![]() ![]() I thought it could have managed without the political approach, instead embracing solely the philosophical discussions that relate to the mystery, which were just as interesting.The book also adhered to some medieval concepts that I could have done without, like the mad disabled man who is portrayed as twisted and repellant, and the gay men who are all predators. The philosophical discussions were interesting at first, but by the time it arrives, the delegation of monks debate is rather underwhelming, because it distracts from the murder mystery. The love plot was one of the most unnecessary I’ve ever read in fiction, and I skipped big paragraphs of Adso’s romantic digressions that contributed very little if anything to the overall narrative. ![]() Eco does that thing where he decides that because of the genre, everyone speaks in paragraphs, and the long-windedness of William’s explanations to his mentee, Adso, begin to grate a bit. He kept adding, and adding, until there were whole chunks that seemed unnecessary. The problem was that Eco bit off more than he could chew. It started out well-the writing on the sentence level was superb, and the combination of intensely researched historical fiction and biblical murder mystery was really fun and compelling. The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco was increasingly disappointing as the narrative went on. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |