Scan barcode
michellel123's review against another edition
1.0
The life of Nicholas Copernicus, Catholic bishop (?) and astronomer who publicises the controversial theory that the sun is the centre of the solar system. Nicholas' mother dies at an early age, and after his father also dies he is cared for by a Bishop uncle, and lives alongside his fun-loving, malicious older brother.
Difficult although a short book.
Difficult although a short book.
blackoxford's review against another edition
3.0
An Accidental Hero
What was it that inspired this book? Apparently not its subject. As portrayed by Banville, Copernicus is hardly a prepossessing character. Emotionally he is vacant and incomprehensible - at times irrationally loyal to his brother, at other times completely indifferent (ditto for his cousin-housekeeper-concubine), alienated from his female siblings for reasons that are vague, essentially friendless with a chip on one of his tradesman’s son’s shoulders toward the aristocracy, and on the other toward the better placed intelligentsia of the period. Intellectually he is a desultory scholar. His concern with astronomical theory is intermittent and hardly the driving force of his life. He is a dabbler who reacts to conditions, both of the mind and of the body, usually passively, as they arise. Although a minor cleric as cathedral canon in a Catholic region, he has no point of view on faith or the church (or on science for that matter) except as a possible impediment to the publication of his ideas.
The best that can be said of Banville’s Copernicus is that he is no fanatic, religious or humanist, in a time of fanatics. He is a medical doctor without empathy, a perennial student without a clear subject, a competent bureaucratic administrator but without perspective or judgment, a diplomat with little diplomacy, a lawyer without a practice. He is a grey personality, having no clear direction in his life except a desire for reclusion and anonymity. The world of the Reformation, global exploration, the humanist Renaissance, and Prussian militarism swirls about him but raises little concern except when he is confronted directly by their effects - and even then he barely registers a response. The overall picture is one of an accidental intellectual hero, detached and aloof to the point of psychotic depression. Not therefore an obvious candidate for a biographical novel, or a promising beginning to Banville’s Revolutions Trilogy that moves from Copernicus, to Kepler to Newton.
There is much ‘throbbing’ by dogs and silences in Banville’s prose, and frequent allusion to the seductive evils of the time - nominalism, Gnosticism, solipsism, and clerical homosexuality - which pervade an otherwise brutal European existence. There is the typical Banvillian expansion of one’s vocabulary with words like ‘jesses’. ‘prog’, and ‘biood-boltered’. But there isn’t much attention devoted to the intellectual challenge Copernicus confronted in overcoming the remnants of scholasticism. Banville seems to be anachronistically anticipating the ‘reality vs explanatory’ schools of quantum theory rather than developing the issue of the biblical authority for an earth-centred cosmos.
In short, Banville doesn’t give the reader a reason to be interested in Copernicus’s life other than that he is an historical celebrity. Perhaps that is the only justifiable reason. If so, is it reason enough? That science and scientists can be excruciatingly prosaic?
What was it that inspired this book? Apparently not its subject. As portrayed by Banville, Copernicus is hardly a prepossessing character. Emotionally he is vacant and incomprehensible - at times irrationally loyal to his brother, at other times completely indifferent (ditto for his cousin-housekeeper-concubine), alienated from his female siblings for reasons that are vague, essentially friendless with a chip on one of his tradesman’s son’s shoulders toward the aristocracy, and on the other toward the better placed intelligentsia of the period. Intellectually he is a desultory scholar. His concern with astronomical theory is intermittent and hardly the driving force of his life. He is a dabbler who reacts to conditions, both of the mind and of the body, usually passively, as they arise. Although a minor cleric as cathedral canon in a Catholic region, he has no point of view on faith or the church (or on science for that matter) except as a possible impediment to the publication of his ideas.
The best that can be said of Banville’s Copernicus is that he is no fanatic, religious or humanist, in a time of fanatics. He is a medical doctor without empathy, a perennial student without a clear subject, a competent bureaucratic administrator but without perspective or judgment, a diplomat with little diplomacy, a lawyer without a practice. He is a grey personality, having no clear direction in his life except a desire for reclusion and anonymity. The world of the Reformation, global exploration, the humanist Renaissance, and Prussian militarism swirls about him but raises little concern except when he is confronted directly by their effects - and even then he barely registers a response. The overall picture is one of an accidental intellectual hero, detached and aloof to the point of psychotic depression. Not therefore an obvious candidate for a biographical novel, or a promising beginning to Banville’s Revolutions Trilogy that moves from Copernicus, to Kepler to Newton.
There is much ‘throbbing’ by dogs and silences in Banville’s prose, and frequent allusion to the seductive evils of the time - nominalism, Gnosticism, solipsism, and clerical homosexuality - which pervade an otherwise brutal European existence. There is the typical Banvillian expansion of one’s vocabulary with words like ‘jesses’. ‘prog’, and ‘biood-boltered’. But there isn’t much attention devoted to the intellectual challenge Copernicus confronted in overcoming the remnants of scholasticism. Banville seems to be anachronistically anticipating the ‘reality vs explanatory’ schools of quantum theory rather than developing the issue of the biblical authority for an earth-centred cosmos.
In short, Banville doesn’t give the reader a reason to be interested in Copernicus’s life other than that he is an historical celebrity. Perhaps that is the only justifiable reason. If so, is it reason enough? That science and scientists can be excruciatingly prosaic?
kflavin's review against another edition
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
noam's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
northeastbookworm's review against another edition
4.0
A Rating of 4.6. Weaving what little is known about his life, John Banville tells the story of the life of the man who gave re-birth to
the heliocentric theory. Banville gives us a Copernicus who lived a
hard scrabble life right till his death. Looking forward to reading the
other two books in the trilogy.
the heliocentric theory. Banville gives us a Copernicus who lived a
hard scrabble life right till his death. Looking forward to reading the
other two books in the trilogy.
jameseckman's review against another edition
2.0
Written in the 70s, I'm sure this was a tough book to write, research was a much tougher and drawn out affair and to try to make Copernicus the protagonist of a work of fiction is daring as well. For me this book felt a bit flat, Copernicus had an interesting career, but it was mostly of a political nature, it makes for fairly dry reading. There's also large chunks of introspection and exposition, a little of this goes a long way with me. Because fictional encounters are mixed in history, it's hard for me to get a feel for the historical Copernicus.
An interesting attempt at historical fiction based on the life of a real person. It's tedious in spots but otherwise an OK read.
Perhaps it's better to cast historical figures as background characters, a good example of this would be [b:Mistress of the Art of Death|86643|Mistress of the Art of Death (Mistress of the Art of Death, #1)|Ariana Franklin|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1435958507l/86643._SY75_.jpg|2443651], after reading it, I went on a bit of an English history binge.
An interesting attempt at historical fiction based on the life of a real person. It's tedious in spots but otherwise an OK read.
Perhaps it's better to cast historical figures as background characters, a good example of this would be [b:Mistress of the Art of Death|86643|Mistress of the Art of Death (Mistress of the Art of Death, #1)|Ariana Franklin|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1435958507l/86643._SY75_.jpg|2443651], after reading it, I went on a bit of an English history binge.
nigellicus's review against another edition
5.0
A thing is pure and independent, the object and the idea of the object utterly united with no division and no corruption. Then comes language and the thing acquire a name and suddenly the idea of a tree and a tree itself are divided, and the idea becomes a separate thing to the thing it's supposed to describe. Thus Nicolas Copernicus, who has a bright vision of the motions of celestial bodies that will turn everything humanity has understood about the world on its head, that will eventually unmoor us from our conception of the world and from religion, soils this vision, destroys it and mars it with his efforts to express it in language. And yet it is the world itself that is diseased and corrupt and downright petty, and he himself fears and hates the world and its imperfections.
John Banville's Copernicus, brilliant but cowed and cringing, dominated by his uncle, savagely haunted by the deteriorating spectre of his brother, seared by the knowledge that he has failed before he has even begun his great work, so that even if he completes it, he almost cannot bring himself to release it to the world because of what his flawed ideas of planetary motion will set in motion. A novel of ideas and angst, fear and base cunning, failure and futility - though his success as an administrator to his war-torn province seems oddly at odds with Banville's portrayal of his internal life, and so gets glossed over a bit.
John Banville's Copernicus, brilliant but cowed and cringing, dominated by his uncle, savagely haunted by the deteriorating spectre of his brother, seared by the knowledge that he has failed before he has even begun his great work, so that even if he completes it, he almost cannot bring himself to release it to the world because of what his flawed ideas of planetary motion will set in motion. A novel of ideas and angst, fear and base cunning, failure and futility - though his success as an administrator to his war-torn province seems oddly at odds with Banville's portrayal of his internal life, and so gets glossed over a bit.
More...