Scan barcode
sjh541's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
Colonialism is a lonely endeavor.
gbeckner's review
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
kcrouth's review
3.0
This is another title that appears several of my "top books" lists. Ms. Cather's writing is rich and pleasant to read, as it was in My Antonia and O Pioneers! The descriptions of nineteenth century New Mexico and the southwest US and the many cultures and personalities are full and three dimensional, and also rich. But the overall context centered around the Catholic archbishop missionary and his travels and cohorts was less interesting to me. I suspect that the story sheds light on the reality of life in the church in that era and context, but i found it secondary to the rich descriptive writing used in the story.
dawseyadams's review against another edition
adventurous
hopeful
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
libraryadvokate's review
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
book_concierge's review
2.0
Okay … Intellectually I can appreciate Cather’s writing. The last chapter, in particular, is very fine. I love the way she is able to convey a sense of time and place … and she speaks of a landscape that is dear to me.
Now, I know this book was written in 1927, and I know that the setting is in the New Mexico territory from about mid 1850s to 1888, but I just cannot stomach the superior European attitude of this book and its main characters.
The educated are all French Jesuits, Spaniards or the occasional Anglo (Kit Carson). The Native Indian are described as noble, loyal, superstitious but deeply spiritual.
But, the Mexicans? Oh my God. It just gives me a stomach ache. The Mexican priests are slovenly, avaricious, gluttonous, vain, greedy, prideful, barely short of evil. Fathers Lucero and Martinez have robbed their parishioners for years – Lucero amasses several hundred THOUSAND dollars. All this money goes to the church “to say masses for the repose” of the priests’ souls. While the parishioners are left to their poverty and hard scrabbled lives, the church is enriched. Wouldn’t it have been better for the Bishop to still say the masses but give the riches back to those from whom it had been wrested?
The Mexican people, we are told, are like children who need guidance. At one point (p 226) LaTour is described as being less quick to learn Spanish than Valliant. But that’s okay for LaTour “To communicate with peons, he was quite willing to speak like a peon.” Only the Mexican women seem to have any virtues at all … but mostly as faithful housekeepers, and willing to sacrifice what little they have to glorify the Church. (They even do so to help Valliant build his Denver church when his own parishioners won’t give anything.) But I guess this is how the Catholic Church has always operated – the poorest give the most.
So, this book just makes me sick. I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.
I give the book 2.5*.
Now, I know this book was written in 1927, and I know that the setting is in the New Mexico territory from about mid 1850s to 1888, but I just cannot stomach the superior European attitude of this book and its main characters.
The educated are all French Jesuits, Spaniards or the occasional Anglo (Kit Carson). The Native Indian are described as noble, loyal, superstitious but deeply spiritual.
But, the Mexicans? Oh my God. It just gives me a stomach ache. The Mexican priests are slovenly, avaricious, gluttonous, vain, greedy, prideful, barely short of evil. Fathers Lucero and Martinez have robbed their parishioners for years – Lucero amasses several hundred THOUSAND dollars. All this money goes to the church “to say masses for the repose” of the priests’ souls. While the parishioners are left to their poverty and hard scrabbled lives, the church is enriched. Wouldn’t it have been better for the Bishop to still say the masses but give the riches back to those from whom it had been wrested?
The Mexican people, we are told, are like children who need guidance. At one point (p 226) LaTour is described as being less quick to learn Spanish than Valliant. But that’s okay for LaTour “To communicate with peons, he was quite willing to speak like a peon.” Only the Mexican women seem to have any virtues at all … but mostly as faithful housekeepers, and willing to sacrifice what little they have to glorify the Church. (They even do so to help Valliant build his Denver church when his own parishioners won’t give anything.) But I guess this is how the Catholic Church has always operated – the poorest give the most.
So, this book just makes me sick. I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.
I give the book 2.5*.
hmstessman's review
By far my least favorite of Cather’s works. There were definitely many moments where I admired her ability to describe landscapes/nature and the spiritual beliefs attached to the land, but I was so apathetic to the actual story. Booooo missionaries and booooo the Church.
awebofstories's review
adventurous
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
lelia_t's review
4.0
According to the biography by Hermione Lee, Willa Cather said she saw the narrative of Death Comes for the Archbishop as if it moved along on two white mules who weren’t in a hurry. That is, apparently, a pace I quite enjoy.
Despite the geographical scope of the book and the tumultuous times in which it’s set, the story is a quiet one. Latour’s contemplative brand of spirituality, Vaillant’s active effort on behalf of the church, the native tribes’ timeless connection to rocks, water and the Mexican people’s daily rituals show the variety of ways people live a spiritual life. There are also the characters who use their spiritual authority to take advantage of others or indulge in unbridled sensuality (something that is clearly differentiated from an appreciation of aesthetic splendor or a recognition of the spiritual power of the natural world).
The theme that Cather seems to return is what kind of mark does a spiritual person leave on the world? Or is any visible sign left at all? Do you build a cathedral? Touch people’s hearts? Or “pass and leave no trace, like fish through the water, or birds through the air?”
Despite the geographical scope of the book and the tumultuous times in which it’s set, the story is a quiet one. Latour’s contemplative brand of spirituality, Vaillant’s active effort on behalf of the church, the native tribes’ timeless connection to rocks, water and the Mexican people’s daily rituals show the variety of ways people live a spiritual life. There are also the characters who use their spiritual authority to take advantage of others or indulge in unbridled sensuality (something that is clearly differentiated from an appreciation of aesthetic splendor or a recognition of the spiritual power of the natural world).
The theme that Cather seems to return is what kind of mark does a spiritual person leave on the world? Or is any visible sign left at all? Do you build a cathedral? Touch people’s hearts? Or “pass and leave no trace, like fish through the water, or birds through the air?”