Book: A canticle for Leibowitz
Aug. 12th, 2003 07:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
livAuthor: Walter M Miller Jr
Details: (c) 1959 Walter M Miller Jr; Pub Orbit 1997; ISBN 1-85723-014-0
Verdict: A brilliant book, moving, complex and intelligent. Wow.
Reasons for reading it: It's vaguely famous, and M's talking about it jumped up the priority of a vague intention to read it at some point.
How it came into my hands:![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
lethargic_man lent it to me.
A canticle for Leibowitz is one of the most impressive books I've read in ages, certainly since I started this blog. I was gripped from the first page; aCfL does just about everything right: flowing prose, new ideas explored rigorously and interestingly, an exciting story, etc.
Although aCfL is much more a book about ideas and situations than people (it doesn't really have a protagonist, as such), every single minor character is absolutely believable. That alone would generally let me like the book a great deal, but aCfL has many other good features as well. The narrative voice is never intrusive either; there are many possible messages that a reader could take away from reading aCfL.
As a portrayal of the horror of nuclear war, this is absolutely unsurpassed by anything I've read. The book opens several centuries after the end of the devastation that everybody expected at the height of the cold war, and recounts how the remnant of humanity claws its way back to cvilization... and back to nuclear capacity and proliferation. This makes the second nuclear holocaust in the final chapter all the more horrifying, partly because it is the second time round. But there is far more to aCfL than anti-nuclear polemic.
In many ways aCfL is a religious piece; the Catholic church plays more or less the rôle expected for a protagonist. I am of course not qualified to say whether it presents a realistic portrait of (pre-Vatican II) Catholicism, but it most certainly presents a highly plausible potrait of a religion. The Church is portrayed in a very balanced way; there is a very clear sense of both the positive and negative aspects of an entrenched religious institution, as well as the religious impulse in various characters' lives. Religion in aCfL is not reduced to a simplistic message, but is morally complex enough to be sustainable for real people in a morally complex world.
There are all kinds of elements in aCfL, and I got the impression that every little detail was very carefully placed and contributed something symbolically. I'm sure that a more literary sort of person than me would get even more out of it, but it never felt pretentious because it works so well on a simple story level as well. I think a lot of it is elements of Christian mythology reinstated in a new context: the Wandering Jew keeps showing up, and there's a very weird interpretation of the Immaculate Conception.
I loved the glimpses of society and the monastic community within it at different stages, the equivalents of the Dark Ages, the Renaissance and the modern period. Again, everything felt plausible and solid, and not just a vehicle for the story. In a sense it's alternate history, but the repetition is a key element, it's not just an excuse for the alternate-ness.
As well as taking great delight in reading such a well-written piece, I was very moved by aCfL. I really cared about the fate of indivuals and also of humanity as a whole. The book avoids easy emotional tricks, and provides neither a happy-ever-after ending nor total despair.
Details: (c) 1959 Walter M Miller Jr; Pub Orbit 1997; ISBN 1-85723-014-0
Verdict: A brilliant book, moving, complex and intelligent. Wow.
Reasons for reading it: It's vaguely famous, and M's talking about it jumped up the priority of a vague intention to read it at some point.
How it came into my hands:
lethargic_man lent it to me.A canticle for Leibowitz is one of the most impressive books I've read in ages, certainly since I started this blog. I was gripped from the first page; aCfL does just about everything right: flowing prose, new ideas explored rigorously and interestingly, an exciting story, etc.
Although aCfL is much more a book about ideas and situations than people (it doesn't really have a protagonist, as such), every single minor character is absolutely believable. That alone would generally let me like the book a great deal, but aCfL has many other good features as well. The narrative voice is never intrusive either; there are many possible messages that a reader could take away from reading aCfL.
As a portrayal of the horror of nuclear war, this is absolutely unsurpassed by anything I've read. The book opens several centuries after the end of the devastation that everybody expected at the height of the cold war, and recounts how the remnant of humanity claws its way back to cvilization... and back to nuclear capacity and proliferation. This makes the second nuclear holocaust in the final chapter all the more horrifying, partly because it is the second time round. But there is far more to aCfL than anti-nuclear polemic.
In many ways aCfL is a religious piece; the Catholic church plays more or less the rôle expected for a protagonist. I am of course not qualified to say whether it presents a realistic portrait of (pre-Vatican II) Catholicism, but it most certainly presents a highly plausible potrait of a religion. The Church is portrayed in a very balanced way; there is a very clear sense of both the positive and negative aspects of an entrenched religious institution, as well as the religious impulse in various characters' lives. Religion in aCfL is not reduced to a simplistic message, but is morally complex enough to be sustainable for real people in a morally complex world.
There are all kinds of elements in aCfL, and I got the impression that every little detail was very carefully placed and contributed something symbolically. I'm sure that a more literary sort of person than me would get even more out of it, but it never felt pretentious because it works so well on a simple story level as well. I think a lot of it is elements of Christian mythology reinstated in a new context: the Wandering Jew keeps showing up, and there's a very weird interpretation of the Immaculate Conception.
I loved the glimpses of society and the monastic community within it at different stages, the equivalents of the Dark Ages, the Renaissance and the modern period. Again, everything felt plausible and solid, and not just a vehicle for the story. In a sense it's alternate history, but the repetition is a key element, it's not just an excuse for the alternate-ness.
As well as taking great delight in reading such a well-written piece, I was very moved by aCfL. I really cared about the fate of indivuals and also of humanity as a whole. The book avoids easy emotional tricks, and provides neither a happy-ever-after ending nor total despair.
(no subject)
I found the very beginning a bit hard going
I didn't, I got into it almost immediately. But I generally don't have a problem with slow beginnings, to be fair.
but overall I loved it
*bounce* Isn't it just breathtaking?!
I felt the whole book was very *angry*
I think it was quite angry, but it managed to avoid letting the polemic swamp the story. The whole Cold War scenario, feeling that the whole of civilization was liable to be wiped out by politicians who didn't want to lose face, must have been quite angering. But there are far too many books that jump up and down clamouring 'nuclear war is bad', which, however true, doesn't make very interesting reading.
The Catholicism seemed mostly quite convincing to me, as well
And you'd be far more likely to see flaws in that than I would. Cool cool. I agree that Christianity is very often portrayed negatively in SF.
This was post-Roman Europe rather than the Conquest of the New World, you know?
Very acute comment! aCfL is definitely drawing parallels with the historical Dark Ages. But it's also true that Christianty is probably unjustly blamed for a lot of the sins of colonialism. The fact that most of the colonialists were Christian or nominally so I feel is only partly relevant.
I don't know if you've ever watched any Babylon 5
Nope, sadly. I saw a couple of episodes on TV years ago, and never really got into it. I'm very loyal to Star Trek; a lot of other stuff just seems like the same themes rehashed, but without the nostalgia value of crap special effects, meaningless technobabble, predictable plots and 60s sexism.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-08-17 04:22 pm (UTC)I think it was quite angry, but it managed to avoid letting the polemic swamp the story. The whole Cold War scenario, feeling that the whole of civilization was liable to be wiped out by politicians who didn't want to lose face, must have been quite angering. But there are far too many books that jump up and down clamouring 'nuclear war is bad', which, however true, doesn't make very interesting reading.
That's very true. The anger doesn't detract from the story, it's just *there*. Kim Stanley Robinson uses a similar technique; his books tend to involve lots of stuff about sustainable ecologies and environmental damage, in a way which makes you think about the issues without having them shoved down your throat.
This was post-Roman Europe rather than the Conquest of the New World, you know?
Very acute comment! aCfL is definitely drawing parallels with the historical Dark Ages. But it's also true that Christianty is probably unjustly blamed for a lot of the sins of colonialism. The fact that most of the colonialists were Christian or nominally so I feel is only partly relevant.
Yes, that's exactly the sort of thing I was thinking of. I get fed up in sci-fi and also in fantasy of Christianity - and obvious parallels - so often being the "bad guy". Bad things were done, but not everywhere, at all times, by all Christians. This book, The Sparrow (by Mary Doria Russell) and a handful of B5 episodes are the only sci-fi sources I can think of which paint Christianity in anything other than a negative light.
Oh, and I recommend B5. Of course, I'm obsessed with it, but it's really a great show. Not that I don't love Star Trek, but B5 was something really different in TV sci-fi.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-08-19 04:09 pm (UTC)And even if they were, a lot can be forgiven for Bach..
This book, The Sparrow (by Mary Doria Russell) and a handful of B5 episodes are the only sci-fi sources I can think of which paint Christianity in anything other than a negative light.
The Priest's Tale in Hyperion, perhaps ? And much of James Morrow's work handles Christianity in a sympathetic, if not uncritical light. And there's always Blish's A Case of Conscience, which is wonderful. And C.S. Lewis. And Good Omens ? More will probably occur to me when I get home, this is something of an
obsessioninterest of mine.I thought The Sparrow was utter tripe, myself.
Oh, and I recommend B5. Of course, I'm obsessed with it, but it's really a great show. Not that I don't love Star Trek, but B5 was something really different in TV sci-fi.
I was very fond of it at the time, not near so much now; it had a lot of promise, but the demands of the structure did weird things to it.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-08-20 04:58 pm (UTC)obsessioninterest of mine.And lo, I forgot The Book of the New Sun.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-08-21 12:05 pm (UTC)I rather agree here, though I probably don't take it quite so personally as you do. Actually I think I wouldn't mind a negative portrayal if the alternative presented were halfway plausible. The sort of 'Christianity bad, fluffy harm none neo-pagan waffle good' paradigm irritates me. As does the assumption that all Christians are hypocrites and follow their religion out of routine, while all fluffy new-agers are completely sincere and perfect exemplars of the ideals of their faith. Yes, your made up religion looks lovely, but that's because you've never thought through how it would mesh with the real world and real people.
and I recommend B5
Well, I'm more interested to get into that than bloody Buffy. If I ever do get round to getting a TV or DVD player that will certainly be on the list.