Paperback, 313 pages
English language
Published Oct. 29, 1976 by Bantam.
Highly unusual After the Holocaust novel. In the far future, 20th century texts are preserved in a monastery, as "sacred books". The monks preserve for centuries what little science there is, and have saved the science texts and blueprints from destruction many times, also making beautifully illuminated copies. As the story opens to a world run on a basically fuedal lines, science is again becoming fashionable, as a hobby of rich men, at perhaps 18th or early 19th century level of comprehesion. A local lord, interested in science, comes to the monastery. What happens after that is an exquisitely told tale, stunning and extremely moving, totally different from any other After the Holocaust story
So that is what they've been talking about all these years. Truly a great example, one of the earliest, of the post-apocalypse genre.
I was prepared to give it five stars before I read the last section. Add a star if you're Catholic or understand the parts in Latin.
Excellent book. Seeing that it's more than 50 years since this book came out (during the height of the cold war), and we still haven't annihilated ourselves, maybe there's hope for us yet!
The first two thirds are interesting; the final, unfortunate. Starts strong but ends stumbling, preachy and unfocused. Very much written in 1961, before Vatican II.
The best nuclear apocalypse book - no reservations recommendation. Best in its genre, and a great book regardless.
Dark and depressing, but oh, so good.
"Men must fumble awhile with error to separate it from truth..." – assuming they ever find the truth. And when they do, does it matter? Truth is only as good as the man who discovers it....
This is a book that I would have absolutely loved as a high school student. I wished I were a high school student while I was reading it. Digesting it in huge chunks at a time. Hanging out in the study hall area before school, debating and quoting and dissecting with four or five other nerds who were reading it simultaneously. (That's how I've read most of the science fiction that I've really loved in my life. It's the best way to do it.)
The problem with classic science fiction is that science fiction is a genre that eats it own and constantly regenerates ideas. So was Neal Stephenson's [b:Anathem|2845024|Anathem|Neal Stephenson|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1224107150s/2845024.jpg|6163095] a complete homage? Yes, in many important ways. And certainly, it was influenced by Canticle, which proceeded it by 30+ years. But I read Anathem first, so Canticle comes off looking the derivative one. I feel bad, because I …
This is a book that I would have absolutely loved as a high school student. I wished I were a high school student while I was reading it. Digesting it in huge chunks at a time. Hanging out in the study hall area before school, debating and quoting and dissecting with four or five other nerds who were reading it simultaneously. (That's how I've read most of the science fiction that I've really loved in my life. It's the best way to do it.)
The problem with classic science fiction is that science fiction is a genre that eats it own and constantly regenerates ideas. So was Neal Stephenson's [b:Anathem|2845024|Anathem|Neal Stephenson|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1224107150s/2845024.jpg|6163095] a complete homage? Yes, in many important ways. And certainly, it was influenced by Canticle, which proceeded it by 30+ years. But I read Anathem first, so Canticle comes off looking the derivative one. I feel bad, because I know it's historically inaccurate, but I'm just kind of over post-apocalyptic-humanity-is-doomed-to-repeat-its-own-mistakes-and-perpetually-destroy-itself.
There were a few tropes I loved - most notably the dilemma of is a species technologically generated by humans to replicate humans less than human? However, that was really only considered for a sentence or two.
I really loved this book. I would have given it 5 stars but I was a little disappointed with the end. Without giving anything away, I felt like it strayed from its narrative. However I would still recommend this book to anyone. I especially liked the preface included in the copy I received.
Monks preserving scientific knowledge after a nuclear holocaust. Feels a bit dated now, like most SF from the 50's and 60's, especially the idea that humanity is doomed to a repeating cycle of nuclear near-annihilation. I'm skeptical that several thousand years after a nuclear war there would still be a recognizable Catholic Church that appears to have changed less than the actual Church has over the last couple thousand years. Nitpicks aside, it's an interesting read, though it's definitely on the soft side of the SF scale. The last of the three chapters is my favorite (semi-spoilery). With the destruction of civilization by nuclear war again imminent, Miller focuses the story on a bitter dispute between the Abbot and a doctor working with relief crews over the assisted suicide of victims of the first strike. he does a good job drawing the reader into the conflict, even though it doesn't …
Monks preserving scientific knowledge after a nuclear holocaust. Feels a bit dated now, like most SF from the 50's and 60's, especially the idea that humanity is doomed to a repeating cycle of nuclear near-annihilation. I'm skeptical that several thousand years after a nuclear war there would still be a recognizable Catholic Church that appears to have changed less than the actual Church has over the last couple thousand years. Nitpicks aside, it's an interesting read, though it's definitely on the soft side of the SF scale. The last of the three chapters is my favorite (semi-spoilery). With the destruction of civilization by nuclear war again imminent, Miller focuses the story on a bitter dispute between the Abbot and a doctor working with relief crews over the assisted suicide of victims of the first strike. he does a good job drawing the reader into the conflict, even though it doesn't matter in the least, since everyone will be dead in a few days.
Another book I was reading back during my high school teaching days. At times I wonder now, given the heavy workload I faced, how I managed to read for fun.
Back then, it was my first time reading this book. Here is what I wrote back then:
>>The Church (Catholic) is one of the few surviving institutions, and they assume the task of preserving knowledge. I believe that the parallels to the monastic movement after the fall of the Roman Empire and the Dark Ages are apparent and intentional. Overall, the novel is a very interesting piece of writing.<<
When I actually finished it, I remarked on the tight ending, which I won't spoil for others. But there is a question the book asks, I thought at the time, which is:
>>whether we as a human race can overcome nature or tendency, to destroy ourselves. Maybe some of us out …
Another book I was reading back during my high school teaching days. At times I wonder now, given the heavy workload I faced, how I managed to read for fun.
Back then, it was my first time reading this book. Here is what I wrote back then:
>>The Church (Catholic) is one of the few surviving institutions, and they assume the task of preserving knowledge. I believe that the parallels to the monastic movement after the fall of the Roman Empire and the Dark Ages are apparent and intentional. Overall, the novel is a very interesting piece of writing.<<
When I actually finished it, I remarked on the tight ending, which I won't spoil for others. But there is a question the book asks, I thought at the time, which is:
>>whether we as a human race can overcome nature or tendency, to destroy ourselves. Maybe some of us out in the stars would be able to as long as no new tyrants rose to life. Who knows?I would like to think that we can solve our problems. The real problem is a sincere desire to solve everything else.<<
I have had the chance to reread it since then, and I have grown to appreciate it more. However, I am now a bit more cynical as well. Definitely a classic.
