You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.29 AVERAGE
3.29 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
informative
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Was expecting something like Name of the Rose. I was disappointed.
This was for me a very difficult read to start with. I just read very small parts, which probably made it even worse. There was much confusion, and I felt nothing was real. I am interested in philosophy, although I must admit it is difficult for me to grasp. I want to have answers to my questions, and philosophy does not have answers. It has thoughts that take you along the road and continue until you are totally lost and feel somewhat mad! At least that is how it seems to me.
It took me more or less 60-70 pages before I got into the story. On page 32 I read:
What I felt more sure of was that the day, which I thought was Tuesday, was in fact Wednesday the 23rd March, and the Guillot did in fact come for me to draw up the Bonnefoy will. It was the 23rd and I thought it was the 22nd. So what happened on the 22nd? And who or what was Taxil?
I must admit, that looking back at the beginning when I am writing this review, it is much clearer now than it was at the time! I am very glad I finished this fantastic story. Yes, I did change my mind as the story developed and I was up until one o'clock in the morning to finish it!
It was 1855. I was already twenty-five. I had graduated in law and still did not know what to do with my life. I spent my time in the company of my old friends without feeling much enthusiasm for their revolutionary zeal, always expecting, sceptically, that they would be disappointed within a few months. Here once again was Rome re-captured by the Pope, and Pius IX, from being a reformer, had become even more reactionary than his predecessors.
Captain Simonini is living in Piedmonte in the mid 19th century. By chance he becomes a counterfeiter, working for a corrupt lawyer. During the fights for Italian unification, he is contacted by a certain authority and hired as a spy. That is the introduction to his new career. Once he can't do more in Italy, he is sent to France, where his skills takes him to the international arena of spies and conspiracies that was part of 19th century Europe. He is not hired only by the French secret service but also by the German and Russian services.
True freedom is man's right to follow the law of God, to be worthy of heaven or hell. And now instead, freedom means you can choose whatever beliefs and opinions you please, where one is the same as the other - and for the State it is all the same whether you are Mason, Christian, Jew or follower of the Great Turk. And no one cares about Truth.
Captain Simonini seems to be the perfect spy. He moves in the light and the dark, with honest people and the criminals, in the world of religion, freemasons and the Occult. Nothing is strange for him. Until one day when he can not remember who he is.
It is curious. You suspect we are the same person. You remember a great deal about your life and yet I remember very little about mine. On the other hand, as your diary shows, you know nothing about me, while I am beginning to realise I remember other things, by no means few of them, about what happened to you and - as chance would have it - exactly those things you seem unable to recall. If I can remember so many things about you, should I then say I am you?
But why does each of us remember the time and moment in which he found the intruder in his house and not the time and moment in which he entered the other's house?
As he gets older he starts to reflect on his life and career.
I lost count of the number of times the scene in the cemetery was reused by other authors - as I write, I seem to recall that a certain Bournand recently published Les juifs nos contemporains, where "The Rabbi's Speech" appears once again, except that John Readclif had become the name of the rabbi himself. My God, how is life possible in a world of counterfeiters?
All through the book there are lovely descriptions of eating. Many of the characters are interested in food and meals are well described.
And having recited the list like a rosary, becoming increasingly agitated, and ending as if he had forgotten to take a breath, he ordered the civet to be served, made with belly pork, butter, flour, parsley, half a litre of Barbera wine, a hare cut into pieces the size of an egg (including heart and liver), small onions, salt pepper, spices and sugar.
He was almost consoled, but at a certain point his eyes opened wide, and he passed away with a light belch.
You wonder how it will end, and when it does, it is quite unexpected. It is a masterly written story and the width of it is clear, only when you read Umberto Eco's Dear Reader at the end. The short background leaves you in awe of how he can tell a story. I still remember In the Name of the Rose and here is another amazing story, which depths we can hardly grasp. What a genius he is, or was. Unfortunately, he passed away a while ago.
One of the very first reviews I wrote when I started my blog back in 2012 was This is not the end of the book, a discussion on books between Jean-Claude Carrière and Umberto Eco. So many wise words!
Review from my blog thecontentreader.blogspot.com
It took me more or less 60-70 pages before I got into the story. On page 32 I read:
What I felt more sure of was that the day, which I thought was Tuesday, was in fact Wednesday the 23rd March, and the Guillot did in fact come for me to draw up the Bonnefoy will. It was the 23rd and I thought it was the 22nd. So what happened on the 22nd? And who or what was Taxil?
I must admit, that looking back at the beginning when I am writing this review, it is much clearer now than it was at the time! I am very glad I finished this fantastic story. Yes, I did change my mind as the story developed and I was up until one o'clock in the morning to finish it!
It was 1855. I was already twenty-five. I had graduated in law and still did not know what to do with my life. I spent my time in the company of my old friends without feeling much enthusiasm for their revolutionary zeal, always expecting, sceptically, that they would be disappointed within a few months. Here once again was Rome re-captured by the Pope, and Pius IX, from being a reformer, had become even more reactionary than his predecessors.
Captain Simonini is living in Piedmonte in the mid 19th century. By chance he becomes a counterfeiter, working for a corrupt lawyer. During the fights for Italian unification, he is contacted by a certain authority and hired as a spy. That is the introduction to his new career. Once he can't do more in Italy, he is sent to France, where his skills takes him to the international arena of spies and conspiracies that was part of 19th century Europe. He is not hired only by the French secret service but also by the German and Russian services.
True freedom is man's right to follow the law of God, to be worthy of heaven or hell. And now instead, freedom means you can choose whatever beliefs and opinions you please, where one is the same as the other - and for the State it is all the same whether you are Mason, Christian, Jew or follower of the Great Turk. And no one cares about Truth.
Captain Simonini seems to be the perfect spy. He moves in the light and the dark, with honest people and the criminals, in the world of religion, freemasons and the Occult. Nothing is strange for him. Until one day when he can not remember who he is.
It is curious. You suspect we are the same person. You remember a great deal about your life and yet I remember very little about mine. On the other hand, as your diary shows, you know nothing about me, while I am beginning to realise I remember other things, by no means few of them, about what happened to you and - as chance would have it - exactly those things you seem unable to recall. If I can remember so many things about you, should I then say I am you?
But why does each of us remember the time and moment in which he found the intruder in his house and not the time and moment in which he entered the other's house?
As he gets older he starts to reflect on his life and career.
I lost count of the number of times the scene in the cemetery was reused by other authors - as I write, I seem to recall that a certain Bournand recently published Les juifs nos contemporains, where "The Rabbi's Speech" appears once again, except that John Readclif had become the name of the rabbi himself. My God, how is life possible in a world of counterfeiters?
All through the book there are lovely descriptions of eating. Many of the characters are interested in food and meals are well described.
And having recited the list like a rosary, becoming increasingly agitated, and ending as if he had forgotten to take a breath, he ordered the civet to be served, made with belly pork, butter, flour, parsley, half a litre of Barbera wine, a hare cut into pieces the size of an egg (including heart and liver), small onions, salt pepper, spices and sugar.
He was almost consoled, but at a certain point his eyes opened wide, and he passed away with a light belch.
You wonder how it will end, and when it does, it is quite unexpected. It is a masterly written story and the width of it is clear, only when you read Umberto Eco's Dear Reader at the end. The short background leaves you in awe of how he can tell a story. I still remember In the Name of the Rose and here is another amazing story, which depths we can hardly grasp. What a genius he is, or was. Unfortunately, he passed away a while ago.
One of the very first reviews I wrote when I started my blog back in 2012 was This is not the end of the book, a discussion on books between Jean-Claude Carrière and Umberto Eco. So many wise words!
Review from my blog thecontentreader.blogspot.com
I didn't finish reading this book, and I probably won't. I won't rate it because I don't want to be unfair. I'll leave it aside and maube I'll get back to it in like 10 years. I simply can't read a book that doesn't interest me in the slighest, in which I can't find at least one interesting feature.
The narrative is boring, told by more than one narrator (one narrator that tells the story and talks to the reader as it goes, and a man writing letters). The letter man is prejudicial and unreliable telling the story based on his point of views. My thoughts while reading this book were mostly variations of "What the hell?" and "This is so tedious".
I'm sorry, but I can't keep on reading. I was 100 pages in and was completely bored.
If you have a different opinion, please give your opinion on why you think this book is good and why you think I should keep reading this, and point out some aspects you find interesting.
The narrative is boring, told by more than one narrator (one narrator that tells the story and talks to the reader as it goes, and a man writing letters). The letter man is prejudicial and unreliable telling the story based on his point of views. My thoughts while reading this book were mostly variations of "What the hell?" and "This is so tedious".
I'm sorry, but I can't keep on reading. I was 100 pages in and was completely bored.
If you have a different opinion, please give your opinion on why you think this book is good and why you think I should keep reading this, and point out some aspects you find interesting.
This book spans the second half of the nineteenth century, through the eyes of a hateful, anti-semitic Italian forger living in Paris. All other characters in the book, the author tells us, are genuine historical figures.
It features the kind of intricate detail which I love about Eco's writing - particularly in the descriptions of food - but I found the story rather stumbling and unsatisfactory (Eco himself seems to admit this at the end, when he presents a table comparing the story vs. the plot). Glad to have read it, but I don't think I'll be returning to it.
It features the kind of intricate detail which I love about Eco's writing - particularly in the descriptions of food - but I found the story rather stumbling and unsatisfactory (Eco himself seems to admit this at the end, when he presents a table comparing the story vs. the plot). Glad to have read it, but I don't think I'll be returning to it.
I should know by now having read a couple of Eco's books that I should do some historical research before hand. That way I will have a deeper understanding and appreciation of the scale and breadth of the story telling. The Prague Cemetery is a wonderful exploration of 19th century Europe with conspiracies all the rage, our protagonist is central to what is happening as is 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.' A work that was initially given some credibility and then found out to be a forgery. Eco treats us to a fictional exploration of how the work came into being.
The writing is truly marvellous and he is able to succinctly capture a person and provide some wonderful insights "leaders with too much charisma should be removed immediately, for the peace and security of the kingdom' or "People are never so completely and enthusiastically evil as when they act out of religious conviction." There is also a lot of descriptions of food, lots of descriptions. At times the food seemed to be the real focus of the book and the story almost secondary.
As much as I love Eco's work, I was not drawn into this novel. Normally as I read Eco's work there is this 'click' where the light bulb goes on and the story all makes sense to me, or I am completely swept into the narrative. The click never came with this story, I don't know why.
It is wonderful book but I just found I was missing something from it or was not fully invested into the story. It certainly won't stop me from reading any more of his work.
The writing is truly marvellous and he is able to succinctly capture a person and provide some wonderful insights "leaders with too much charisma should be removed immediately, for the peace and security of the kingdom' or "People are never so completely and enthusiastically evil as when they act out of religious conviction." There is also a lot of descriptions of food, lots of descriptions. At times the food seemed to be the real focus of the book and the story almost secondary.
As much as I love Eco's work, I was not drawn into this novel. Normally as I read Eco's work there is this 'click' where the light bulb goes on and the story all makes sense to me, or I am completely swept into the narrative. The click never came with this story, I don't know why.
It is wonderful book but I just found I was missing something from it or was not fully invested into the story. It certainly won't stop me from reading any more of his work.
I had no foreknowledge as to how apt it would be to follow up a reading of The Illuminatus! with Eco's The Prague Cemetery. If anything, however, it shows how fiction has nothing on fact; Eco's meticulously researched novel is very nearly as absurd as Shea/Wilson's Discordian epic, but with the added perversity of referencing actual affairs, persons and conspiracies, real and imagined.
A chilling introduction to the development of the most infamous and influential anti-Semitic works, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
A chilling introduction to the development of the most infamous and influential anti-Semitic works, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
“Os homens nunca fazem o mal tão completa e entusiasticamente como quando o fazem por convicção religiosa.”
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I never thought I'd rate an Eco this low, but I feel vindictive after wasting the time and spoons it took to read this (hardcover). I've had it since it was brand new, had several false starts and now wish I had left it at those. I don't mind unlikable/unreliable protagonists, and the conceit here, where part of the mystery is supposed to be about if the narrator is actually one or two people should have been intriguing as hell, but it got bogged down in tedium, excessive detail, numbing trivia, too many ancillary characters, and, it seemed, just a general desire to test the reader's patience. Oh, Umberto...
Difficult to get through the antisemitism and racism of the first 60 pages or so--and I'm a little concerned that it inoculates one against the very skewed thinking it seeks to expose. Was almost expecting Herman Zweibel of the Onion to appear! Nonetheless a remarkable intellectual work connecting a disparate--and to an American obscure--set of 19th century European figures. Certainly will appeal to anyone mildly interested in the Italian wars of unification, the Paris Commune, and various secret societies as well as gastronomes. Eco claims all but the main character are real figures--would be fascinating to know how much of the events and dialogue are real as well. Succeed in making me want to read more Eco.