Has anyone read (the 1959/60 version) of A Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter Miller ( aka Walter M. Miller, Jr.)? It was one of the first attempts that science fiction made to deal with formal religion.
Printable View
Has anyone read (the 1959/60 version) of A Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter Miller ( aka Walter M. Miller, Jr.)? It was one of the first attempts that science fiction made to deal with formal religion.
Some years ago, a publisher in UK brought out a new imprint of classic SF - Canticle was one of the titles, The Man in the High Castle was another, as was Day of the Triffids. after that I lost track of the series.
I can't tell you which version it was I read - I remember at the time thinking that I did not expect the story to take that particular final turn (will not put in a spoiler!) I was not able to follow it through but thought I would like to read some more of Miller's work - is there a title you would recommend?
I have an old hardback copy of The Science Fiction Book Club version I bought from a second-hand bookshop 3 or 4 years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by kasie
It's all I really know of his work. I have found this however.Quote:
Originally Posted by kasie
I read the book, and I don't remember the theme or message, exactly. There were some obvious ones that I at least imagine were in there, but when I finished, I wasn't sure the reason for its renown. But I did like the book, but mainly as a pulp sci-fi book with better than average writing, and an especially unusual setting, plot.
However, looking back, I think I might have missed something significant in the tale, it was so rich with potentially significant elements, and the change in the latter part of the book was a nice surprise. I think it was one of those times when I was just reading through a book less seriously than it deserved, perhaps discriminating against it on account of the era and genre. Red-Headed, did you find it to be a pretty "deep" work that notably rewarded contemplation/analysis?
I found it very interesting & full of quite subtle detail. It was an interesting 'take' on post-apocalyptic novels & seemed full of irony & wit to me. It was sympathetic to religious beliefs in many ways yet saw the absurdity of much religious belief as well. It was a Hugo award winner. The only flaw I found was the inferred presence of the 'Wandering Jew' which was a bit odd. I was not sure if that was a belated attempt at ironic humour or not. I believe that the original novel has been expanded somewhat. You are quite right though, you have to suspend belief & ride with the odd humour to really enjoy the novel.
Ultimately, this might not be a good comparison in everyone's eyes, but thinking back to the mood, the desolate desert landscape, the religious aspects, the humor, etc.--as well as the apparent richness in symbolism and thematic explorability, I find my thoughts returning to a film that had many of the same elements: Nacho Libre.
I'm pretty sure that, upon closer inspection, this film goes in different directions and explores different pathways, but I think the themes of Canticle and Nacho Libre wander similar landscapes, and reside in the same basic superstructure of spiritual concerns.
I'll have to have a look at that film sometime.
I should be reading it in about a week based on my current booklist. I'll check back then.
There is a sequel.
The book is outstanding. Its metaphor is that religion should overpower the State; meaning, since the Soviets were secular, only the true power that could stop them was God. The ability to have faith overpowers reason, and the Flame Deluge (the nuclear war) was God's wrath upon men, but the Albertian Order of Leibowitz knows that faith in God will prevent another war.
It has been accused of Christian apologetics but I read it as being more ironic than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo Neem
Interestingly, I feel the book is a little of both. I just finished it a week a couple days ago and cannot BELIEVE how even-handedly it handled the dynamics of faith and science. I didn't feel the book foisted religion above science at all but rather put issues of faith and spirituality as existing in just as much relevence and sometimes varience to science. There are some brilliant dialogues concerning the dynamic but I am most impressed with Miller's decision to see to the depths of characters motivations and the flaws that lie therein. The best religious characters are shown as devoted and caring humans (as opposed to being some theoretic representation of self-sacrifice) but sometimes self-rightous and political, the scientists are shown to be desirous of furthering human life but also prideful and sometimes petty; meanwhile both are shown to be short sighted in places.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Headed
I think the euthinasia scene is very difficult to read and to align with either side but I think it is fitting to something so complicated and multi-faceted as mercy-killing.
Yes, I agree with you. Miller, who I believe was a practising Catholic when he wrote the novel, was not overtly tendentious & was both sympathetic & ironic.
I read the book not so long ago and enjoyed it immensely -- I now realize for many of the reasons cited in the excellent posts above. But the humor, oh, the humor! Fantastic!
I have found this if anyone is interested. Eventually I will read more of Miller's work.