Rating: 
Summary: Reason and Dogma
Review: This is a rather different book that will take a fair amount of effort on the part of the reader to understand and enjoy, but I think the effort is worth it. This is nominally a murder mystery at an isolated abbey set in the early 14th century, but there are several layers to this that will lead the reader down the course of actual history, into the dark sea of the minutia of Catholic dogma, follow the deep valleys of both base and ennobling human emotions, and into the rift of the meaning and purpose of language. The story is narrated by Adso, an apprentice monk to our star detective William of Baskerville, who has been obviously modeled on Sherlock Holmes. This narration provides a level of indirection, a distancing from the direct events, as it is supposedly being written by a very old Adso, long after the fact. It also allows Adso to make editorial comments along the way about his own feelings, the events and people around him, and the various Catholic arguments and historical personages and positions. In some cases this device works very well, providing a platform where the mind-set of the times can be clearly presented. At other points, it is a detriment, as you can't get up close to all the characters and see their inner motivations. And because of this, the murder mystery seems a little shallow, the reader can't get caught up in trying to figure out who is responsible for all the murders, at least not until very late in the book, as the reader has little of the motivation base to make proper guesses. But the mystery is almost secondary to the presentation of the religious points of view of the time that rocked the Catholic church to its foundations, points of view that are slowly revealed in the personal histories of the monks of the abbey alongside the 'official' positions of the papal and factional representatives. Here the book shines, showing not only the dogmatic points, but their (often ironic) effects on both high and low people. And while these religious points may seem somewhat minor to the reader at first glance, something like the debate about 'angels on a pin', after a while it will become apparent that these points really do have relevance to all people of any religious persuasion. At the denouement, the dogmatic persuasions of the various monks folds back into the reasons behind the murders, and here we finally get enough of individual character to make the reader care about both the situation and the people involved. The final arguments between William and the perpetrator are an excellent discourse on the right of man to know and investigate all things versus the point of view of 'There are some things only God should know', with another level of meaning behind the arguments on language symbols and their effect on human reasoning. Stylistically, this work is occasionally brilliant, especially in some of the descriptions of various religious artifacts and buildings, sharply different from the way things would normally be described by the average modern person, and provides a very effective setting of mood and mind-set while reading. There are some long passages in Latin, some of which are important to the story thread, and not all are translated, paraphrased, or meaning derivable from context, which forced me to try and puzzle out some of this from knowledge of word roots, as I don't read Latin. In this area I think it would have helped if there had been at least a foot-noted translation made available. Overall, a many-layered book with points of power and brilliance, a little weak in characterization and mystery action, but well worth the time and trouble to read, understand, and enjoy.
Rating: 
Summary: REALLY SO MUCH LATIN?
Review: Hello! I read the reviews about this book and I noticed that many people are complaining with the fact that this book is full of Latin sentences.
I am native Italian and I read this book in its original Italian version. I must say that Italian version of this book is not so full packed of Latin sentences as many of you say.
Even taking into account the fact that Latin is obviously easier to me than to an English-speaking person due to Neolatin origin of my mother tongue and the fact that I studied little Latin at university, I did not notice that large amount of paragraphs in Latin.
Anyway... absolutely one of the best books I've ever read (and I read a lot!) :-)
Rating:
Summary: needed latin translation
Review: There are already plenty of reviews of this amazing book so I just want to add my voice to those readers who missed out on a large part of the book because it was in latin. While the particular characters in that time and place no doubt did use Latin, whole pages and paragraphs of it become impossible for many of today's readers to follow. There ought to have been more translation, especially in a mystery where the facts are important, and given the underlying themes of the book. Readers shouldn't have to buy a guide that costs more than the original book to understand what is being said. This is my one criticism. I found the book fascinating, learned a great deal and had trouble putting it down. I have no trouble giving it 5 stars, latin or not.
Rating: 
Summary: Got Latin?
Review: I bought this book after seeing the movie of the same name starring Sean Connery, with the view that the book had to be better than the movie. It wasn't. While admittedly a fascinating story, the book was saturated with dialog between Brother William of Baskerville and his pupil Adso of Melk, which made the reader feel as if he was intruding in a personal conversation. Additionally, there was entirely too much Latin used in the book. If the Latin were confined to an isolated phrase here and there, fine, but I found myself having to skip entire paragraphs, because they were written in Latin. This made the book very difficult to read, and although I knew the premise of the book from having seen the movie, very difficult to enjoy as fully as I'd hoped. It would be a much better book if footnotes translating the Latin had been included, but it was a fascinating story nevertheless.
Rating:
Summary: Must read more than once
Review: I first learned of THE NAME OF THE ROSE while taking a break from writing my dissertation -- sometime prior to 1991. I stopped to watch the morning news where the author, Umberto Eco, was being interviewed because his book, THE NAME OF THE ROSE, was just published. I took pause because Eco was an Italian Sociologist. So am I! I watched with great interest and learned that Eco employed sociological insights and historical scholarship in the development of a highly praised and highly complex story. I became very curious and made a mental note to read it after I completed my Ph.D. I did. In fact, I read it during the mid 90's and several times after that. There are few novels that must be read more than once. THE NAME OF THE ROSE is one of them. The plot is not complex. However, the dialog and symbols are. Thus, if one doesn't have a handle on church history prior to the protestant reformation and sociological theory, one will strain to comprehend much of the story. Even if one has an academic background in these various areas, one will need to read it closely. In addition, the novel was translated from Italian. I suspect many important ideas were lost in the translation. This is not your basic detective story - although it has most of the elements of a good detective novel. It is artfully done with wonderful descriptions. This is a novel of process not of outcome. It is a story of intrigue, mystery, and debauchery with a 13th century monastery as the backdrop. I've enjoyed this story EVERY time I read it.
Rating:
Summary: Perfect Mix of AC Doyle and Thomas Mann !!
Review: Anyone reading this somewhat difficult book will probably feel their head and mind expanding, no "drugs" required.Signor Ecco's magic carpet delivers you staight to a 14th century Catholic monastary. His Holmesian investigating skills soon are called upon as he and his youthful assistant (almost like Batman and Robin)trackdown the perpetrator of some gruesome ungodly murders. Along the way, you'll learn everything and more about religious schisms of the time, herbal good health concoctions of the time, the architecture of monasteries, and the bureaucracy of same. Just an amazing read!! Perfect for a long wintry,snowy,weekend!!
Rating:
Summary: When else did you wish you knew Latin?
Review: AN Excellent read! Although not the smoothest. For someone of Medium intelligence, like myself, this is a great book. It has all the stuff that a great mystery has, the kind of stimulating suspense that keeps the pages turning. But it also contains more than enough new information, the kind that makes you wish you lived next store to a library. I couldn't put it down, even when I was lost in the Latin that appears frequently or in the midst of a reccolection of the history of the Roman Catholic Church. Challenge yourself. You'll be happy you did.
Rating:
Summary: Last Page
Review: "Stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus" literally means "the rose of yesteryear exists in name, we hold naked names."
Rating:
Summary: Astounding Book!
Review: This was the very first book of Umberto Eco that I read, and I was very delighted by it. It has a very suspencefull plot that is not unraveled until the very end, when the truth is finaly revealed. This story is very much like a Sherlock Holmes story of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. It is set in an Italian Monestery in the 12th century AD, and is about Brother William and his apprentice Adso. They try to uncover the secret of the seven grotesque deaths of their fellow monks. Throughout the book, there are several realistic for the time debates between the monks about faith, Christ, and general semiotics. The only unenjoyable part was the amount of untranslated Latin. Of course the book can be read without looking at the Latin, but it makes one curious of what it really means. I felt that this book was very informative of the time period, but most of all I liked the fact that it was very gripping and suspencefull. I could not put it down when I was reading because the plot became so entangled and new events kept complicating matters. I think that this book is definetly a must-read if you enjoy such genra books (mystery, historical fiction, etc.)
Rating:
Summary: elementary, my dear Eco
Review: With large chunks of text in Latin and numerous discussions of 14th century religious controversies and political squabbles, Umberto
Eco's Name of the Rose appears, at first glance, to be one of the more unlikely bestsellers of all time. But if you want to understand the
real key to its success, you need look no further than the structure of the story and the name of the protagonist, William of Baskerville.
Though Eco claims that while he was writing the book he actually referred to William as William of Ockham, it seems implausible that
he did not realize all along that he was simply transplanting Sherlock Holmes to a medieval monastery. After all, he even gave William
an overly innocent sidekick and awestruck narrator, in the form of Adso of Melk, an old man now who relates the series of events he
witnessed back in 1327. The story then proceeds like the best of the Sherlock Holmes imitations (sort of a medieval Seven Percent Solution) and adds in
elements of the gothic thriller. Combine these sure fire formulas with a sufficiently intellectual patina to make us feel like we're reading
real "literature" and you've got an odds on recipe for a hit. There are quite probably a number of other levels on which the book can be
read and Mr. Eco is assuredly trying to accomplish other things, but the fact remains, it works quite well as a garden variety mystery,
and that's how almost all of its readers have likely understood it. GRADE : B+ N. B. I recently found a slender volume by Mr. Eco entitled Postscript to the Name of the Rose (1983) and picked it up (for $1) on the
assumption that within its pages he might offer some explanation as to his purposes in the book. However, the theories he does expound
are so absurd or obtuse--hard to tell which--that I now assume that it is merely a hoax. His failure to even acknowledge his debt to Sir
Arthur Conan Doyle renders everything else he has to say more than somewhat suspect. Perhaps the point of the novel really is as simple as he says early on in this postscript : I felt like poisoning a monk. Mindful of at least the possibility that he's being serious in this admission and of the fact that the novel concerns a series of characters
who are killed by their own literary curiosity perhaps it is best that we delve no further.
| 
