A Canticle for Leibowitz?

Nightspore

From Inner Space
Joined
Jul 3, 2013
Messages
123
'A Canticle for Leibowitz' by Walter M. Miller, Jr hasn't been out of print since it was first published in 1960. It won the 1961 Hugo Award. Its post apocalyptic tale spanning thousands of years has been considered a work of genius by many critics.

Has anyone read it?
 
yep.. very much a vehicle of its times..
tis on the required list for a lot of highschools and colleges so it will probably never be out of print. Used to be one of the antiestabishmentarianism tomes whose message was about the spin placed upon historical events by the victors. about how the real message can be lost by the control systems of the status quo.
very nice read and never really dated.
 
yep.. very much a vehicle of its times..
tis on the required list for a lot of highschools and colleges so it will probably never be out of print. Used to be one of the antiestabishmentarianism tomes whose message was about the spin placed upon historical events by the victors. about how the real message can be lost by the control systems of the status quo.
very nice read and never really dated.

I am glad to see it on required school/college reading lists. That seems very enlightened. I don't ever remember seeing it on any reading lists in British syllabuses. I must say that I believe it to be a very well written novel & it's a shame that Miller didn't write much more. I believe he had his own problems though. The only thing that seems to stick out as a bit of an aberration in the work now is the running black humour gag of the 'wandering Jew'.
 
One of the few classic SF novels that is also fairly familiar to the mainstream. A deeply human story which balances a serious theme with a playful style.

Indeed, I believe that the balance between pathos & playful humour is one of the main contributions to its success & popularity.
 
To me the "Canticle for Liebowitz" story is both memorable and frustrating. To say that it was ahead of its time is likely true. But it was most definitely a book of its time as well. It was written during the zenith of the Cold War. Like many people, it believed that humanity was destined to destroy itself by nuclear war.

What I found agonizing was its view of religion. It took the idea of religious people seriously, and on the whole they were treated as complex and sometimes admirable people. The holy book was a sham; and the only truly supernatural character is a racist inside joke. As a Parson I have to view this book as one of the most subtle and most successful attacks on religion ever written.
 
As a Parson I have to view this book as one of the most subtle and most successful attacks on religion ever written.

Sorry, Parson. That's what I like most about it.

Next stop "Name of the Rose" -- Umberto Eco


Then, to really take a leap: "Deus Irae" -- PKD and Zelazney

And, from the Islamic side of the fence... don't miss "Osama the Gun" Norman Spinrad.
 
Last edited:
To me the "Canticle for Liebowitz" story is both memorable and frustrating. To say that it was ahead of its time is likely true. But it was most definitely a book of its time as well. It was written during the zenith of the Cold War. Like many people, it believed that humanity was destined to destroy itself by nuclear war.

What I found agonizing was its view of religion. It took the idea of religious people seriously, and on the whole they were treated as complex and sometimes admirable people. The holy book was a sham; and the only truly supernatural character is a racist inside joke. As a Parson I have to view this book as one of the most subtle and most successful attacks on religion ever written.

I'm not particularly religious, but from what I can recall of the novel, it seemed more sympathetic to religion than antagonistic to me. Perhaps 'sympathetic' isn't the right adjective. It was empathetic perhaps?
 
Sorry, Parson. That's what I like most about it.

Next stop "Name of the Rose" -- Umberto Eco


Then, to really take a leap: "Deus Irae" -- PKD and Zelazney

And, from the Islamic side of the fence... don't miss "Osama the Gun" Norman Spinrad.

Speaking of Eco, Foucault's Pendulum is probably in my top ten novels of all time.
 
Yes, I have read it. It's a good book, although I doubt it will ever be considered a great classic like the first one. It seems to approach the theme of religion from a different viewpoint than the first one. (Having read all the fiction by Miller I could find, while my better half was researching a book on him, and having received letters from the reclusive author during this process, I can say that Miller's opinions on religion, and everything else, were subtle, complicated, and subject to change at any time.) Like the seemingly genuine miracles that occur in the first book (at least in my reading of the text), the second one seems to involve genuine manifestations of a tripartate Goddess which may be familiar to modern neo-Pagans.
 
Yes, I have read it. It's a good book, although I doubt it will ever be considered a great classic like the first one. It seems to approach the theme of religion from a different viewpoint than the first one. (Having read all the fiction by Miller I could find, while my better half was researching a book on him, and having received letters from the reclusive author during this process, I can say that Miller's opinions on religion, and everything else, were subtle, complicated, and subject to change at any time.) Like the seemingly genuine miracles that occur in the first book (at least in my reading of the text), the second one seems to involve genuine manifestations of a tripartate Goddess which may be familiar to modern neo-Pagans.

OK, thanks for the insight. I'll probably get around to reading it one day.
 
Has anyone read the sequel: Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman? I haven't, I am just curious what anyone thinks about it.

Wikipedia entry: Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman

A Canticle for Leibowitz is was one of the books I remember with great fondness from reading them as a kid - and possibly for the same reasons as Alex, The G and T* (Sorry, Parson).

I was really excited to find the sequel (Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman) a few years ago, tried to read it and soon gave up in disgust. I thought it was bloody awful.




*Incidentally, is that short for 'Great and Terrible' or 'Gin and Tonic'?
 
I was really excited to find the sequel (Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman) a few years ago, tried to read it and soon gave up in disgust. I thought it was bloody awful.

Is it really that bad? Was it anything about the way it was written, prose style, plot etc?
 
Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman is, in my view, a seriously flawed book with portions which are brilliant, and others which are nigh unreadable. However, it does tend to polarize people, so if I were you, I'd give it a try, as you may end up in the camp which supports the novel.

And Parson and I have discussed this elsewhere at length, but it is unlikely that Miller (at least at this point in his life) was intending any sort of attack on religion; nor is Benjamin (the Wandering Jew) what one could call "a racist inside joke"; this is a figure which has appeared throughout literature since the Middle Ages, both for literal and metaphoric purposes; and he is a very complex character (and symbol) here. To belittle either the character or his role with such a phrase is, in my view, to seriously miss the point. As has been said, a complex and subtle book of many layers, one well worth multiple readings and ponderings.

(Incidentally, I would demur somewhat about it having a "playful style", at least as a whole. Certainly, the first book ("Fiat Homo") has much of that, though there are some rather grim moments even there. The second ("Fiat Lux") begins to blend the humorous tone with a more sober one, as the theme, originally showing some hope of light, begins to darken (making the title of this section both ambiguous and ironic). The third ("Fiat Voluntas Tua"), though having its lighter moments, is predominantly dark and grim, yet offers its own kind of "light" or hope in the figure of Mrs. Grales' twin, a figure of purity and innocence which also -- again complexly -- stands for the disfigurement of Man due to the fall (physical deformity, though the twin is, as noted, purity itself; even, it is hinted, the Second Coming; and also the fallen yet oddly innocent character of Mrs. Grales).

It is interesting that, as an atheist, I am so fond of this novel because it treats both its themes and its characters with such respect and compassion; which is something I found rather lacking in the later novel (which actually is a "prequel" to Canticle, by the way).
 
Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman is, in my view, a seriously flawed book with portions which are brilliant, and others which are nigh unreadable. However, it does tend to polarize people, so if I were you, I'd give it a try, as you may end up in the camp which supports the novel.

I will get around to reading it some day hopefully.

... nor is Benjamin (the Wandering Jew) what one could call "a racist inside joke"; this is a figure which has appeared throughout literature since the Middle Ages, both for literal and metaphoric purposes; and he is a very complex character (and symbol) here.

I think that the character of Benjamin has been one of the points of contention with those who have disliked the novel as a whole. I certainly don't think that it was intentionally 'racist' either.

(Incidentally, I would demur somewhat about it having a "playful style", at least as a whole. Certainly, the first book ("Fiat Homo") has much of that, though there are some rather grim moments even there. The second ("Fiat Lux") begins to blend the humorous tone with a more sober one, as the theme, originally showing some hope of light, begins to darken (making the title of this section both ambiguous and ironic).

It has been a number of years since I read the novel, & I tend to agree with you, but I was probably thinking more of the first section (Fiat Homo) in recollection. It does have its grim moments later on.


It is interesting that, as an atheist, I am so fond of this novel because it treats both its themes and its characters with such respect and compassion; which is something I found rather lacking in the later novel (which actually is a "prequel" to Canticle, by the way).

I do know that the second novel takes place at some time before many of the events of the original novel.

Anyway, thanks for your interesting & erudite insight into the novels.
 
Tell you the truth I can't remember what it was in particular (if there was any one thing in particular) that put me off - I just have an memory impression of this great dense indigestible lump of verbiage.

Yeah, Jane Austin does that for me. ;)
 

Similar threads


Back
Top