches fire and is destroyed.
I rented the movie last week and watched it as soon as I finished the book. It was okay, but it is impossible to fit a 550 page book into a two hour movie, so there was a lot of stuff left out and glossed over. I didn't like in the movie how much attention was focused on Adso's brief love affair with the peasant girl. I also wished the final scene with Jorge was elaborated, so that there was more of a reason behind his rationale of poisoning the book. Sean Connery played William and a young Christian Slater played Adso.
I enjoyed this book immensely. William is similar to Sherlock Holmes and his assistant Adso/Watson. Logic is the guiding force that can shine the light on the mysterious workings of the Abbey. I feel much smarter after reading Umberto Eco. He explains in great depth about the intricacies of European politics at the time, and the relationship between the Church and the monks and the peasants. Of course it was difficult to understand a lot of what was being discussed. I had to Wikipedia some bits of history to understand better, like Fra Dolcino, and the move to Avignon, and the differences between Dominicans and Franciscans. I also did not like how much of the book was in Latin. Whole passages had to be skipped over, and certain key lines as well. I wished they had footnotes so the reader could follow along better.
All in all it was a great read. Started off slowly, but the tension built into a wonderful second half of the book. Four and a half out of five stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment