Paulo Coelho- What do we think?

[Geraint]

I have just finished reading The Alchemist and was impressed by the general tone of the novel, but did not find anything truly spectacular in the novel. It appeared to be an anaesthatised work, almost dream-like and without any moments of intensity and high drama. Does this really constitute good -or great- literature? He seems to be an incredibly popular author: is this deserved?

[JCamilo]

He is a awful writer. He does not have a simplistic language - He barely dominated portuguese when he wrote The Alchemist, it is full of mistakes and mediocre language use. His books are banal Self-help fables that he stole from other sources (and have a hard trouble acknowleding it), little domain of the metaphors he use, simplistic level of interpretation.
His popularity is only because the new wave spiritualism and have nothing to do with any talent. Brazilian Literature is in a lowdown since he appeared, specially compared to true masters of language we had in the past.
And as a person? He is a jackass posting for example blog entries as if he wrote it while they are a copy and paste from other sources without giving the reference or publishing a book in Iran because the authoral rights law is more severe to then open criticise the tyranical regime there.

[johann cruyff]

Ah,I always thought Coelho was a bit overrated.I mean,The Alchemist is something that not everyone could write,but still,I was kind of...meh...To me,it's nothing more than a poor man's Siddhartha,to be honest.Then again,Coelho is at least trying to be a serious writer,a rare sight these days.

[johann cruyff]

I'm glad you brought up Hesse. He's another writer I don't like, though I would never doubt his greatness.


I don't want to be friends with you anymore!:D ;)

[amalia1985]

I cannot say that I am a fan of Coelho, although I have read some of his books. There were two I really liked, The Alchemist and Miss Prinn. They seemed to deserve their popularity, without being masterpieces, but the others were nothing special. Recently, I was persuaded by a friend of mine to read Veronica Decides To Die. I think it was boring and had nothing to offer. Two books of his I found really bad, poorly-made, and completely common. This is only my personal opinion, I read everything to form an opinion, but I do believe that he is overrated. He is not a bad author, but he's not what the Media presents him to be.

[aeroport]

I've only read the Alchemist, which is decidedly not my thing. Perhaps I'll read another sometime before dismissing him...

[Geraint]

I suppose that from a structural perspective The Alchmist is stereotypical, but interesting. This appears to be a microcosm of the entire book: nothing new, but a gentle change to the norm. I am not convinced that this constitutes great literature, but it seems that the serenity attained whilst reading it does give it some merit. Take this out of the library: do not buy the box set.

[JBI]

His Portuguese grammar is apparently horrendous. Antiquarian, did you read him in the original? If not, then you are like me, I am afraid, only able to comment on his translators. As plot and character however, the Alchemist is hardly worth the time (and it only takes a few hours). I cannot accurately judge his style, being that I read him in translation.

I will say though, I like his internet politics, and his decision to make his books available for free online.

[amalia1985]

I have not read Miss Prinn, but I was going to read Veronica Decides to Die. Now, after reading what you have to say about it, I'm going to have to rethink it because I have so much to read and only so many hours in a day to do so.


Yes, Antiquarian, I agree. I repeat, this is only MY opinion, it may very well be wrong, but when you have much to read, Veronica Decides To Die shouldn't be one of your first options. In fact, to be totally honest with you, if my friend hadn't persuaded me so much, expecting me to have a clear and formed opinion on the book, I would have given it up after the first five chapters. It just didn't work for me. I'm not saying that it was "rubbish" or anything. The characters were complex, and the beginning was promising. Until the end of the 3rd chapter, I was satisfied with the "dark" feeling of the book, but later, it was like reading a fake and forced self-discovery trip, and it appeared too exaggerating. Read it when you have the chance, but don't rush to start it.

[JCamilo]

No, I don't read Portuguese, I read The Alchemist in English.

How can his Portuguese be so terrible, though, when it's his native language? At least Brazilian Portuguese?

Because he is not a good writer and certainly not doing anything to be a good writer. Years ago there was a analyse of the original of the Alchemist published in a newspaper and the number of mistakes are in the level of 12 years old students - not good students by the way. His prose in portuguese is awfull, absolute no domain of metaphors, poetical flow or the variations of portuguese in Brazil. I always suspected that his translators are very good, it is a bit of ironic (but since he have no literature culture he would not reckon it) to tell that he is indeed a product of Borges.

I fail to see how Coelho is doing anything original (Even because he borrows his plots from Oriental stories, mix with new wave christianism, have a text so basic that there is no language creation either, and simplify any possibility of interpretation): Coelho started his sucess in the end of 80's when Brazil had a a magazine named Planeta that mixed mystic religions, Allan Kardec, shamanism - so the Alchemist appealed to this public. (That is why Coelho is also an almagam of all that, after all he claims to be a Catholic Ortodox, but basically have no idea what this means). With the sucess - sadly because Brazilian education lowered the level of reading capacity of our population and because the great brazilian writers are all dying and no one seemed to appear to replace them) - he got ambitions that are quite ridiculous which also leed to his confrotation with the critics. My favorite part is he saying "I could write like Joyce too if I wanted", altough I doubt he ever read anything written by Joyce, and just borrowed a name that appeared among the critics that more often attacked him. Once he tryied to claim to be influenced by Borges (in a ridiculous attempt to claim that the History of two man that dreamed that appears in his book are not totally copied - when anyone could see the version where he copied the material) which backfired since he misquoted so grossly Borges that was even funny. If you want a good brazilian writer with real links with arabic culture, Check Malba Tahan.


Ps. His online service is another of his hipocrisies. For years he was a fighter against the pirates or on-line version of the books. He even published outside brazil to try to pick more protection. He even tried to take some people to the court (as if someone who copy and paste so much like him have any moral right to claim that his authoral rights are not respected). He lost, then someone pointed he could got more money like this, and he did it.

[Pensive]

I have tried three books by Coelho; The Zahir, Eleven Minutes and The Alchemist. The first one I couldn't bring myself to complete due to the dull nature of the book. Eleven Minutes I did find interesting enough to complete but I couldn't brign myself to appreciate it as a wonderful literary piece. It was okay, nothing more. In fact the narrator by putting up stereotypes (a woman's psychology is like this, a man does this in a particular situation blah blah) I found quite annoying at places.

As far as The Alchemist is concerned, I wouldn't call it a really bad book for the mere reason that it kept me occupied at places. But I would have to call it bad seeing the over-used ideas it contains. I found a particular resemblance with A Wizard of Earthsea too, a book I recently re-read.

So overall, I don't see anything very special in Coelho's philosophies.


I found it sweet and containing much depth, sort of in the manner of Chekhov.

I will have to disagree with you here. I don't think Chekhov's description, the emotional extent of his works and the way they show misery, despair, and how beautifully his stories are written (I don't know about the plays as haven't read them) can be compared to Pailo Coelho's writing.

[Castalian Girl]

I read The Alchemist, By the River Piedra I Sat Down and Wept, Eleven Minutes and Veronika Decides to Die. Eleven Minutes was disappointing. It just kept being so naive and I really don't understand why was the book labeled "erotic". Also, prostitution seems to be too nicely described in the book - like being a prostitute is actually nice and easy job. I nerver tried it, but I doubt it. The Alchemist and Veronika Decides to Die were good to pass time, but nothing new or spectacular for me.

[HerGuardian]

After an online friend persuaded me to buy one of his books, I picked the most famous one "The Alchemist". I really think that Coelho is greatly overrated. His books are merely fables woven in a certain plot. Yet, this plot is not that intersting or keep you reading. His language, though I only read the English version, is too simple with no such sentences or phrases that make you think . However, literature is a matter of taste. Not necessarily to have a writer liked by everyone.

[AuntShecky]

I haven't read any of the works cited, but I did read something called "The Witch of Portobello," which was offered by the publisher in a free online edition. What I am going to say is the equivalent of looking a gift horse in the mouth but here goes:
I found the main character to be completely improbable. We are told early in the novel that she is not wealthy yet gets to travel all over the globe by sheer luck. Secondly, the philosophy driving her works as a kind of parapsychologist or guru (whatever the feminine form of guru is) is completely specious, a hodgepodge of Eastern philosophy and Christianity mixed with Gypsy folklore; at best, it is a rehash of the New Age claptrap that characterized best sellers of the 1970s such as The Celestine Prophecy. Finally, I want to be fair, as the text was an English translation of his prose from a different language BUT -- there was nothing remotely literary or artistic about his writing. I don't know why I wasted my limited computer time on this piece of commercial junk.

[HerGuardian]

I feel exactly the same way about Dan Brown's terrible work and dreadful prose. My elementary school niece and nephews can write better than Brown. I wonder why inferior authors usually become so popular? Marketing, I guess. And Khaled Hosseini. Oh, my. What a dreadful writer he is, yet his books sell and sell and sell. I think he's even worse than Dan Brown. No, I know he is. He's just the most dreadful writer I can think of right now. Khaled Hosseini, that is.

Coelho's works will never be "great literature," that's for sure, but I can't say it's a shame they were published. I can say that about Dan Brown and Khaled Hosseini, especially Hosseini.


Well. There's a small difference between Coelho and Brown. Coelho is using this stupid childish sentences without capturing the reader's attention. On the other hand, Brown, I read the Arabic translation, is using such a technique that keeps you read till the end. He has the skill of using suspense in the right way. However, to be honest, once you read one of his works and try to read the other, you won't be the same. His second work will be less interesting. Moreover, a second reading of his works won't be done except by silly people. Both won't make it into the "Great Writers".



I know nothing about this Hosseini.

[johann cruyff]

Khaled Hosseini...that would be the author of Kite Runner,right?I've heard of this book and remembered the name of the author,but don't really know about it.It's a popular one,though,as far as I know.

And I agree with you Antiquarian,it all comes down to marketing these days.Dan Brown is successful because he found the right measure for controversy - he is by no means a good writer,but religion sells,the same way sex does.

[amalia1985]

Thank you, Amalia. I won't rush to read it. Thank you very much for giving me your impression of the book. I have so much I need and want to read, I can't waste time on something that is "iffy." :)

You're welcome!!:)

[naomi moon]

I have read most of Coelho's books: the fifth mountain, eleven minutes, by the Piedra river I sit and cry, The Zahir, the Witch of Portobello, Veronika decides to die, The demon and Miss Prym.
I liked Veronika decides to die. I liked the philosophy of life conveyed in it, and I have learned some interesting things from it, the Zahir and The Fifth Mountain were good too.
I hated The Witch of Portobello because, the ideas were more about mysticism and the female face/side of God stuff like that, I mean it was incomprehensible, at least to me and of no importance.
When it comes to judge whether his writing is literary or not. I may say, it's average, it's not that great.

[Remarkable]

He is overrated,after all.I liked "The Alchemist",it was not so bad but I was a kid when I read it so while my mind evolved,my point of view made progress to and I find that book rather childish now.I also read "The Zahir" which was a total farce and my opinion on Coelho changed,I can't say for good but however...Not advisable as an author.There are many better writers these days,even geniuses.The epoch of literature is not over yet(oh,I regretfully say that "yet",I hope it will become "never" one day)...

[kasie]

I feel exactly the same way about Dan Brown's terrible work and dreadful prose. My elementary school niece and nephews can write better than Brown. I wonder why inferior authors usually become so popular? Marketing, I guess. And Khaled Hosseini. Oh, my. What a dreadful writer he is, yet his books sell and sell and sell. I think he's even worse than Dan Brown. No, I know he is. He's just the most dreadful writer I can think of right now. Khaled Hosseini, that is.

Coelho's works will never be "great literature," that's for sure, but I can't say it's a shame they were published. I can say that about Dan Brown and Khaled Hosseini, especially Hosseini.

Oh dear, my sister-in-law who visited recently left me A Thousand Splendid Suns to read - I shall have to make at least a nominal gesture towards reading it, she will Ask Questions. She did the same with Girl with a Pearl Ear-ring and gave me the DVD for a birthday present and I hated both of them (Creative Writing class exercise, I thought) and she keeps referring to it and is quite offended that I didn't like it. What do you do with people who can't accept that people are entitled to their own opinions?

Agree with you about Brown - couldn't stop myself thinking 'Tosh!' as I read it - page-turning tosh, but nevertheless badly written, dishonest tosh. But people take it seriously! What have we done to the next generation of readers? Failed to give them any critical faculties, that's for sure. Can't bring myself to watch the film.

Was also loaned The Alchemist some time ago, but was not in a reading mode, too much else going on my life at the time, so quietly returned it without comment.

[Castalian Girl]

Agree with you about Brown - couldn't stop myself thinking 'Tosh!' as I read it - page-turning tosh, but nevertheless badly written, dishonest tosh. But people take it seriously! What have we done to the next generation of readers? Failed to give them any critical faculties, that's for sure. Can't bring myself to watch the film.

I think Dan Brown sold a large number of his books because of the "controversial" topic. And about the next generation of readers? With all reality shows, lame teen-tv with only one message: be rich, skinny and beautiful and society which still measures one's life and achivements through money earned during lifetime I wonder if there WOULD be a next generation of readers at all.

As for Hosseini, I read The Kite Runner. In terms of style maybe it wasn't so special, new or revolutionary. But I still found it better than any average crime novel and the main reason I was attracted to this book was because it's about Afghanistan. And I'll give him credit for describing class differences in a society.

[JCamilo]

There is no difference about COelho and Dan Brown, both a formula writer, both limited. For Dan Brown audience (Thrillers) he is able to keep the attention ,for the mystic kind of attention needing confort Coelho will be able to keep the attention.
I must say however that the ability of writer to keep his reader reading page after page is the most basic and limited trait ever. A great writer provokes the imagination beyond the page, confuse, give us an internal turmoil about everything writen there. Coelho and Brown equally fail there.

Antiquarian:
I didn't mean Coelho used other texts to re-create temes and plots. He just borrowed them. The only reason why he is not drowned by authoral rights process is because most of the writers he copies are dead century ago.

[curlyqlink]

I've read Coelho's The Devil and Miss Prym. It did nothing for me. I'm not a big fan of magical realism, and the book seemed nothing more than heavy-handed allegory. I didn't loathe it, but I found it distinctly forgettable... fluff. Coelho, for all his "bestselling author" status, seems decidedly lightweight.

As for Dan Brown' Da Vinci Code, the plot and setting seemed a direct rip-off of Umberto Eco's complex, delightful Foucault's Pendulum.