A Canticle for Leibowitz is a devastating post-apocalyptic novel that remains current because of its central theme: humanity’s own nature. Click for the full book review.
I read this book in my 20s, 60ish years ago. I thought it was great but I’ve never met anybody who I could talk it over with. I’m glad you’re reacting to it. I was a fallen away Catholic at the time, but I don’t I didn’t see the critique of religious belief the way you did. I thought it was brilliantly funny in showing how archaeologists draw absurd conclusions from the objects they come across from the past. I think the final part is brilliant and how well it portrays the sacredness of life.
Thank you for reading! I don't think it critiques faith, but the Catholic Church as an organisation and its bureaucratic procedures—which, in my opinion, is something quite different. I thought this was more prominent on the Fiat Homo section, with the satire about the beatification process.
Thematically, I think it focuses on humanity's need for conflict, on how prone we are to war and to disregard the consequences of that war. At the same time, it has a very strong message about learning from history and how untrustworthy our archeological findings (or rather our interpretations) may be.
The final part is excellent but quite sad and quite hopeful at the same time. However, I was trying very hard not to spoil the ending in this review.
Well since I’m a Catholic, and a believer that it structures and procedures were guided by the Holy Spirit, I don’t see an indictment of the Catholic church’s procedures. And I don’t think the author did either.
I read those sections differently, but I think that’s precisely what contributes to the richness of the book: the variety of interpretations and the debates it enables. Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, and happy reading.
I read this book in my 20s, 60ish years ago. I thought it was great but I’ve never met anybody who I could talk it over with. I’m glad you’re reacting to it. I was a fallen away Catholic at the time, but I don’t I didn’t see the critique of religious belief the way you did. I thought it was brilliantly funny in showing how archaeologists draw absurd conclusions from the objects they come across from the past. I think the final part is brilliant and how well it portrays the sacredness of life.
Thank you for reading! I don't think it critiques faith, but the Catholic Church as an organisation and its bureaucratic procedures—which, in my opinion, is something quite different. I thought this was more prominent on the Fiat Homo section, with the satire about the beatification process.
Thematically, I think it focuses on humanity's need for conflict, on how prone we are to war and to disregard the consequences of that war. At the same time, it has a very strong message about learning from history and how untrustworthy our archeological findings (or rather our interpretations) may be.
The final part is excellent but quite sad and quite hopeful at the same time. However, I was trying very hard not to spoil the ending in this review.
Well since I’m a Catholic, and a believer that it structures and procedures were guided by the Holy Spirit, I don’t see an indictment of the Catholic church’s procedures. And I don’t think the author did either.
I read those sections differently, but I think that’s precisely what contributes to the richness of the book: the variety of interpretations and the debates it enables. Thanks for the thoughtful discussion, and happy reading.