Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by kn0tp0rk
The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
1.0
🔸This edition has line art illustrations done by James Noel Smith, however they're…vague. I realized that they couldn't be much more because of a certain amount of detail lacking in the writing. How can you do an interior shot or close-up portrait when the author hasn't provided this information? In this case, I do not see the point of the illustrations but as a marketing ploy. I can tell that Coelho wasn't working with Smith to explain how the illustrations should look. Look at the depth of notes Alan Moore, who wrote Watchmen, provided to his artists, for example.
🔸I don't really like Coelho's prose. It's flat and obvious. As noted above, the descriptions are lacking. It feels like he was so focused on an idea that he failed to take his time drawing scenes and people.
🔸Santiago was trained to become a priest but all he thinks about while traveling is the women he can meet and this girl he knew for a few hours. I'm surprised he doesn't have a body count. Something, something, religion doesn't absolve you of your human desires.
🔸Coelho does this thing where Santiago remembers a time and then we cut to a flashback of that time happening. The problem with this is that the flashbacks are so brief and they keep happening. You get the bare minimum insight into the people and situations that Santiago interacts with. It's underwhelming.
🔸We're given Santiago's name in the first sentence and then he's referred to as "the boy." Maybe this will have a payoff later, but he could have just remained unnamed, like in Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man.
🔸It's obvious that the king of Salem, Melchizedek, is supposed to be God or an angel. I forgot of his actual mention IN THE BIBLE. Yes, he's a Bible character. He even gives Santiago the Urim and Thummim, which in the Bible were given to Aaron to decide yes/no questions. Melchizedek is wearing that same breastplate from the Bible as well.
🔸If Santiago studied to become a priest, why doesn't he comment on the Urim and Thummim or Melchizedek's breast plate OR NAME? Certainly these are details someone of his education would recognize. He doesn't put two and two together. He doesn't even utter a "Wait, hol' up, fam…." Must not have done well in his studies.
🔸The anti-Romani sentiments here are equally unsurprising given the track record so far. Any time I say Roma/Romani, remember that The Alchemist calls them the g-slur. There's no effort to understand their struggle. Santiago has been traveling far and wide as a shepherd and you're telling me he's still afraid of Roma?? Melchizedek says that Romani people "are just like that." Man, fuck off.
🔸Melchizedek is named once and afterward referred to as "the old man." We're given identities but our real identity is our actions. That's what this means, I'm not taking critique.
🔸Uuugh, I know the theme is "things happen for a reason", but a friend literally buys Santiago's sheep so that he's no longer inhibited from traveling to Egypt AND THEN a butterfly appears.😭😭And each time something lucky happens, it's commented on like THUS SAID THE OMEN. It happens so suddenly, I can't buy in. While it's true that we derive meaning from things, this presentation is specific to those who have religious or supernatural beliefs. Why can't I see a butterfly and it just be beautiful? Why does it have to mean that I need to pack up or discard my things (like Jesus intended) and follow a recurring dream I had? How do dreams reflect reality outside of potentially being a visual comment on your subconscious (for example, I was abused, and my dreams reflect that abuse's damage to my mind)? I have dreams about going on adventures, too. This doesn't mean I'm destined to go on an adventure to become rich. And posthumously applying the dream to fit the description of something that's happened to you is bogus. That's not a prophecy, that's the human desire to find meaning. Good and bad are matters of perception. Good and bad will happen to anyone regardless of their dreams. So far, the theme in The Alchemist teaches us to be gullible using situations crafted by an author. If all this works out for Santiago, it's because Coelho wanted it that way. He's a fictional character in a book. I can't apply these themes to my life if I'm concerned with my ability to stay alive. I mean, but hey, plenty of people have demonstrated through their actions that they don't care about that.
🔸I thought this story was supposed to be fantasy but it's not. That's partially why I'm raising these objections. You're destined to defeat the Digimon that's been terrorizing the Digital World? I'm totally on board. A Roma woman tells you that you're going to actually find treasure in Egypt. Eh, you gotta approach it differently than Coelho is. I could buy in if it was a tale about not being gullible or quick to make decisions but NOPE!!!
🔸I will not ignore that I just brought up Digimon because I believe the series do an excellent job at approaching concepts of destiny, fate, relationships, power, happiness, and pain in a reasonable manner while still employing fantasy. Season 3 (Tamers) is the best at this, but I recommend watching the first 4 seasons (The Japanese dub keeps the serious elements intact).
🔸The reason I can't really call this fantasy despite Melchizedek's obvious powers is Coelho's own worldview. There are actually people who believe that angels (or demons) can come to earth and take the shape of humans to guide us. It's not a fairytale to them. In their eyes, Melchizedek's ability isn't a fantasy because many people can do this in 100% real life because they're not human but supernatural beings. To me, this is unsubstantiated fantasy, to someone like Coelho, this is just real life.
🔸I want to comment on Melchizedek helping a man who was unsuccessfully emerald mining. The practice of mining is dangerous to people and the environment. It's a practice I feel confident calling immoral. But because this character was following his dreams, we're meant to be sympathetic toward him? Fuck you and fuck the damage you caused. Emeralds only have value because human beings have assigned them value. But what's an emerald to me? A pretty rock not worth causing destruction over. And the pursuit of wealth above all the rest of society is not admirable.
🔸One decent story Melchizedek tells is of a man seeking wisdom. This story is actually good because it reminds us not to lose ourselves as we seek beauty/adventure. Of course, one downside is that the wise man of the story is insanely rich and popular. Wisdom=/=Wealth, please, I'm begging you…
🔸I just did a once-over of Goodreads reviews for this work because of how taken aback I am so far. I'm so glad that there are a significant amount of negative reviews, though not in the sense that I'm rooting for Coelho to fail. At the time of writing this bullet point, there are 240,727 2-star reviews, and 136,204 1-star reviews. I do not believe my prospects for this book are going to look up, but I'll try to be open-minded…
🔸So, uh, is Melchizedek cursed or something? Why hasn't he died? He is literally the Bible character who interacted with Abraham. Why must he roam around helping people achieve their "Personal Legends"?
🔸How has Santiago made such an impression on Melchizedek, that he regrets not being more memorable? What exactly is it about Santiago? Why is this story about SANTIAGO?
🔸No, this book is bad. Suddenly Santiago is in Africa, and despite brief comments about how it wasn't so far from Andalusia, there's no explanation of his trip. He's just there. And immediately we're treated to his Islamophobia, calling the praying people infidels, saying that they all look scary, and likening them to worker ants.
🔸It's hard to follow along with who's speaking when everyone is a "he" and Coelho refuses to address Santiago by his name.
🔸How does Santiago not have enough street smarts to not know that he shouldn't give his money to randos he just met?? I mean, hell, I guess he gave away his sheep in the blink of an eye. Though if "the universe is conspiring" why would he ever experience loss to begin with?? It becomes arbitrary. Whatever.
🔸End of Part One. I am not impressed. So far The Alchemist is preachy, sophomoric, and hateful. I keep reading because I'm just so amazed at how bad it is.
🔸Where does Santiago sleep? What does he do besides selling crystals (vague)? Why aren't these details that we're treated to? He spends over a year (?) in Tangier and I've barely learned anything except that he's luCKY!!!
🔸Ugh, the characters always know exactly how to explain their thoughts.
🔸So Santiago becomes a business partner with a Muslim man, but I don't know that this really absolves him of his Islamophobia. He doesn't reflect on how it was wrong to think bad things about them. It's not addressed.
🔸Please tell a story and stop focusing so hard on giving "wise" one-liners, I'm begging you, Coelho, pls...
🔸Third person omniscient...driving me crazy...the head-hopping is insane.
🔸As I suspected, being with the crystal merchant had to do with the practice of crystal purification🙄Again, pretty minerals do not control your destiny lmfao
🔸THE ALCHEMIST IS FINALLY MENTIONED
🔸Is Coelho really suggesting that every legend is true? I mean, he avoids explicitly naming polytheism despite pushing a strangely polytheistic idea of the universe. There's no mention of Brahma or Jupiter, just God/Allah.
🔸Love at first sight is real if you're tapped into the Soul of the World.
🔸Fatima is immediately written as subservient. She has no dreams outside of catering to Santiago's desires. Girl, you JUST met him and you're already content to go back to the kitchen????
🔸Santiago can foresee the future also, I guess.
🔸So he's just hanging out with and befriending Muslims, but there's still no reflection about why his earlier beliefs were mistaken and cruel. Okay.
🔸There's discussion about how Abrahamic divination behaves, but much like prayer, I find this unconvincing. Of course because we're reading a work of fiction, the divinations are accurate.
🔸Santiago is compared to Joseph from the Bible and we even get a "TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO--" line. Then he's made the Oasis' counselor...
🔸The alchemist tells Santiago to forget that hoe, Fatima, because women know to wait on their men.
🔸If Santiago doesn't go to the pyramids right now, the Soul of ze World will abandon him after 4 years and he'll never have another chance because remember kids, you can only have one main desire in life and it's dictated by your actual fucking bedtime dreams.
🔸Santiago has reached fucking Nirvana or something because he's capable of discovering life with only his heart.
🔸The alchemist reaches into the sand, pulls out a cobra, and confines it to a circle, all without it biting him. Also, yes, the circle is literally just drawn with a stick and the snake stays there. Damn, get this guy on stage!!
🔸Santiago is asking questions a mile a minute, boy, shut yo ass up!!!!
🔸Coelho loves beating dead horses. The amount of repetition here is insane and I've literally read the Qu'ran and the (abridged) Mahabharata.
🔸If you're happy, it's because you know God. Except...what about people who experience happiness and do not believe in God?? What about people who claim to know God but are sad? I can see the retorts now because I've literally heard them before: you're not really happy; you know God exists but you're lying; you don't really know God.
🔸Every time Coelho mentions listening to one's heart, I can't help but think he means literally, and not, like, for health reasons LMFAO He seems like the sort who really believes the heart is where our emotions come from rather than this being figurative language.
🔸I was reading this while waiting at the doctor's office. My nurse practitioner asked how it was because she'd heard of it. She frowned when I explained the reasons for disliking it. But then I said that a good fable-like story was Peter S. Beagle's The Last Unicorn and she was like, "THAT'S MY FAVORITE BOOK!!!!"
🔸I was telling my older Christian friend about how I disliked this book and she said that she'd read it before and didn't remember anything except also disliking it LOL
🔸Santiago discovers The Circle of Life, except it's nowhere near as profound as The Lion King.
🔸There's this entire debacle about Santiago becoming the wind in three days?? (Get it, three days??) He DOES NOT BECOME THE WIND but his captors and the alchemist concede. It just gets super windy and he walks to another location. I HATE THIS I HATE IT
🔸I already mentioned this briefly but I hate that aspects of nature are anthropomorphic but that this is still…not a polytheistic story lmfao It's bogus.
🔸No humility allowed. When the monk says the alchemist's offering of gold is too great for him to accept, he gets scolded.
🔸The treasure was underneath your feet the whole time!!!!!!!!!
🔸This is not as charming as a nursery rhyme and not as insightful as an epic poem. This isn't a work of poetry, but you can tell that Coelho desperately wants to match their influence. He fails miserably by my estimation.
🔸Others have compared The Alchemist to Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead. I have read and reviewed both of those works, and you know what, I agree. While Rand obviously rejects religion, she, like Coelho, gives us a reasonable premise, "follow through with your aspirations", and twists the surrounding narrative into something ridiculous. At least The Alchemist is a fraction of the length of Rand's works.