The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho

[JCamilo]

Mediocre and worst because it sucks down other sources sometimes not changeing a word as something original.

Anyways Anastasija, I think and you found out since you commented about older people still reading it... Coelho does not provide a start in the reading development. In my opinions, people who are stuck with him are reading something to be forgotten (the reading experience) and keep the easy message (Life is a journey to achive your dreams or something as similar that can be read in a chinese coockie). Coelho simple do not provide to the reader material for development, no literary device, skill ,technique to make the reader ready for the other works. (not even vocabulary, since it is well know his ridiculous use of portuguese, he writes in portuguese worst than I write english... seriously drunk). A good evidence is that Coelho have now almost 30 years of success and no literary movement or significant reading habits were developed in Brazil.
Sure, he won't damage people which reading habits are already being developed by several other experiences, but where there is none? Just like using an umbrella under water.

[B-Mental]

I'm sorry people don't like this and base it on his writing ability...maybe you should base it on what he writes about. He is writing about mysticism and religion...faith, confidence, a familiarty with nature. I think a lot of people bash him for something in the book they never pick up on. What is the alchemy he is talking about.

A well learned "alchemist" is encountered in the story. This alchemist is symbolically those people who seek knowledge or enlightenment in a manner that is incorrect to the simple attunement of one with nature. I think its overly simple to enable some to understand what he is writing about. I have a problem with some of his other books in that he makes grand assumptions that to me have flaws.

[Scheherazade]

I'm sorry people don't like this and base it on his writing ability...maybe you should base it on what he writes about.

I believe that greatness of a book should be measured not by its subject matter but how that subject matter is dealt with by the author.

Coelho, in my opinion, fails to do justice to the subjects he aims to deal with... and badly so.

[B-Mental]

The worst thing is this is the better book.

[JCamilo]

Not mentioning that the quality of the writer is something important when talking about books... his subjects suchs. You can be happy if you follow your dream or your inner self or anything as such. Self-help. That is why he is unpleasant. For good sakes, he went to the World Cup Annoucement and said : Brazil is the greatest football team when they do not think they are the greatest. What does this mean ??? We are the greatest because we Won most than anyone else! It is ridiculous (and considering how self-help discuss of our last coach costed us a team in the last world cup)... Mickey Mouse have more depth than him.

[aabbcc]

Anyways Anastasija, I think and you found out since you commented about older people still reading it... Coelho does not provide a start in the reading development. In my opinions, people who are stuck with him are reading something to be forgotten (the reading experience) and keep the easy message (Life is a journey to achive your dreams or something as similar that can be read in a chinese coockie). Coelho simple do not provide to the reader material for development, no literary device, skill ,technique to make the reader ready for the other works. (not even vocabulary, since it is well know his ridiculous use of portuguese, he writes in portuguese worst than I write english... seriously drunk). A good evidence is that Coelho have now almost 30 years of success and no literary movement or significant reading habits were developed in Brazil.
Sure, he won't damage people which reading habits are already being developed by several other experiences, but where there is none? Just like using an umbrella under water.

I agree with you.
I did not say that Coelho is a phase one must go through in one's "reading development", I just commented on how I find it normal that a group of particular age, especially if without very laudable literary education behind them at that point, finds Coelho to suit their needs. I am not that young any more, but I still remember pretty clearly what I was like when I was 13 - it was only four years ago - and I know that people of that age, add or remove a couple of years, often seek for 'meaningful' and 'spiritual' literature, and authors such as Coelho tend to be liked by them because they are simplistic, superficial, but on that superficie there are tracks of what they seek for, and they are usually not ready to turn towards 'serious' literature, so they end up reading these wannabes, and are usually nicely out of that phase in a year or a few. That is not to say that anyone who tries Coelho in that age will like him - I thought he was a trash when I was 12, I think he is a trash now when I am 17, and I probably always will find him a trash; I myself in those years found consolation needed in a completely different set of authors (Hesse, Mann, Pessoa and Baudelaire were predominately my thing back then ).

I also do not think that Coelho should be used to get people reading - God forbid. I think you misinterpret that part of my post (but nevermind if you did, I hope you get my point now ). I simply think that people at certain phase tend to get attached to such books, on their own, and if anything, I do not think it should be encouraged in any way. The idea of, say, teaching Coelho at school, or including him in any kind of literary canon alongside the actual literature, seems rather laughable to me.
I also do not think that Coelho provides any 'base' to later build on, nor that it is significant phase, nor that his writing can be described any better than superficial blabbering of a ten-year-old who went on chatting about 'big topics of life'. I just think it is normal people fall for such pointless trash, especially if young, and especially, regardless of age, if they in general do not read books that are much better than this, in both cases not getting what is so wannabe about Coelho.

Again, even despite the significant lack of literary value in Coelho, I can understand that for reasons that elude me people can get emotionally attached to his works, so no offense towards those intended.

[JCamilo]

Oh, no. I wasn't thinking you argued this. You can imagine, this conversation truly started a long time ago, several times with several others
I know, Coelho appeals is the simplistic spiritualism of his work. He just used several other literatures (arabian, Borges, budhist) that have a world of possibilities and resumed it to one simple, happy, likeable truth. (hence, self-help). I understand why people like it and despite the hammer I use when I am writing those critics, I think they are absolutely free to do it and Coelho and earn his money.
Anyways, if we consider how Coelho hold down people, we can imagine why, when people age, they keep reading him. It is short of a dead end, if you do not learn to ride a bike ,you will keep walking. I also always raise my eyebrown when I heard "better be reading him than reading nothing"...
I also remember my 13 years reading habits, a long ago. There was tons of Arthur Clarke, Agatha Christie, Stephen King (all of them considerable better than Coelho), comic books but there was also Dante, Homer or Cervantes. I really hope that those who read Coelho do not ready also "Who stolen my cheese" or similars...

[bunker_70]

Someone recently advised me to read this book. I was planning on reading it soon. I think I will read it anyway just to see why its so bad . Anyway thanks for the warning ^^

[karo]

I loved The Alchemist. Thought it was magic. But then, I am a simple soul. I still enjoy fairy tales, but I do draw the line at Mickey Mouse

[Etienne]

I loved The Alchemist. Thought it was magic. But then, I am a simple soul. I still enjoy fairy tales, but I do draw the line at Mickey Mouse

I think Mickey Mouse is much better honestly. He's funnier, and on a philosophical level they're about the same level (which means quite low!)... and at least Mickey Mouse doesn't have the pretension, almost pedantic, of the cereal box "philosophy" The Alchemist has.

[JCamilo]

I think Karo is just being nice and humurous about one of my rants.
Anyways, I prefer Bugsy Bunny

[dust0fnations]

My College lit. teacher has assigned an explication essay for this novel and the majority of my class is enamored by what a "life changing piece of literature" they find this novel to be. Meanwhile im scratching my head that so many feel it has so much philosophical weight when Coelho flat out explains the meaning behind every single literary device he's thrown in. I understand that it's supposed to be simplistic like a fable but for some reason it does seem like a glorified self help book to me. Im not familiar with all of Coelho's work but this novel seems like he wrote it with a need to enrich his own life by writing a novel with a strong universal message(I use that term loosely). If your at the stage where your hungry for a non transient "mystical journey of enlightenment" kind of deal, Siddhartha is 10x better than The Alchemist in my opinion. I can see why people would like it and I dont believe its because their not strong readers. Some people apreciate simplicity and whose to say they are wrong. I'd give this novel more brownie points If Coelho didnt outright say what the deeper messages were since you can see them plain as day anyway.

[bazarov]

That book is really really bad; no way I'll touch Coelho again.

[blazeofglory]

I have read this book recently and I like this book immensely particularly there is a line something like ' if you want something intensely the whole universe conspire you to have it' or something like that I can not recall exactly.

I like the story. It is something spiritual and I got completely absorbed and lost in a world that was presented in his book.

[JCamilo]

It is really not surprising that you liked it, Blazeglory...