Penitenziagite !

I just finished my 3rd reading of Umberto Eco's novel The Name of the Rose.
This time it took me all of 20 days to get through this tome.
Just 1 day short of the loan period from the National Library.
It was one of the  most difficult  book I have ever read, but I loved every passage of it.

 I was introduced to this novel by a franciscan friar, Fr Alban, back in early 1990s, but in truth, I gave up half way through the book because it was too difficult to comprehend. My first attempt ended up in utter failure.

It was not till almost 8 years later that I managed to read through the entire book. By this time,  a movie starring Sean Connery had been  made, based loosely on this book. I watched the movie and was totally enamored by it and that made me resolve to re-read the book.

I remembered that it was still difficult to digest but at least now I understood the gist of the novel which helped to move the pages along.

The book is vastly different but superior to the movie. 

While the movie is an excellent whodunit, it really does not do justice to the book. I'll elaborate on this a little further down after I tell you of the novel.

The 2nd time I re-read the book I skimmed over a lot of difficult passages. Perhaps I had actually wanted to make a comparison between the movie and the actual novel. But I did remember that the novel was so enthralling that from then on I kept it listed as my all time favorite.

Now, after 20 years from my initial attempt, I again decided to re-read this great book but at a slower pace to get a deeper insight and to grasp the finer nuances of Eco's writing.  

While the movie portrays a medieval murder mystery, the focus of the book is not on the murders but more of the discourses of philosophy, logic, church practices during the middle ages,  politics of the Holy Roman Empire, the dreaded working of the Holy Inquisition and the great debate about the poverty of Christ.

There are beautiful discussions of literature and books, and how the medieval monks so lovingly sought to keep alive knowledge through books. These discourses between the protagonist of the novel, Bro William, and the other characters are intertwined with the investigation of the murders at the abbey.
At the end, when the monastery burned, Eco's writing keeps you spellbound with pages and pages just about the great fire. That's how good a book it is!

The novel is sprinkled generously throughout with extremely difficult words that needs explanation.

Words like enthymeme, palimsests, semiotics, syllogism, aedificium.
Also many phrases are in Latin, the language of the church in the middle ages. Whew!

My 3rd reading of this book now comes with hindsight, having over the years since read more and knowing better the history of the church, the middle ages, of popes and anti-popes, and a bit of the history of the franciscans. (I worked in a franciscan parish church as a full time administrator years back)

I would recommend this book to you if you are somewhat interested in the history of the middle ages, literature or debates about religious practices. If not, it's better to watch the movie.

The movie itself is excellent, but it departs a lot from the book and take a very liberal re-telling of the novel.
In fact, the producers at the beginning disclaim this disconnect by calling the movie "A Palimpsest of Umberto Eco's Novel"

The main thrust of the movie is about the murders that occur at a monastery, where a debate between the Pope's representatives and the Franciscan friars over the poverty of the church was about to take place.
The protagonist, Bro William of Baskerville, attempts to solve the mysterious murders.
Being erudite but striving to keep his humility as a friar, Bro William gets entangled with the superstitious Inquisitor Bernardo Gui (a real person in history).

I shall not spoil your interest by telling you the story but it may suffice to know that the book ends completely different from the movie.

If you wish to watch the movie, it's actually available on Youtube, but I can't guarantee when it will be pulled for copyright reasons. There are 2 copies of the book at the Clementi branch of the National Library.

You can follow the movie via the Youtube link above.

Eternal rest

I was at the Saturday Novena at St Alphonsus Church at Thomson Road yesterday. Fr Simon Pereira preached at the service. He had just returned from Malaysia where he celebrated the Feast of St Anne.

His homily was about grandparents and how they always seemed to be the oasis of calm, support and peace for the grandchildren, as opposed to parents who, in comparison, are usually made out to be the boogeyman. His homily in part was due to the fact that St Anne was the mother of Mary, vis-a-vis, the grandmother of Jesus.

His words brought forth memories of my own grandparents, especially now being less than a week ago that I attended to the re-interring of my grandparents remains.

My maternal grandmother, Mary Lee, was exhumed from CCK cemetery, while my grandfather, Louis Goh, together with an uncle Sylvester  who passed even before I was born, were exhumed from St Joseph Church cemetery. They were re-interred at the Franciscan Columbarium at my parish Church of St Mary of the Angels on 4the August 2010.

The Franciscan Columbarium is one of the best designed I've seen anywhere. The atmosphere here is one of calm and serenity throughout. I have already reserved a niche for myself and my wife. This was part of the fundraising effort towards the re-construction of St Mary. Sounds a bit morbid, but here in a typically Singaporean manner, it's planning for the future as well and doing your part for society.

When my time comes, I'll be at St Anthony #6022. My grandparents are just a room away at St Bonaventure #4132.

Good Friday 2010, April 2nd.

          I was in church this morning for Good Friday service. The church was packed, with an additional 1000 seats outside on the piazza, and this was only 1 of 4 services scheduled for the day.

          As usual, the theme for almost every Good Friday always revolve around The Passion of the Christ. Friar John Paul preached on the symbolism of the cross. Over the years, I have heard many variations on this theme,  but of all the sermons that I can remember, only one has been vividly etched deep into my brain.

Back in 1987, there was a visiting missioner, Franciscan Friar Desmond Lean ofm, who was invited to preach at the Good Friday service. To paraphrase his sermon this was what he preached...

"When I look at the cross, 3 things come to my mind," then he told a story of his little niece Sarah. "Sarah, do you love your uncle Des? how much do you love uncle Des? Do you love me this much?" making a gap with his index finger and thumb.  Sarah shook her head.
"Do you love me this much?" making a space between his two palms about the size of a breadbox. Sarah shook her head again.  "then how much do you love your uncle Des?"
Sarah said, "I love you this muchhh!" and spread her arms outstretched.

I love you this muchhh!

"The second thing I see when I look at the cross is that it is a crossroad where the directions converge onto one  point. And like all things in life, Christ should be where all our directions lead to.

The third thing I see when I look at the crucifix is that it is on the back. The cross is something we bear, a burden that can be heavy at times but it is always on our backs. It is something we carry all our life."

Friar Des Lean's words struck a chord right within me at that time and has remained with me all these years. I remember Fr Des Lean.  (extract courtesy of Bro George Boggs ofm)

(