I was waiting for someone to begin the discussion despite having finished the book over a week ago. For I wanted to know if it was merely I who stumbled through the lengthy passages & "deep" ideas.
Before that, Sumedha asked for a lucid interpretation of stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus which ends the book. Eco wrote Postscript to the Name of the Rose, in which he explains this as :
Since the publication of The Name of the Rose I have received a number of letters from readers who want to know the meaning of the final Latin hexameter, and why this hexameter inspired the book's title. I answer that the verse is from De contemptu mundi by Bernard of Morlay, a twelfth-century Benedictine, whose poem is a variation on the "ubi sunt" theme (most familiar in Villon's later "Mais ou sont les neiges d'antan"). But to the usual topos (the great of yesteryear, the once-famous cities, the lovely princesses: everything disappears into the void), Bernard adds that all these departed things leave (only, or at least) pure names behind them. I remember that Abelard used the example of the sentence "Nulla rosa est" to demonstrate how language can speak of both the nonexistent and the destroyed. And having said this, I leave the reader to arrive at his own conclusions.
(source link)
Now that isn't very lucid :-), but he does leave it open to interpretation. I used a latin translator to get the literal meaning of the phrase, and am still mulling over the interplay of "names", "ideas" and "history".
The Name of the Rose is one of the toughest books I've ever read. I must admit that I didn't get hooked until the appearance & the obvious significance of the name "William of Baskerville". The references to William of Occam (Occam's Razor), the prevailing social mindsets and the detailed explanation of that historical era took some time getting to, but provided a lot of interest for me personally.
Set in a time when reason & rationality begins to emerge and clash with contemporary power structures where the fear of the occult, of both God & the Devil are necessary to control what the powers that be have decreed as good or bad. There are several contradictions in the actual behaviour of the clergy & the secular law which leads men like Willam of Baskerville to question the existing scheme of things. However how difficult this is can be seen when despite his nascent rational beliefs, he still is moored in his spiritual beliefs.
The book serves as a historical document for in this era where stand up comics routinely poke fun at religion & men like Fritjof Capra hold that we have reached the extreme ends of rationality, it is hard to believe that a time like the one described in the book could exist. However, remember that a couple of decades ago, Ayatollah Khomeini was reportedly in favour of a ban on laughter. The theological debate at the end of the book will provide ample insight into the minds of those who believe (or used to)so.
Structurally, the book is quite forbidding with its many long passages that make you reach for the dictionary several times in a page. I find it really hard to believe this is actually a translation (by William Weaver) from Italian. Is the Italian original as rich in its language? Only one well versed in both languages can comment. As Sumedha remarked, we are left to grope with the Latin extracts when not explained in context. It is simply too tough to attempt to do so all the time. I unhesitatingly skimmed over lengthy description, such as the interrogation & sentencing of the "heretics".
As Adso & William pondered (with the hesitant application of reasoning, syllogisms & deductions) on the mystery of the library, I did try & sketch out a map as Adso was attempting the same. As Sumedha mentions, it makes a big difference! Eco can spend several words describing the layout of the abbey, but can be equally terse and forego details when it comes to the movement of people in the large chambers, jumping to dialogue straightaway. This can jar a little. You meet some characters after a long interval, so sometimes you forget who was what and why.
Having said that, weaving the more plebian pleasures of a murder mystery with pedantic & profound commentaries helps to retain a great deal of interest. However, I didn't get too fond of the prose for obvious reasons. You are on his turf & must obey the rules or show yourself out :-)
A useful reference is from notes in a Cleveland State Univ. English class.
Which one is true:
ReplyDeletea) Eco's natural style is bombastic.
b) That's how Weaver chose to translate it.
c) I've read only one Eco book and perhaps his other books are different. Ergo, his style has been tailored to content.
True Sumedha, the role of the translator in such a "tome" is quite interesting to contemplate.
ReplyDeleteI'm toying with the idea of getting Focault's Pendulum.
Thanks for the translation note. I seemed to have the first edition which had none of the footnotes.
ReplyDelete