Books

  • Whitaker Library
      • Rated 0 stars

    New Book, December 2011

    Whitaker Library wrote this review Tuesday, December 13, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    Play Book Tag Shelf
    1 of 1 members found this review helpful
      • Rated 3 stars

    Susan T said: 3 stars

    “I hate therefore I am”

    The quote above tells you almost everything you need to know about the protagonist of Umberto Eco's latest novel. Set in 19th century Europe, Captain Simonini is an equal opportunity misanthrope, and early in the novel there's a lengthy diatribe against not only the Jews (always very much at the center of Simonini's hatred), but also the Germans, French, Italians, priests, Jesuits, Masons, women, and several other groups in asides. Simonini expounds, "They say that a soul is simply what a person does. But if I hate someone, and I cultivate this grudge, then, by God, that means there is something inside! What does the philosopher say? Odi ergo sum. I hate therefore I am."

    I think it took me about three attempts to make it past these over-the-top opening salvos of hatred, and a smarter reader would have quit, but Eco has defeated me in the past, and I was determined to read this entire book. Why? Why? The Prague Cemetery is a dense, complex, convoluted tour through 19th century European history. (I strongly recommend that you acquire a Ph.D. in the subject before you sit down to read.) Simonini, it seems, is--Forrest Gump-like--at the center of almost all major events, and pretty much behind every conspiracy of the era.

    As you may have gathered above, he is not a good guy. At one point he justifies: "Yes, I admit it. In my conduct toward my would-be Carbonari comrades, and to Rebaudengo, I did not act in accordance with the morals you are supposed to preach. But let us be frank: Rebaudengo was a rogue, and when I think of all I have done since then, I seem to have practiced all of my roguery on rogues." Yeah, right.

    The novel is an autobiography of sorts, as there is some confusion as to Simonini's identity. He seems to be possibly inhabiting the same apartment? body? mind? as a clergyman named Abbé Dalla Piccola. Simonini's memory is full of holes, which Dalla Piccola seems to be able to fill, as he inserts his own recollections into Simonini's written document. Does this sound confusing? You have no idea. "Abbé Dalla Piccola seems to reawaken only when Simonini needs a voice of conscious to accuse him of becoming distracted and to bring him back to reality, otherwise he appears somewhat forgetful. To be frank, if it were not for the fact that these pages refer to events that actually took place, such alternations between amnesiac euphoria and dysphoric recall might seem like a device of the Narrator."

    On the subject of "events that actually took place," pretty much all of the history (if not the stories behind the events) took place, and in fact, according to Eco, Simonini is the only fictional character in the entire novel. So, those European history Ph.D.s are really going to have a field day. For the rest of us, not so much fun, I have to say.

    If it's not yet clear, I hated this book. I violently HATED this book! Reading it gave me PTSD. I know, you're wondering why the three stars? Well, as much as I hated it, I can't actually tell you it's bad. Eco is a brilliant, talented writer. I simply can't imagine why he chose to use his talent to tell this particular story. Here are some of the issues I had with the novel:

    * The required knowledge of history was oppressive. Without that knowledge, the novel was almost impossible to follow and/or appreciate.
    * The cast of thousands, all with multi-syllabic foreign names, was impossible to keep track of, especially as characters would reappear decades after their last appearance in the book.
    * Despite the sheer amount of stuff that happens within these pages, the story moves at what, for me, was an excruciatingly slow pace. I'm not actually sure how Eco managed that.
    * Not only is the central character a truly awful human being, there really is no one to like or care about much in the book.
    * While at first I was able to shrug off the anti-Semitic content of the novel, after 464 pages of the most vile garbage imaginable, it really, really got to me. As a Jew of European descent, no matter how ridiculous and over-the-top the hatred was (from all characters, not just Simonini), I know that everything Eco wrote was very reflective of the attitudes of the era. It made me ill. Make no mistake; I don't believe Mr. Eco is an anti-Semite. I just didn't need to read this hatred. It hurt me.

    Umberto Eco is a great writer, but any way you chose to look at The Prague Cemetery, I don't believe to be among his strongest works, and it is certainly not one of his more accessible titles. Despite Mr. Eco's talent, I can't recommend this book to anyone. And it'll be a long time before I decide to read him again.

    Play Book Tag Shelf wrote this review Saturday, December 10, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    Dianne L
      • Rated 1 stars

    Once again I couldn't finish an Umberto Ecco book. It started great but quickly got boring. Oh well, lesson learned.

    Dianne L wrote this review Wednesday, December 7, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    Juan M Wills
      • Rated 4 stars

    Novela histórica que combina hábilmente hechos sucedidos en el siglo XIX con personajes reales y un protagonista ( el único que no existió en la realidad) especialmente creado por el autor para enlazar toda la trama. Se describe con maestría la vida de Europa Occidental, los diversos movimientos y sectas activos de la época, desde los católicos, cristianos, templarios, jesuítas, masones y judíos hasta los revolucionarios italianos, prusianos y rusos, los sicoanalistas y los grupos anti semitas. Lateralmente con sus interacciones, adornadas de los placeres de la buena mesa y la conversación inteligente en restaurantes parisinos.

    Umberto Eco demuestra una vez más, su sapiencia y erudición; la gran maestría para combinar de manera veraz y emotiva un relato que nos muestra los orígenes de los difíciles conflictos vividos en el siglo XX.

    Al final queda el gran dilema de analizar las consecuencias de la vida de un protagonista amoral, materialista, desleal.

    Es una lectura que vale la pena. Así implique para un lector desprevenido como yo, un esfuerzo adicional de investigar las vidas y acciones de sus personajes y de los ambientes de esta época de la humanidad tan importante para nuestro siglo.

    Juan M Wills wrote this review Wednesday, December 7, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    Cliff
      • Rated 5 stars

    A great romp through revolution, occult, espionage etc. in the the latter half of the 19th century.

    Cliff wrote this review Friday, November 25, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    Care B
      • Rated 3 stars

    The Prague Cemetery by Umberto Eco ✰✰✰

    In general I am a huge fan of Umberto Eco, and as such I was eagerly awaiting the release of the English translation of The Prague Cemetery. I am sad to say that all of those elements that I love about Eco’s writing-the intelligent plotting, the dense prose, the belief in his reader’s ability to follow where he leads-have been carried to excess with this one.

    The story is narrated by three voices, two of which are one person with a split personality, and the third is an unreliable voice of no discernible provenance. I must give a warning here about the main character. Eco has stated that he attempted to create the most despicable of all literary characters. The book begins with a rant that, had I not agreed to review the novel, would have had me tossing this one aside. If you are Jewish, German, French, Italian, or female and are sensitive to vitriol, the opening pages might offend you greatly. In point of fact I must admit that as the pages roll on the reader can see that stereotypes of prejudices are being played upon, and the reader begins to perceive the shape of a truly reprehensible character and ceases for the most part to be offended personally. The one thing which continued to cause me a fair measure of unease as I read is the virulent anti-semitism. I know that distrust and dislike of the Jewish people has been rampant throughout European history, and I realize that the plot of this novel centers around events purportedly reactionary to those anti-semitic feelings. However, the hatred is so much at the forefront of this book, that it almost made me the reader feel complicit by continuing to read. The foreknowledge that that is the author’s intent does not make me feel any less uncomfortable.

    The device of a split personality is interesting, and works with the conspiracy theory nature of the plot. As for the plot, the reader is told up front that the book is created from real historical figures (only the main character and a few very minor ones are not drawn from actual people), and the plot structure is based on factual events with many conspiracy theories interwoven. The time frame in question is the later half of the nineteenth century, the setting is Italy, and the characters include Garibaldi and his Redshirts. Conspiracy theory is a fascination of mine, and I trusted Eco to write it well. This is the point where I must admit that I only made it to page 153 of 467. I went to the library last night and browsed through the Italian history books related to this era, hoping to demystify the plot somewhat by familiarizing myself with the players and events. Then I curled up again with the book, hoping my further education would make the book more accessible. After a couple of hours I put the book down and came to a decision-I must read a complete nonfiction work about the time, place, and people in question in order to fully understand and enjoy the conspiracy theories which Eco weaves through them. Too much is assumed by the author with regards to this reader’s knowledge of Italian history. I wonder perhaps, given that Eco writes in Italian for Italians, if this knowledge is basic to their curriculum, and it only becomes an issue in translation for foreigners.

    At the moment I have given the book three stars, for I simply can not give a master of the pen like Eco any less. My plan is to read, in the next few months, The Making of Italy, 1815-1870 by Edgar Holt, a readable, concise work covering the events of Eco’s book, and then re-read this book by Eco. If you do not mind feeling a little lost in your history/conspiracy theories, or if you know a sufficient amount of the time and place in question, and if you love deep, dark novels, this will likely be your kind of read. Otherwise, I would approach this one with caution and preparation.

    Care B wrote this review Tuesday, November 15, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    Jakdaw
      • Rated 3 stars

    Eco has produced a novel of despicable characters that seek to obfuscate through conspiracy theories and falsehoods. One wonders at Eco's premise - is the book itself a falsehood? The conspiracy theories that he rekindles are meant to infuriate and have worried many who worry that they may re-ignite hatreds - but, the hatreds will be of the ignorant only. This book punishes the ignorant and rewards the counterfeiter - a jumble of ideas cleverly crafted.

    Jakdaw wrote this review Sunday, January 8, 2012. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    rania
      • Rated 5 stars

    Eco's still got it. A lot of events and names, a bit confusing, but still a masterpiece. Makes me wonder how can one man possess so much knowledge and imagination.

    rania wrote this review Wednesday, November 2, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
    M. Hoevermann
    3 of 3 members found this review helpful
      • Rated 5 stars

    Manipulativer Meisterfälscher, Misanthrop und Widerling - Von der Entstehung des Antisemitismus

    Er ist eine Art abstoßender Forrest Gump des 19. Jahrhunderts: Der Meisterfälscher und Spion Simone Simonini, der 1897 (angeblich) erinnerungslos in Paris erwacht und über den sein Schöpfer Umberto Eco sagt, dass er mit ihm eine möglichst widerliche und abscheuliche Figur kreieren wollte. Das ist ihm gelungen. Virtuos gelungen. Einen widerwärtigeren Protagonisten wird man in der Weltliteratur schwerlich finden. Simonini ist käuflich, fälscht Dokumente, mordet, lügt und betrügt. Und er hasst inbrünstig. Juden, Freimaurer, Jesuiten, Deutsche, Frauen, eigentlich alle und alles. Vielleicht mit Ausnahme des Essens.

    Der Sohn eines italienischen Offiziers ist geprägt vom Einfluss des judenhassenden Großvaters, der die Juden als Quelle allen Übels und Unglücks betrachtet. Damit entwickelt sich Simonini zum Träger der rassistischen, antisemitischen Vorurteile seiner Zeit. Zur Projektionsfläche alles Bösen. Die dahinter stehenden Triebkräfte sind die gleichen, die bis heute noch Rechtsradikalität und Terror hervorbringen: tief verwurzelter Hass und Geldmangel, gepaart mit intellektueller Befähigung und dem Ehrgeiz, diese auszunutzen.

    Simonini lernt die grenzenlose Macht des geschriebenen Wortes kennen, die Bedeutung von Schriftstücken. Fiktionen, so die Erkenntnis, erzeugen Wirklichkeit, jedenfalls, wenn sie gut gemacht sind: "Nie, nie, niemals darf man mit echten oder halb echten Dokumenten arbeiten... Um überzeugend zu sein, muss das Dokument ganz neu geschaffen werden..." Der Erfolg ist besonders groß, wenn es auf Gerüchten basiert. Auf etwas, das man schon einmal gehört hat oder gehört zu haben glaubt - und kurz und knackig muss es sein, denn "ein diffamierendes Pamphlet muss sich in einer halben Stunde lesen lassen".

    Nur scheinbar lässt sich Simonini hineinziehen in die Netzwerke der Mächtigen, verkauft sich als vermeintlich williger Spielball und Handlanger. In Wahrheit verfolgt er dabei stets eine eigene Agenda, bedient alle Geheimdienste gleichzeitig, nutzt bestehende politische Konflikte, um dazu den passenden Betrug zu erfinden - und macht einen Reibach damit. Ein boshaftes Genie, das alle hinters Licht führt, inklusive der katholischen Kirche.

    Wieder einmal zeigt sich der Universalgelehrte Umberto Eco als beeindruckend versierter Erzähler. Den kompetenten Kenner der Verschwörungstheorien des 19. Jahrhunderts fasziniert allerdings nicht nur Geschichte; ihn fasziniert auch die menschliche Fähigkeit zu lügen und zu betrügen. Beides verknüpft er in seinem neuen Werk "Der Friedhof in Prag" auf imposante Weise.

    Dem dahinter stehenden Rechercheaufwand muss man Respekt zollen, denn historisch entspricht - wie auch bei Forrest Gump - nahezu alles der Wahrheit. Simonini durchläuft zentrale, politische essentielle Momente des 19. Jahrhunderts; seine Aktivitäten prägen das Weltgeschehen maßgeblich mit: Er präsentiert sich als Anhänger des Nationalhelden Garibaldi, fälscht Briefe, um den jüdischen Artilleriehauptmann Dreyfus als vermeintlichen Spion der Deutschen zu entlarven. Schließlich gipfeln seine antisemitischen Hasstiraden in einem Schriftstück, das in 24 Abschnitten verfasst als "Die Protokolle der Weisen von Zion" ein Stück Weltgeschichte schreiben wird. Denn Hitler benutzte dieses Dokument als Legitimation für die Judenvernichtung. Obwohl das judenfeindliche Pamphlet bereits seit 1921 als Fälschung entlarvt ist, befeuert es bis heute Vorurteile; unter anderem beruft sich die islamistische Hamas bis heute darauf.

    Auch der titelgebende "Friedhof in Prag", Leitmotiv des Romans, existiert tatsächlich: Es handelt sich um eine kleine, letzte Ruhestätte in der Prager Altstadt, genauer im Viertel Josefstadt, in der trotz eklatanten Platzmangels (die Fläche misst nur ca. 1 ha) über 12 000 Grabsteine zu finden sind. Das lebendige, alles andere als symmetrische Miteinander der Grabsteine verleihen dem Ort etwas Geheimnisvolles. Ein idealer Schauplatz!

    Nur Hauptmann Simone Simonini selbst ist frei erfunden. Er begegnet den "großen Namen" seiner Zeit: Schriftstellern, Politikern und Geschäftemachern, Menschen, die die Welt veränderten: Cagliostro, Dreyfus, Dumas, Freud, Garibaldi ,Hugo, Jolys und vielen anderen.

    Drei Erzählebenen nutzt Umberto Eco, um den unsympathischen Widerling plastisch werden zu lassen: Der Einblick in das Tagebuch Simoninis ist zunächst etwas verwirrend. Simoninis gespaltene Persönlichkeit verweist auf seine zerrüttete Identität und kennzeichnet ihn von vornherein als unzuverlässigen Erzähler. Der junger Psychiater Sigmund Freud, der zufällig einmal neben Simonini am Nachbartisch speist, rät ihm dazu, sein Leben schriftlich zu fixieren. Darauf lässt dieser sich ein. Seine Eintragungen werden dabei von einem zweiten Ich begleitet, kommentiert und korrigiert. Schließlich schwebt über allem ein weiterer, ein allwissender Erzähler, der kommentierend eingreift und verbindende Brücken zwischen den Einträgen baut.

    "Der Friedhof in Prag" ist ein komplexes, vielschichtiges, historisch akribisch recherchiertes Buch eines wahren Meisters der Erzählkunst. Ein intellektuell und ästhetisch ansprechender Roman, eine herausfordernde Mischung aus Fakten und Fiktion um Wahrheit und Täuschung, Identität und Intrigen. Man mag dieses durchweg fesselnde Buch nicht aus der Hand geben. Es bewegt, es beschäftigt, es lässt einen nicht mehr los und führt doch immer wieder ans Bücherregal oder ins Internet, um das eine oder andere zu recherchieren.

    Diese geballte Konfrontation mit Wissen fordert und garantiert ein großartiges Lesevergnügen. Und abendfüllende Diskussionen. Entstanden ist ein Werk, das wirkt wie ein weiser Kommentar zur heutigen politischen Situation, zur Propaganda Berlusconis, aber auch zu den Verschwörungstheorien, die sich um den 11. September ranken.

    Angesichts des Romaninhalts und seiner jüngsten politischen Aktivitäten wundert es nicht, dass Umberto Eco aus konservativen Kreisen und seitens der katholischen Kirche einiges an Kritik einstecken musste.

    Lächerlich ist der Vorwurf, Umberto Eco selbst sei judenfeindlich. "Der Friedhof in Prag" ist ein klares, ein eindeutiges Statement gegen Rechtsradikalismus und Antisemitismus. Allerdings macht dieses Buch auch etwas bewusst, mit erschreckender, schneidender Klarheit: Simone Simonini ist zwar der einzig erfundene Charakter, aber gleichzeitig der lebendigste von allen. Der, der alle Zeiten überdauert. Der, der nach wie vor unter uns weilt. Nur unter anderem Namen.

    (c) M. Hoevermann

    M. Hoevermann wrote this review Saturday, October 29, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No