Scan barcode
A review by emtees
The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco
challenging
dark
informative
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
I’ve tried to read Umberto Eco in the past and found his work impenetrable, so I was surprised that I flew through The Name of the Rose. It’s one of the most brilliant works of historical fiction I’ve ever read.
The story follows two monks - the young Benedictine novice Adso and his mentor, the scientifically-minded former Inquisitor William, a Franciscan - on a journey to a remote monastery at which they will be present for a historically significant meeting between representatives of the Franciscan Order and the pope, with whom they are in conflict over the question of what role poverty played in the life of Jesus and, therefore, should play for monks. But upon arriving at the monastery, William and Adso are confronted by a more immediate problem - one of the monks has died in a fall from a tower, possibly a suicide but just as likely a murder. The abbot asks William, who has a reputation for being able to solve mysteries, to figure out what happened before the conference can begin and the monastery’s reputation can be compromised. William begins to investigate and quickly discovers that the mystery is tied to the monastery’s library, a literal labyrinth to which very few have access.
This is a book that you can’t split into the good and the bad; it only has the aspects that work well, and those that work incredibly. The characters are definitely a strong part of the book. Adso is a fairly bland character, but that’s the point of that sort of naive, POV character; he’s there because he’s young and relatively ignorant and so he can be used to explain things to the reader. The real protagonist is William, our “detective,” who belongs on the list of great fictional detectives. William used to work for the Church’s Inquisition before he came to have doubts about their methods; he is an “Inquisitor” in the more literal sense, a person who solves mysteries by asking questions and following up on seemingly disparate threads. The workings of his mind are often beyond Adso, but Eco writes him so clearly that the audience understands his perspective. His insistence on rational inquiry in the face of superstition and emotion is admirable. I particularly enjoyed that William was far from infallible; he made mistakes, sometimes tragically, and came to conclusions that were wrong. For all his brilliance, he never actually solves the real mystery; he gets caught up in secondary mysteries and then the original one just gets solved in front of him.
The mystery itself is a twisty one, with a complex and intense ending. It’s very well spooled out through the story. Like (in my opinion) the best mysteries, it’s not one the reader will figure out themselves, but it is one where someone reading closely will have all the right suspicions before the final reveal.
The really excellent part of the story, though, is the way it handles its two genres. It’s difficult to talk about what Eco does with mystery without spoilers, so:I loved the way he played on the audience’s expectations. As the murders piled up, he introduced what seemed to be a pattern to the killings. William, the rationalist, was confused and disturbed by this pattern, like a sane man suddenly finding himself in a world ruled by the dictates of fictional storytelling should be, but the evidence continued to build for this pattern and so he felt he couldn’t ignore it. And yet, in the end, it turned out to be a trick; the pattern wasn’t real. Just as the characters had fallen for it because of their human desire to find order in chaos, the audience fell for it because we expect that sort of thing in a story. . As for the historical fiction aspect, The Name of the Rose immerses the reader in another time in a way few historical stories manage, not by making the story relatable to a modern reader but by not doing that at all. A huge amount of the action in the story is concerned with a specific thirteenth century conflict within the church around questions of poverty as they applied to people in religious orders. It’s not a period most readers will be familiar with, and it’s not one of those religious conflicts that still has resonance today. To understand it requires getting as deep into the mindset of the characters as possible. And yet Eco manages to make this conflict feel vital, so that when characters make decisions because of it, they feel real and believable.
The story follows two monks - the young Benedictine novice Adso and his mentor, the scientifically-minded former Inquisitor William, a Franciscan - on a journey to a remote monastery at which they will be present for a historically significant meeting between representatives of the Franciscan Order and the pope, with whom they are in conflict over the question of what role poverty played in the life of Jesus and, therefore, should play for monks. But upon arriving at the monastery, William and Adso are confronted by a more immediate problem - one of the monks has died in a fall from a tower, possibly a suicide but just as likely a murder. The abbot asks William, who has a reputation for being able to solve mysteries, to figure out what happened before the conference can begin and the monastery’s reputation can be compromised. William begins to investigate and quickly discovers that the mystery is tied to the monastery’s library, a literal labyrinth to which very few have access.
This is a book that you can’t split into the good and the bad; it only has the aspects that work well, and those that work incredibly. The characters are definitely a strong part of the book. Adso is a fairly bland character, but that’s the point of that sort of naive, POV character; he’s there because he’s young and relatively ignorant and so he can be used to explain things to the reader. The real protagonist is William, our “detective,” who belongs on the list of great fictional detectives. William used to work for the Church’s Inquisition before he came to have doubts about their methods; he is an “Inquisitor” in the more literal sense, a person who solves mysteries by asking questions and following up on seemingly disparate threads. The workings of his mind are often beyond Adso, but Eco writes him so clearly that the audience understands his perspective. His insistence on rational inquiry in the face of superstition and emotion is admirable. I particularly enjoyed that William was far from infallible; he made mistakes, sometimes tragically, and came to conclusions that were wrong.
The mystery itself is a twisty one, with a complex and intense ending. It’s very well spooled out through the story. Like (in my opinion) the best mysteries, it’s not one the reader will figure out themselves, but it is one where someone reading closely will have all the right suspicions before the final reveal.
The really excellent part of the story, though, is the way it handles its two genres. It’s difficult to talk about what Eco does with mystery without spoilers, so:
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder
Some of the murders are pretty gruesome.