The Name of the Rose: (Warning: Contains Spoilers)
Written by Umberto Eco, an Italian professor of
semiotics. As best I can tell, he is the
real life version of Dan Brown’s fictional symbologist Robert Langdon. The book recounts a multiple murder mystery
set in a remote Italian monestary in the mid 14th century as
recorded by a novice monk, Adso of Melk, now in his old age. The book is written with excruciating detail
with regards to church politics in greater Europe. Reading the book is an exercise in
vocabulary; ancient and obscure words are used regularly as are untranslated
phrases in a variety of languages (most commonly Latin, but including French
and German). The mystery itself is
interesting enough, but is interspersed with longwinded asides detailing
religious visions and emotional experiences of the narrator. While I did not read the post script in its
entirety, I did read far enough to see that Eco refused to take out these
sections, as was suggested by his editors and test readers. He saw them as penance the reader must serve,
just as the monks do, to partake in the life and story of the monastery.
Summary:
Adso recounts the experience from his youth as he faithfully
follows his master, Brother William of Baskerville. It is revealed that William is on a mission
to establish a meeting between Michael of Cessna and delegates of the newly
elected Pope, in order for the terms to be set in a later meeting between
Michael and the Pope himself. Due to
various ideological differences between orders and factions within the church
and Europe, the unnamed monastery in question is the only place for such a
meeting to take place.
Upon their arrival the monastery, William is revealed to be a
wise and clever man, much like Sherlock Holmes, by solving the mystery of a
missing horse. With his reputation
preceding him up the hill to the monastery, William meets the abbot Abo, who
greets him and quickly requests his help in solving the mystery of the death of
a young monk. As William and Adso start
to investigate, they quickly find the abbey has many dark secrets.
The abbey’s fame derives primarily from its vast
library. However, access to the library
is strictly controlled. Only the
librarian is allowed to enter the library and only he decides what books are
pious enough for the monks to read. As a
safeguard, the library itself is a labyrinth full of surprises aimed to foil trespassers.
As each day passes, another monk dies and the mystery
deepens. Eventually, the meeting between
Michael of Cessna and the Popes delegates takes place even as monks continue to
die. After the failed meeting, William
is coming close to solving the mystery, so close that he is asked to leave by
the abbot (so that the matter can be dealt with internally). Vowing to solve the mystery before departure
in the morning, William solves the final riddle of the library where he finds
the mastermind and the coveted book that have caused so much trouble. As detective and crook revel in their glory –
the crook in how brilliant and successful his crimes, the detective in piecing
it all together – the final act of the crook to destroy the book results in a
fight and the burning down of the library and abbey in its entirety.
Thoughts:
The mystery itself was interesting enough, but had it been
written without the longwinded and unrelated background of Church politics and
heresy, it would be quickly overlooked and considered generally
uninteresting. The crux of the crime
comes down to the hiding of a book, the second book of Aristotle, which
glorifies laughter. The murdering monk,
blind old Jorge, sees the book and its philosophy as the downfall of
Christianity as it will undermine people’s faith and empower the devil. This is a somewhat weak premise by which one
can justify killing seven monks, but it gains some credence by the books long
discussions on heresy.
To me, William is by far the most interesting character in
the book. He is a man of learning. He speaks many languages, is widely read and
can readily quote text as it becomes relevant.
Further, he is a follower of Roger Bacon (why is that name
familiar? Was it somewhere in Neil
Stephenson’s Baroque Cycle?) and clearly a scientist. I was continually left wondering why he was a
monk. The best hypothesis I have come up
with is that there was no other place for a man of learning in the 14th
century. The best he could do was to pursue
science and attempt to develop it further, within and by pushing the boundaries
of, theological interpretation. Leonardo
da Vinci lived from 1452-1519, a good 100 years after the fictional William of
Baskerville, how did da Vinci work around and with the pervasive religion and
culture of Christianity? Or was he close
enough to the age of enlightenment (beginning ca. 1600) that the iron grip of the church was loosening? As the story was published in the 1980’s, it
is curious to think how much influence Sherlock Holmes had on the development
of William’s character. Both are from
England and have incredible mental capabilities. However, William’s character remains more
elusive than Holmes.
Much like the Baroque Cycle of Neil Stephenson, this book is
longwinded and wildly boring. Yet I
couldn’t put it down. There is less
swashbuckling in The Name of the Rose, but the moments of action are
intensified by their contrast to the slow and often boring sections recounting
history, visions, and descriptions. Also
similar to the Baroque Cycle is the way this book intermingles fact and fiction
to give a sense of the way life was at that time. It may not be true that any knowledge of
optics had developed in Europe, but it is wonderful to see the seeds of
enlightenment being planted!
Overall, this was an enjoyable book, but I wouldn’t
recommend it to everyone. It requires
commitment from the reader to wade through the tedium, but the subtle twists in
plot and clever mystery, as well as glimpse into 14th century
European monastic life, makes it worthwhile.
No comments:
Post a Comment