marrjoram t1_j2aopuy wrote
I also found the book to be very humorous at times, in a satirical or sarcastic way, but I think the portrayal of Christianity is supposed to be very positive. I read it a long time ago, so I might misremember it, but the Catholic Church is what basically keeps all human knowledge from disappearing and is portrayed as its keepsake* (edit: I mean a keeper) of sorts, for next generations who will follow and will be able to utilise it. Also, and what frustrated me a lot reading the book, at the very end you get the pov of a priest (correct me, if I remember wrong), who observes people around him dying and suffering horribly painful, uncurable wounds but is very much against helping them, or even allowing them stopping their suffering, seeing their wish to end their lives as a great sin and basically enforcing the view that suffering in itself is necessary for salvation. This priest character read a lot like an author self-insert, at least to me it sounded like we were supposed to agree with his point of view. So while I enjoyed the book very much, and didn't mind the positive portrayal of the Church in the rest of the book, the end soured it a bit for me.
Redjay12 OP t1_j2aow9e wrote
very interesting - I didn’t think we were supposed to be on that priests side, especially as he made himself suffer needlessly at the end im order to suffer as much as she (the woman he had prevented from suicide) had suffered
marrjoram t1_j2askyf wrote
I'm not sure if I interpreted it right, and it's been some time, but to me the suffering for the sake of it seemed like the point, like we were meant to admire the path the priest chose, and I remember the frustration and strong disagreement while reading it. But I'm also an atheist (raised Catholic) who is pretty anti-Church, so it might have been just my opinions skewing my interpretation. I might have to go back and re-read it sometime :)
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments