It has been said that The Name of the Rose was one of the most purchased, most displayed, and least read bestsellers. This notion expressed a belief that at least more people wanted to be perceived as sophisticated enough to read the book than wanted to make the effort of reading it.

On one level, The Name of the Rose is a decent whodunit set in an isolated northern Italian medieval monastery. William of Baskerville is our Sherlock and Adso, his young assistant, is the unlearned neutral narrator (His neutrality is seemingly due to lack of sufficient understanding to put a sophisticated gloss on his reporting - but he is writing the story decades later.). Upon their arrival, the abbot asks William to investigate the death of one of the monks. As he does so, the bodies pile up, a number of potential suspects and motivations are suggested and then rejected as the suspects themselves become victims. (In that regard, William echoes TV detectives who come to solve one murder, fail to stop several more, but then compensate by solving them all. See, for example, Midsomer Murders - The Early Cases Collection).

Mixed in with the mystery, however, are discursions in semiotics, hermeneutics, biblical analysis, religious debate, literary theory, and medieval history. And what would a medieval mystery be without the inquisition?

The Name of the Rose is a ludicrously difficult book to read if one insists upon understanding everything that one is reading. The book has spawned at least two book-length scholarly analyses as well as a book dedicated to supplying Latin-to-English translations for the dozens (hundreds?) of Latin phrases as well an explanation of the philosophical and literary theories that Eco introduces. (The product description to The Key to The Name of the Rose: Including Translations of All Non-English Passages (Ann Arbor Paperbacks) promises: "an approachable, informative guide to the book and its setting--the middle ages. The Key includes an introduction to the book, the middle ages, Umberto Eco, and philosophical and literary theories; a useful chronology; and reference notes to historical people and events.").

The book has also generated many conflicting interpretations and evaluations of its merit. Eco himself felt compelled to write a Postscript several years after the book's publication. The postscript is helpful in figuring out what Eco was `really' up to. Eco describes a novel as "a machine for generating interpretations." The book's popular success so surprised Eco that he ponders "why the book was being read by people who surely could not like such `cultivated' books." (He concluded that the unsophisticated Adso made readers feel it was OK to not fully comprehend the book.). The Postscript is now included in many versions of the book and I recommend it. The Everyman version does not appear to have the postscript, but this older version does: The Name of the Rose.

Eco clearly enjoys parading his learning - and there is little doubt he is an extraordinarily learned man. What is one to make of his casual use of the most obscure words? (I sometimes suspected he was making up words.) Is he trying to make most us feel stupid? Or is he writing for a very select audience? Or is he urging us to extend our grasp? He explains in the Postscript that wanted readers to become fully immersed in the medieval world, but once past that initiation to become his "prey, or rather the prey of the text". An author who views his readers as prey is just a little weird.

Eco expended great effort studying medieval history and transcripts and the effort shows in most respects, but it was disconcerting to learn that he felt justified in having William spout "disguised quotations" from Wittgenstein (who lived some 450 years after the events of this book) because such things were what William *should* have said. Such intentionally misleading writing violates an implied pact between author and reader. However, I do not wish to make too much of what I perceive as a transgression. The book should be read, pondered, and re-read - or it should be chucked in the trash can in frustration over the umpteenth foreign language or otherwise impenetrable word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, or page. Both reactions are understandable. I suggest reading it first. ( )

Umberto Eco was Professor of Semiotics at Bologna University when The Name of The Rose was published in 1980. Semiotics is the study of sign systems, a more arcane and subtle version of the spurious field of symbiology invented by Dan Brown, a would-be Eco. The grandfather of semiotics, the American philosopher Peirce, defined a sign as ‘something that stands to somebody for something else in some respect or capacity’. In other words, a tripartite entity which involves a thing, an observer, and a sign mediating between the two and which is capable of different interpretations: a rose, its various names, and a seeing, scenting self. Eco’s novel is, among other things, an attempt to embody in artistic form the principles and practice of semiotics, and at the same time, to show how important it is for freedom of thought. The interpretation of signs is a key activity and theme of the book, and may be said to operate in two contrasting areas: interpretation from deduction, and interpretation from doctrine...

Read the full review on The Lectern:

http://thelectern.blogspot.com/2009/1... ( )

Before I read this, I read somewhere that it is considered the thinking man's Da Vinci Code. I don't know if that's true because I've never read the Da Vinci Code, but it seems like it could be the case. I know this is supposed to be a post modernist masterpiece about relativism and the nature of truth and how books speak to other books. BUT. I just read it for the whodunit, and because I have a history degree and enjoyed all the medieval stuff. SO it's very smart blah blah whatever but it's also very ENTERTAINING, which I (sometimes) find more important. ( )

Once I completed “Foucault’s Pendulum” I knew that I wanted to read more from Umberto Eco. And soon after picking up Mr. Eco’s first novel “In the Name of the Rose” I greedily devoured its contents. While not taking as many digressions as Mr. Eco’s later work, “In the Name of the Rose” does develop many tangents not inclusive but wholly in line with the murderous storyline. What I love most about Mr. Eco’s work is the relative esoteric history lesson one gets when reading, especially the story of Dolcino’s heresy. Hopefully, I’ll be picking up his next novel in the near future. ( )

Not uninteresting but blown way out of proportion. Umberto Eco is not the Messiah, he's a dull microcosmopolitan academic and nothing more. ( )

Let's get straight down to business: The Name of the Rose is a tough read. It is about equal parts history, theology, eschatology, literary criticism, and murder mystery. In short, you will almost certainly learn something new while reading it. However, Eco seems to presume a certain amount of knowledge on the part of the reader going in: I can barely imagine beginning this book without a passing familiarity with Catholic ecclesiastical history in general, and the Avignon papacy in particular. A very determined reader might overcome such a deficit, but my suspicion is that he would find considerable stretches of the narration disorienting, if not downright confounding.

However, I am hesitant to discourage anybody from giving it a shot, because the murder mystery aspect of the novel makes it a real page-turner. I ordinarily read at least two books at a time, but from the moment I picked up The Name of the Rose until the moment I finished it, I don't think I read a word from any other book.

The action is interrupted at regular intervals by (a) history lessons, in the form of supporting characters narrating their life stories, (b) theological arguments, in which various monks debate, among other things, the poverty of Christ, and (c) overlong descriptions of aesthetic objects. Although all of these interrupt the book's flow to some degree, only the last became truly tiresome. Look for it when Adso describes the doors of the church, the illuminations on Adelmo's manuscripts, and especially his dream.

The book contains a sex scene, which is problematic only because it feels a bit implausible, and accordingly, a bit tacked-on. This effect lasts only as long as you're reading the scene itself, because its fallout is subsequently woven satisfactorily into the balance of the plot. Still, it enters as a loose thread, and I can't help but think something more could have been done to integrate it organically in the first instance.

Adso, a novice monk of the Benedictine order, accompanies Brother William, a Franciscan friar, to an abbey with the task of religious/political negotiations. But a murder has occurred and Brother William, a master of logic in a Sherlock-esque mode, is called on to investigate. Over the course of the investigation, William and Adso encounter many mysteries: the past lives of the variant monks living at the abbey, a labyrinthine library that holds untold secrets, and signs of the Apocalypse.

I have been putting off reading this novel for quite some time. A discussion of this procrastination can be found here. One reason for my procrastination was fear of the length, which was overcome by my attraction to the Chunkster Challenge. Then, as fortune would have it, I joined the Take a Chance Challenge which called for me to read a book from 1980. Lo and behold, that is when Eco published The Name of the Rose = reason number two to read the novel. Then, while talking with Brandon, he recommended the book and that was the trifecta. And just today, I joined the R.I.P. IV Challenge and ta-da, it works for this too.

Brandon gave me a good piece of advice - read up on the history before reading the book - which I in my arrogance promptly ignored. I really should have. I probably would have gotten so much more out of the novel if I knew a bit of what was going on in Italy and around Europe at the time, especially as regards Papal and political history.

Of The Name of the Rose's 502 pages, I probably only fully comprehended half. This was not just a murder mystery, but also a lengthy discourse on religious politics, literary theory, the nature of truth, semiotics, logic, the validity of inquisitions, syllogisms, and history. I was fascinated even as I was confused. Overall though, the book is a good story with many and diverse characters, beautiful language, and intriguing philosophies. ( )

In this order, I saw the movie, listened to an abridged audiobook, and read the book. Out of the three I would recommend the abridged audiobook, because it cuts out all the erudite passages and gives you the mystery story, which is extremely interesting. And yet... the historical details are fascinating too. As other reviewers have remarked, it's two books in one. I would recommend both the book and the author to readers who like a good mystery but want a little more substance than the average historical thriller. And, for a change, the movie did a fairly good job of communicating the essence of the book. ( )

Sherlock Holmes meets Inquisition. A monk investigates murders in a monastery. Set in Italy in the Middle Ages.

Works on several levels: After 263 reviews, what else can I say?

Don't let the poor film adaptation fool you. It works so well on so many levels.
* Detective story. Its a traditional (and very good) Sherlock Holmes-type murder mystery. The setting is colorful and unusual.

* Philosophical/theological/historical treatise. Eco is a world-class authority on Medievel theology. His academic book on Aquinas is a classic, for example. He knows his stuff and is able to give the readers all kinds of things to puzzle over: the poverty of Jesus; the history of the papacy; implications of William of Occam, etc. Eco's atheism shows through subtly, but is an interesting challenge to the believing reader.

It's a mystery, it's literary criticism. I love it either way. ( )

I couldn't get this one straight until after I had seen the movie. Once the movie had set the plot basics in my mind I really enjoyed getting all the details from the book. ( )

Brother Adso and Brother William travel to a remote convent in Italy. Brother William is there to work for a reconciliation between the Emperor's faction and the Pope's faction within the Catholic church. But his arrival also causes the abbot to investigate the recent death of a brother of their order. More deaths follow soon, and everything points toward an insider being behind it all. William is determined to find out what's behind all of this, even if it means discovering every secret the abbey possesses.

I read one review that describes this as The Da Vinci Code with brains. Possibly. But that doesn't necessarily make it an easy read. All the long, long, paragraphs, the highly technical religious controversies, and all the passages of Latin (With no footnotes! Why not?).

I almost feel like this was two books in one, one that I enjoyed - the mystery, the relationships, the setting - and then the long, pretentious stuff that's rather boring. I got to where I started skipping the boring stuff so I could get to the action. This edition had an afterword by the author, where he longwindedly defends his style and his writing. Maybe. But I disagreed with him. The stuff he defends as crucial to the book are the things I found myself skipping. ( )

This, in my humble opinion, is Eco's best work. The prose brings medieval monastic existence to life. Great characters and for ECO, a fast moving plotline highlight this work. I personally loved the literary and linguistic references throughout the book. I loved the fact that the Latin was not translated and made you do your own work to pull the full meaning out of the text. Bravo!

Narrated by the 80-year-old Benedictine monk Adso, “The Name of the Rose” relates events that occurred over a one-week period in 1327 when Adso (then an 18-year-old novice) and his master, the English Franciscan monk William of Baskerville, visited an abbey in northern Italy. The action takes place during the controversy over Apostolic poverty that occurred between the Franciscans and Dominicans, and during the course of the story a Papal legation including the inquisitor Bernard Gui arrives to evaluate allegations of heresy. At issue is the poverty of Jesus and whether or not the Church should accumulate wealth. These concerns however are overshadowed by the mysterious death of the monk Adelmo which is followed by 6 sequential murders of monks during the week. William’s time is consumed by an investigation of the mysterious deaths, and a large part of the popularity of this novel is based on the clever unraveling of the mystery that occurs as a result of William’s deductive reasoning and interpretation of symbols. The abbey has an elaborate labyrinthine library with many rooms laid out as regions of the world as it was known at the time with secret passages accessed by hidden mechanisms. A mysterious book it contains holds the answer to at least some of the murders. Ironically, when the mystery is solved, the murders turn out not to be part of a plan patterned on the Apocalypse, as William suspected, but rather a suicide followed by a serious of murders connected with illicit trysts between monks and an elaborate attempt of one monk to suppress information in Aristotle’s book on Comedy (a lost work that suggests laughter is an appropriate response to the mysteries of the universe).

The novel clearly reflects the erudition of its author who is a professor of semiotics and an expert on medieval times. There is a lot of Latin in the book (without translation) which puts the average (Eco would say “unsophisticated”) reader like me at a disadvantage. There are long enumerations of medieval minutiae such as the entire chapter devoted to Adso’s inspection of the fantastic creatures carved on the church’s doors. In the postscript, Eco says the “long didactic passages” were intentional and served to set the pace of the book. His friends and editors advised him to shorten the first 100 pages of the book because this section was “demanding” but he refused, believing “if somebody wanted to enter the abbey and live there for seven days, he had to accept the abbey’s own pace.”

Near the end of the book, William gives Adso some advice about where the real danger (as opposed to the risk of heresy) lies: “The Antichrist can be born from piety itself, from excessive love of God or of the truth, as the heretic is born from the saint and the possessed from the seer. Fear prophets, Adso, and those prepared to die for the truth, for as a rule they make many others die with them, often before them, at times instead of them.” I found this argument very compelling.

Finally, don’t ask what the title of the book means. Apparently, Eco wrote the postscript in response to that question, and even after reading the postscript I still don’t understand it. He says he chose the rose as a symbolic figure so rich in meanings that by now it hardly has any meaning left. What? The title is a cliché? I guess I am just one of those “unsophisticated” readers! Read the book yourself and decide if it is worth the effort. ( )

I have heard The Name of the Rose described as 'The Da Vinci Code written by somebody with brains'. The author of this description is not far wrong. While it may have all the elements of a typical Dan Brown novel, The Name of the Rose is infinitely deeper, richer and more thought-provoking. This really is the book that has everything – murder, action, religion, sex, philosophy, suspense, and even a dash of well-placed humour. Though it took me a while to read, it has challenged my reasoning, stretched my mind and extended my vocabulary. (I had to read it with a dictionary to properly understand it!)

The pace will probably infuriate all but the most patient readers at some point or other. Our narrator, Adso, feels that there is nothing more wonderful than a list, instrument of wondrous hypotyposis, but I found it difficult to share his passion. The first hundred-and-twenty pages or so are filled with too much description, too many lists and too much discourse for my liking. It was not until I had read nearly a third of the novel that it started to get really interesting - and even then, the 'interesting factor' continued to ebb and flow. Be warned: those who read The Name of the Rose simply as a mystery or thriller novel will be frustrated by the omnipresent philosophy. ("Why yes, Mr Eco, I would love to stop all the excitement for a fraternal debate on the poverty of Christ.") Instead, it should be read as a work of philosophy, where the mystery and thriller elements are simply the icing on the cake.

While the pace may cripple the excitement, however, it gives Eco plenty of time to paint vivid pictures of the abbey in the minds of his readers. The descriptive language in The Name of the Rose is always exceptional, and sometimes breathtaking. (Ironically, its brilliance is probably due in part to Adso's annoying list-making!) There are very few books that manage to capture the world of their story as perfectly as this one does. Truly, Eco is a literary master.

It may be hard to read at times, but for those willing to turn the pages, the experience is well worth the effort. This is one book that I won't easily forget.

This is one of the rare mystery novels out there that manages to be more than just a "whodunit." Mysteries, which come with the ready-made plot arc of crime/investigation/solution, often fail to give the reader much more than that, dressed up with a few different characters or a different setting. In Eco's book we get not only a decently plotted murder mystery , but also a close look at life in a medieval European abbey, plus an examination of the nature of books, of knowledge, of language, and ultimately of humanity. If that sounds like a lot, well, the book weighs in at about five hundred pages, so there's plenty of room for it.

The actual mystery is not anything to write home about, nor does it suffice by itself to keep the reader turning the pages. What makes this book a masterpiece is the way it steeps you in the fascinating world of the medieval monks, and places you inside the heads of people who look at the world so very differently than we do today - but still, by and large, are very much like us. I'm not sure about the accuracy of the details of the larger historical plot, but they fit in with what I do know about the period, and I think Eco generally has a pretty good record on that score.

I thoroughly enjoyed picking up on the subtle (and occasionally unsubtle) references to Sherlock Holmes that Eco makes in describing William of Baskerville's character and behavior. William is a little bit of an anachronism but not overtly; his beliefs and way of thinking are rather modern, but Eco provides sufficient evidence that he arrived at that mindset from available medieval literature and experiences, so we buy it and move on.

If you have no interest in history or theology, and aren't interested in a relatively slow-paced immersion in the historical world and mindset of medieval Catholic monks, you might find this novel too slow or too boring for your tastes. It's definitely not a quick beach-read mystery. On the other hand, if you like historical fiction, this is a gem of that genre; if you want a book that will entertain you while making you think, and which you can't finish in one sitting, this one's for you. Ultimately, the final revelation is less about the identity of the criminal, but the nature of crime, and I'm going to be pondering the theological/philosophical implications of the ending for a few days at least. I fully expect this book to stand up to a re-read in a year or so. ( )

Extremely smart one. Not easy to read at all...
Captivating story of monks in a monastery; the action surrounds the library... huge and impressive library. Luckily, I had the chance to see the place for myself - in Montserat, Spain. The monastery is absolutely amazing.... no wonder it inspired UE.
The parent of semiotics - UE proved his brilliant imagination & science in this book - his best, in my opinion.

Also, the movie (Sean Connery) is a remarkable piece of work. ( )

Absolutely wonderful! I only think the book is too structured, and because of that I have a feeling of artificiality. I understand Eco is not an artist though, but a great scientist and erudite. ( )

A marvelous whodunit and window to the past.

I read this ages ago, and decided to read it again to examine more closely how it is written. This edition has a postscript by the author explaining many things about the writing of the novel.

Interesting that he describes the first hundred pages as a penance or initiation for reading the novel. I found myself skimming much of the historical facts about the sects and heretics. Is all that detail really necessary? Isn’t it enough to know the facts without so much detail? I would certainly cut a lot.

And it seems that the author added the extra levels of narrator (a modern translator at least twice removed from the young novice narrator) as a salve to his own ego. Odd.

But at it’s core, there is the traditional detective novel, much like a story of Sherlock Holmes narrated by Doctor Watson. William of Baskerville is the “detective” and everything is narrated by the novice Adso.

Much of the extra material valued so highly by Eco was, of course, removed for the movie.

I read this book several years ago and for a good long while, it had returned to my thoughts. Reading it again, I found timely a timely political theme.

This is the story of two delegations called to a neutral setting to debate their religious positions as they relate to the influence of the Church on government. The erudite English monk, William, instructs his young acolyte on the separate paths of spirituality and government as the arguments--punctuated by a series of mysterious deaths--rage unseemly among men of holy calling.

As scenes portray illicitly charged prisoners interrogated by an inquisitor who presumes guilt unless innocence is proven, and accepts the threat and practice of torture as a normal tool of investigation; the monumental pride of principals convinced of the superiority of their rule and the inferiority of the ruled; the intolerance of opposing factions; and the disastrous consequences of secrecy--I understand why this book, first read as a finely crafted mystery, began to speak to me again during the administration of George W. Bush. ( )

This is one of my favorite books. The setting of an old monastery filled with old scriptoriums and libraries provides such a sense of escapism for me in terms of reading. The plot revolves around a murder mystery that is solved with a clever sense of awareness by the semiotician main character. Will suggest to others. ( )

I am not sure what I think or feel about this book. It took me a long time to read, compared with most books. I found it tedious and wordy, but still enjoyable.

The fact that there are many phrases in latin, and other european languages, made it difficult to read, due to my monolingualism.

I am the sort of person who reads a book for enjoyment, not to pick it to pieces and analyse to find "deeper meanings." Therefore I probably missed most of the semiotics Eco intended. ( )

The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco is, at the most simple level, the story of a medieval Franciscan Sherlock and his Dominican Watson setting out to solve a series of murders at an Italian monastery. These murders center on a mysterious library and a missing book. Eco makes use of an incredible vocabulary; I kept thinking that finding the necessary English words must have been an extended treasure hunt for his translator. Eco also uses language to create strong, complex, overwhelming visual effects, conveying powerfully the art and architecture of the place and the intense impact they had on his assistant.

The actual, so to speak “factual” ending of the story made me angry. Anyone who knows the ending can imagine why I would be upset. I was also angry because I felt I had been “had”. Eco had completely tricked me regarding the storyline he actually intended. Now that I have recovered my aplomb, I am amused and still shaking my head at Eco’s cleverness and at the extent to which the book I read had been my own creation. The material was there but the focus was my own. It will be interesting to go back and read TNOTR again sometime, knowing what I now know about it.

I think it would be hard to read this book just for the mystery story, as there is just too much else going on. Having read it, I am strongly tempted to tackle his others, but cautiously. ( )