joejames's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
lindy_b's review against another edition
4.0
I admire this book a lot. Mostly because it completely avoids my common gripes about both historical fiction and detective fiction, two genres I find myself wishing I liked more than I do.
1) Most books claiming to be historical fiction are actually time travel stories, in that we have characters who think and act like modern day people dropped into the trappings of the past. Sometimes authors recognize the disjunction, highlight it, and it contributes to the theme of the novel, and that's great, but most of them don't seem to care and then I'm wondering what the point of reading/writing such fiction is in the first place. Eco takes a less common approach; the world and the characters' psychologies are obviously and intricately interwoven; these are potential people who could only have existed at a particular junction in time; Eco's doing everything he can do avoid the dissonance. This requires a ton of research and will upset readers who don't like that the characters are 'alienating.' For me, the alienation is what makes it worthwhile.
2) At some point in the past, I realized that, given that blood splatter analysis and psychological profiling have roughly equal statistical accuracy to phrenology and drowning someone and seeing if she floats, the only detective fiction that isn't going to annoy me is going to use the plot as a hanger to drape essential questions of epistemology off of because in these fictional situations there is no meaningful difference between the natural (or scientific) and the supernatural (or magic). This rarely happens and consequently I am frequently annoyed. In The Name of the Rose the plot is epistemology and its constraints and the setting means everyone's arguing about the super/natural.
3) This book is hilarious. [b:The Secret History|29044|The Secret History|Donna Tartt|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1451554846l/29044._SY75_.jpg|221359] is also hilarious, but people tend to act confused when I say this and I suspect the same may apply here. (There are several different levels to read them on, and one of them is are as deconstructive spoofs.)
I won't go around recommending that everyone must read The Name of the Rose or anything, but I'm glad I did.
1) Most books claiming to be historical fiction are actually time travel stories, in that we have characters who think and act like modern day people dropped into the trappings of the past. Sometimes authors recognize the disjunction, highlight it, and it contributes to the theme of the novel, and that's great, but most of them don't seem to care and then I'm wondering what the point of reading/writing such fiction is in the first place. Eco takes a less common approach; the world and the characters' psychologies are obviously and intricately interwoven; these are potential people who could only have existed at a particular junction in time; Eco's doing everything he can do avoid the dissonance. This requires a ton of research and will upset readers who don't like that the characters are 'alienating.' For me, the alienation is what makes it worthwhile.
2) At some point in the past, I realized that, given that blood splatter analysis and psychological profiling have roughly equal statistical accuracy to phrenology and drowning someone and seeing if she floats, the only detective fiction that isn't going to annoy me is going to use the plot as a hanger to drape essential questions of epistemology off of because in these fictional situations there is no meaningful difference between the natural (or scientific) and the supernatural (or magic). This rarely happens and consequently I am frequently annoyed. In The Name of the Rose the plot is epistemology and its constraints and the setting means everyone's arguing about the super/natural.
3) This book is hilarious. [b:The Secret History|29044|The Secret History|Donna Tartt|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1451554846l/29044._SY75_.jpg|221359] is also hilarious, but people tend to act confused when I say this and I suspect the same may apply here. (There are several different levels to read them on, and one of them is are as deconstructive spoofs.)
I won't go around recommending that everyone must read The Name of the Rose or anything, but I'm glad I did.
nmhq's review against another edition
Boring,felt too much like an explanation rather than a story,maybe too complicated for my monkey brain
piikuri's review against another edition
informative
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
mollyxmiller's review against another edition
5.0
This book was absolutely amazing. The gothic horror romance meets Sherlock Holmes meets mid-14th century Italy and a bunch of monks. In other words, just pure perfection. I loved this book from start to finish. I do not know very much Latin, but thankfully Umberto Eco did paraphrase some of the more important quotations in Latin (at the recommendation of his editor for English audiences), so I did not feel completely left out. This is definitely a veritable feast for book and library lovers, for those who love historical fiction, and even if you are just a fan of the gothic or a murder mystery. Okay, okay--it is dense. There is a LOT of medieval philosophy and details of life in a Catholic abbey in the 14th century. But honestly, to me, that was part of the draw. This book is an expert blend of multiple genres--it is the postmodern epic I was always hoping to read but had not yet found. I definitely recommend it!
minchiela's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
informative
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
justinlife's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.25
Boy is this book a doozy. It took a bit longer than I expected to get through. It is dense and at times unforgiving. The Name of the Rose offers a fictional glimpse of a monastery in the 1300s where people are dying right before a meeting between the Pope's entourage and the Emperor's where they discuss Christian theology. It's up to the monk, William, to solve the mystery.
At times the novel is intense and interesting, and at times it gets weighed down by it's own prose. It's fascinating, but man, it's dense. I never thought I would read a book that contained so many philosophical questions like "did jesus laugh?" or "was Jesus poor?" These concepts seem like something we all know and could discuss but it adds to a greater conversation about Christian thought. I think about this now as there are traditionalists that seem to pass off Christian teaching as set in stone when it's always been changing; it's always been morphing into something. This was really interesting to me. I never considered that St. Francis' teachings could have posed a threat to the church.
The paragraphs are long and the murder mystery is only one part of it. I really enjoyed it, but it did feel at times like a chore to read. It's a well researched novel though.
At times the novel is intense and interesting, and at times it gets weighed down by it's own prose. It's fascinating, but man, it's dense. I never thought I would read a book that contained so many philosophical questions like "did jesus laugh?" or "was Jesus poor?" These concepts seem like something we all know and could discuss but it adds to a greater conversation about Christian thought. I think about this now as there are traditionalists that seem to pass off Christian teaching as set in stone when it's always been changing; it's always been morphing into something. This was really interesting to me. I never considered that St. Francis' teachings could have posed a threat to the church.
The paragraphs are long and the murder mystery is only one part of it. I really enjoyed it, but it did feel at times like a chore to read. It's a well researched novel though.
untitledlullaby's review against another edition
1.0
Again not really interested in philosophy and this is too religious for me I guess. I just can’t wrap my head around what’s happening it keeps getting diverted with long confusing descriptions of the abbey. The conversations were fine and j enjoyed some parts but I will have to DNF for my own sanity