What do you think?
Rate this book
Sono Dio
Stufo di andarsene a spasso per il cosmo, Dio si ferma a contemplare l’umanità, tra le sue creazioni forse quella meno riuscita, così brutale, inconsapevole e priva di prospettive. Ma quandoil Suo sguardo si posa su una ragazza – alta, intelligente, non bellissima, va detto – accade qualcosa di imprevedibile: Dio si immerge nel mare oscuro dei sentimenti, così intensi da togliereil fiato e soprattutto la ragione. In unaparola: si innamora.Peccato che Lei, l’amata, sia un’addetta alla fecondazione bovina e una fanatica genetista, nonché una ragazza atea e di facili costumi.E peccato che per Lui l’amore sia il catastroficopreludio a una valanga di emozioni: stupore, gelosia, rabbia, invidia.In un tempo sospeso tra passato, presente e futuro, Sono Dio di Giacomo Sartori fa sorridere con intelligenza e riflettere con ironia sul destino dell’umanità e sulle conseguenze dell’amore.Questo libro è per chi ama correre in moto nelle notti viola, per chi si emoziona quando Truman si incaglia con la barca ai confini del suo cielo e della sua terra, per chi cerca il profumo delle stelle e per chi è innamorato ma si sente un ranocchio che ha paura di cadere nel buco nero di Sagittarius A*.
224 pages, Paperback
First published May 26, 2016
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 132 reviews
May 27, 2019
The narrator, God, is insufferable in this novel. Terribly unlikable. Actually, none of the characters are likeable, except maybe Daphne. All the men are described as pervs.
I got through it. There's a lot of stuff in here about environmentalism and its a little preachy and tedious.
I kept reading, thinking "Is this actually a good book and I just don't get it?" But this quasi-love story between God and a flawed human girl didn't cut it for me. And what's with God being so homophobic anyway?
I got through it. There's a lot of stuff in here about environmentalism and its a little preachy and tedious.
I kept reading, thinking "Is this actually a good book and I just don't get it?" But this quasi-love story between God and a flawed human girl didn't cut it for me. And what's with God being so homophobic anyway?
June 6, 2019
This is not so much a novel as a tone of voice.
Sartori's God is a veteran humblebragger, a ridiculous romantic, a terrible liar, vengeful but without his heart in it, and benevolent despite himself. He's omnipotent, but he talks about it like he's trying to impress you at a bar. He's contemptuous of humans, but he displays pretty much every single one of our tendencies. He's in love, but he's trying to play it cool, but he's unbelievably bad at playing it cool - not a skill an all-powerful being gets to practice much, you imagine.
The plot here is not really relevant. I did feel invested in Daphne (the girl that God's got a crush on), but that was nothing compared to watching God twist and contort himself into various postures of denial, self-deception, giddiness, shame, and finally acceptance.
A lot of credit has to go to the translator, Frederika Randall, for getting this tone to shine through.
Sartori's God is a veteran humblebragger, a ridiculous romantic, a terrible liar, vengeful but without his heart in it, and benevolent despite himself. He's omnipotent, but he talks about it like he's trying to impress you at a bar. He's contemptuous of humans, but he displays pretty much every single one of our tendencies. He's in love, but he's trying to play it cool, but he's unbelievably bad at playing it cool - not a skill an all-powerful being gets to practice much, you imagine.
The plot here is not really relevant. I did feel invested in Daphne (the girl that God's got a crush on), but that was nothing compared to watching God twist and contort himself into various postures of denial, self-deception, giddiness, shame, and finally acceptance.
A lot of credit has to go to the translator, Frederika Randall, for getting this tone to shine through.
January 26, 2020
I didn't care for this. My problem with it, I think, is the character of God. He isn't panoramic enough. I remember an essay by Arthur Krystal in which he wrote the Christian God is more like the mayor of earth than lord of the cosmos. So is Santori's. For all His grand descriptions of the cosmos, the supernovas, colliding galaxies, black holes, and all the rest, He seems too preoccupied with earth which, we know, is insignificant in the scheme of things, not even a mote in God's eye.
We've all read stories in which gods feature as characters, or else are represented by humans. What makes them interesting is how they intersect with accepted human morality. The prime moral concern of Santori's God seems to be with evil, the presence of which He blames man and the reason He dislikes us as a species. Even in this novel where atheism is a theme, He strikes me as being unconcerned by faith Still, He doesn't interfere in things, has left earth alone to develop as it will. This is a God without purpose. The ironic tone in which Sartori has God deliver His monologue, however, lacks the seriousness we'd assign to evil. He's a whimsical God. Even when we become aware of what's on His mind--His upstart Son, the mechanics of creation--they're what we imagine He thinks about because we created Him. Therefore He becomes cute because Sartori didn't make that imaginative leap into a character transcending our familiarity. In the end He's like you and me.
The conceit of the novel is that God has fallen in love with a mortal of earth. At least He keeps His distance, doesn't, for instance, turn Himself into a swan and force Himself on her like one of His peers. To me the emotional urge He feels for Daphne amounts to more of an obsession than love. He's particularly interested in her sex life and, because He doesn't physically approach her, is more voyeur than lover.
God's emptiness is a shame because I'm sure Sartori intended to create an interesting God. On p78 is the sentence best expressing what I felt while reading: "It's all very well being God, but it's one thing to turn out cheesy stuff even if it's perfectly technically sound; it's another to produce pieces that belong in the best art galleries." There's more cheese to Sartori's God than there is art.
We've all read stories in which gods feature as characters, or else are represented by humans. What makes them interesting is how they intersect with accepted human morality. The prime moral concern of Santori's God seems to be with evil, the presence of which He blames man and the reason He dislikes us as a species. Even in this novel where atheism is a theme, He strikes me as being unconcerned by faith Still, He doesn't interfere in things, has left earth alone to develop as it will. This is a God without purpose. The ironic tone in which Sartori has God deliver His monologue, however, lacks the seriousness we'd assign to evil. He's a whimsical God. Even when we become aware of what's on His mind--His upstart Son, the mechanics of creation--they're what we imagine He thinks about because we created Him. Therefore He becomes cute because Sartori didn't make that imaginative leap into a character transcending our familiarity. In the end He's like you and me.
The conceit of the novel is that God has fallen in love with a mortal of earth. At least He keeps His distance, doesn't, for instance, turn Himself into a swan and force Himself on her like one of His peers. To me the emotional urge He feels for Daphne amounts to more of an obsession than love. He's particularly interested in her sex life and, because He doesn't physically approach her, is more voyeur than lover.
God's emptiness is a shame because I'm sure Sartori intended to create an interesting God. On p78 is the sentence best expressing what I felt while reading: "It's all very well being God, but it's one thing to turn out cheesy stuff even if it's perfectly technically sound; it's another to produce pieces that belong in the best art galleries." There's more cheese to Sartori's God than there is art.
February 15, 2019
Giacomo Sartori's I Am God (translated from the Italian by Frederika Randall) skewers religion, science and love through observations from the Almighty himself. God is moved to "describe my existence... in clumsy human language" through diary entries.
God is obsessed with Daphne, a scientist who is also a promiscuous, cross-burning atheist. He tries to remain neutral as he watches her (although strange accidents happen to the attractive scientist interested in her). God finally admits to himself, "It's not clear my appreciation for her is one hundred percent divine."
God diverts his attention with visits to the outermost reaches of the cosmos. "Not even the divine eye... can ever have its fill of the infinite variety of shapes and unending metamorphoses, the ever-changing choreographies that give life to its farraginous complexity." But he returns, again, to humankind. "They bug me, that barbarous cult of technology of theirs and their contempt for things that matter; they enrage me... but I can't stop looking at them." Daphne, however, is unaware of divine interest. Her job and relationships with friends and lovers preoccupy her thoughts. When she finally confronts the reason for her hatred of the church, God--"fed up" with humans--says, "The time has come to extinguish them."
I Am God is compulsively readable, with passages so crisp and funny that readers will want to read them aloud. Sartori, an Italian scientist, has written a book that, beyond its philosophical wit, draws attention to hypocrisy in all forms.
-reviewed for Shelf Awareness 2/15/19
God is obsessed with Daphne, a scientist who is also a promiscuous, cross-burning atheist. He tries to remain neutral as he watches her (although strange accidents happen to the attractive scientist interested in her). God finally admits to himself, "It's not clear my appreciation for her is one hundred percent divine."
God diverts his attention with visits to the outermost reaches of the cosmos. "Not even the divine eye... can ever have its fill of the infinite variety of shapes and unending metamorphoses, the ever-changing choreographies that give life to its farraginous complexity." But he returns, again, to humankind. "They bug me, that barbarous cult of technology of theirs and their contempt for things that matter; they enrage me... but I can't stop looking at them." Daphne, however, is unaware of divine interest. Her job and relationships with friends and lovers preoccupy her thoughts. When she finally confronts the reason for her hatred of the church, God--"fed up" with humans--says, "The time has come to extinguish them."
I Am God is compulsively readable, with passages so crisp and funny that readers will want to read them aloud. Sartori, an Italian scientist, has written a book that, beyond its philosophical wit, draws attention to hypocrisy in all forms.
-reviewed for Shelf Awareness 2/15/19
February 15, 2022
Controversial, sarcastic and witty from start to finish.
This is not a narrative to simply accept but to discuss, analyze and allow yourself to have an open mind.
I don't think the goal is to agree with God, but rather to understand that entity that is the voice of comments that are not divine, not even a little bit.
A harassed God, somewhat tired of humanity and who, without a doubt, is not entirely pleasant.
This is not a narrative to simply accept but to discuss, analyze and allow yourself to have an open mind.
I don't think the goal is to agree with God, but rather to understand that entity that is the voice of comments that are not divine, not even a little bit.
A harassed God, somewhat tired of humanity and who, without a doubt, is not entirely pleasant.
November 4, 2019
1.5 stars.
Who knew God was such a crashing bore?
Who knew God was such a crashing bore?
February 6, 2026
God awful
June 3, 2016
Un bel giorno Dio decide di mettersi a scrivere così, come fosse un diario, annota pensieri e fatti; i pensiero sono i suoi, i fatti sono quelli che vede accadere guardando sulla Terra.
Frase dopo frase, Dio si scopre a volte solo, malinconico, vendicativo, prepotente e si innamora...sì, si innamora di una ragazza atea e pure bruttarella.
Cosa succede se Dio si innamora? Sarà sopraffatto, confuso, ansioso come succede agli uomini? Eserciterà la sua onnipotenza?
Ne esce una divinità spassosa e molto umana, addirittura a tratti 'atea' come se Dio fosse semplicemente ingegnere del Cosmo.
Un libro sull'Uomo e sull'umanità, sui limiti e gli errori che questa porta con sé; un romanzo divertente che, tra una risata e l'altra, lancia dure stilettate e nessuna manca il segno.
È Dio che creò l'Uomo a sua immagine o piuttosto l'Uomo che ha creato Dio simile in tutto a se stesso?
Sono Dio
Giacomo Sartori
Editore: NNeditore
Pag: 213
Voto:4/5
Frase dopo frase, Dio si scopre a volte solo, malinconico, vendicativo, prepotente e si innamora...sì, si innamora di una ragazza atea e pure bruttarella.
Cosa succede se Dio si innamora? Sarà sopraffatto, confuso, ansioso come succede agli uomini? Eserciterà la sua onnipotenza?
Ne esce una divinità spassosa e molto umana, addirittura a tratti 'atea' come se Dio fosse semplicemente ingegnere del Cosmo.
Un libro sull'Uomo e sull'umanità, sui limiti e gli errori che questa porta con sé; un romanzo divertente che, tra una risata e l'altra, lancia dure stilettate e nessuna manca il segno.
È Dio che creò l'Uomo a sua immagine o piuttosto l'Uomo che ha creato Dio simile in tutto a se stesso?
Sono Dio
Giacomo Sartori
Editore: NNeditore
Pag: 213
Voto:4/5
Read
March 3, 2020I agree with much of the reviews this book has received and also would like to note that before this book I had never thought the phrase “gum-colored gums” could be used as a description that many times.
November 23, 2021
I knew nothing about this book when I bought it. I was buying a small(ish) pile of books at The Grumpy Swimmer in Elwood when the bookseller noticed they were all translations and pulled out this brand new arrival and said it was very funny.
I took one look at the cover and....
(You know the rest).
God, who narrates the story, much like many an insufferable male, is a tad pompous and more than a little self-obsessed, plus very opinionated — but then, why wouldn't he be? He is after all #InsertCharacteristicsOfGod, e.g. omnipotent, all-seeing, etc etc. Unfortunately he is bored with his creation, and disappointed in humans, having a poor opinion of them in general, and feeling peeved about particular things that they have done. Indeed, when things become too difficult for him on Earth, he takes a break in the other galaxies, rather like a stress day off work. And there he gloats: Just look at all the gorgeous galaxies I've created! He savours that feeling you get contemplating something you've made with your own hands, the satisfaction of a job well done, of time well spent.
He compares his efforts with creation with that of contemporary artists...He created and created, nonstop, with no cigarette breaks, no union hours, and is proud of every single component:
His work (apart from humans, who would be a mistake, except that God doesn't make mistakes), belongs in the best art galleries. But...
He is irritated, for example, by the effrontery of Big Bang Theory. He wryly notes the pathetic spectacle of early man's efforts to barter their absurd sacrifices for help with their problems from every type of spirit apart from that of yours truly... but the scientific theory that he was not involved at all makes him cross.
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2021/11/23/i...
I took one look at the cover and....
(You know the rest).
God, who narrates the story, much like many an insufferable male, is a tad pompous and more than a little self-obsessed, plus very opinionated — but then, why wouldn't he be? He is after all #InsertCharacteristicsOfGod, e.g. omnipotent, all-seeing, etc etc. Unfortunately he is bored with his creation, and disappointed in humans, having a poor opinion of them in general, and feeling peeved about particular things that they have done. Indeed, when things become too difficult for him on Earth, he takes a break in the other galaxies, rather like a stress day off work. And there he gloats: Just look at all the gorgeous galaxies I've created! He savours that feeling you get contemplating something you've made with your own hands, the satisfaction of a job well done, of time well spent.
He compares his efforts with creation with that of contemporary artists...He created and created, nonstop, with no cigarette breaks, no union hours, and is proud of every single component:
Sleek panthers, enchanting palms, hieratic giraffes, proud plovers, gorgeous orchids, the softest, greenest moss, shiny ladybugs, adorable daisies.
His work (apart from humans, who would be a mistake, except that God doesn't make mistakes), belongs in the best art galleries. But...
Contemporary so-called artists display washing machine parts, driftwood, bodies that have been run through, scrap iron, photographs of genital organs and aged corpses, polystyrene chips, medicine bottles, naked women, even just their own excrement, and the public pretends to be mildly interested. In this age of screens and globalised idiocy, nobody seems to know how to hold a brush. (p.79)
He is irritated, for example, by the effrontery of Big Bang Theory. He wryly notes the pathetic spectacle of early man's efforts to barter their absurd sacrifices for help with their problems from every type of spirit apart from that of yours truly... but the scientific theory that he was not involved at all makes him cross.
An eternity went by before they realised that their blessed Earth is a mere speck in the Solar System, in turn a piddly little mite in the Milky Way, one negligible molecule in the vastness of the universe. Only my great patience kept me from taking serious umbrage. And to top it off, rather than finally recognising my merits, rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, (that boy of mine, the one reputed to be my boy at any rate, had a knack for catchy sayings), now they're spreading the rumour that the universe created itself. That it sprang forth from nothing, like a mushroom: Big Bang, and there's your rabbit, folks. (p.13)
To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2021/11/23/i...
August 8, 2019
I Am God by Giacomo Sartori.
Translated by Frederika Randall.
Review by Galen Weitkamp
It is said that God created everything: the Earth, the heavens, the lights in the sky, even space and time. But “created” isn’t really the right word for it. Creation is an action that takes place within time. One readily understands what it means to say that at one moment there was darkness and the next light. But what does it mean to say that at one moment there wasn’t time and the next moment there was? There is no language that can describe the “creation” of, or the “bringing into being” of time. Nevertheless, God is responsible for “the being” of what physicists today call spacetime. He is omnipresent within it; that is to say, He is everywhere at once and every when at once.
This being said, God clearly doesn’t experience time as we do. He is beyond the experience of time’s flow. He has no use for verbs; no use for language. No use for thinking - at least not in the temporal way you or I think by laying one predicate next to a subject and than another predicate next to another subject. Yet “I Am God” is a narrative by God written in Italian (strewn with Italian verbs) about a certain obsession He developed for a young Italian woman, a geneticist and atheist named Daphne.
As the narrative develops we see God becoming more and more confounded and tangled in the ungodly constrictions of human language. He complains,
“It’s language that reduced me to this state, it’s the agitating, incitement-to-riot effect of the written word and the smokescreen of uncontrolled feelings that words belch out...Every language contains all the folly that humans are capable of; language just spills it from their mouths.”
“If you never think,...you won’t have moods or feelings, and you can live blissfully and serenely for billions of years.”
Certainly God’s attempt to use use human language added to his befuddlement, but any reader can see that if He just hadn’t become so twitterpated with Daphne, He never would have bothered with language, thinking and all that other human stuff.
Translated by Frederika Randall.
Review by Galen Weitkamp
It is said that God created everything: the Earth, the heavens, the lights in the sky, even space and time. But “created” isn’t really the right word for it. Creation is an action that takes place within time. One readily understands what it means to say that at one moment there was darkness and the next light. But what does it mean to say that at one moment there wasn’t time and the next moment there was? There is no language that can describe the “creation” of, or the “bringing into being” of time. Nevertheless, God is responsible for “the being” of what physicists today call spacetime. He is omnipresent within it; that is to say, He is everywhere at once and every when at once.
This being said, God clearly doesn’t experience time as we do. He is beyond the experience of time’s flow. He has no use for verbs; no use for language. No use for thinking - at least not in the temporal way you or I think by laying one predicate next to a subject and than another predicate next to another subject. Yet “I Am God” is a narrative by God written in Italian (strewn with Italian verbs) about a certain obsession He developed for a young Italian woman, a geneticist and atheist named Daphne.
As the narrative develops we see God becoming more and more confounded and tangled in the ungodly constrictions of human language. He complains,
“It’s language that reduced me to this state, it’s the agitating, incitement-to-riot effect of the written word and the smokescreen of uncontrolled feelings that words belch out...Every language contains all the folly that humans are capable of; language just spills it from their mouths.”
“If you never think,...you won’t have moods or feelings, and you can live blissfully and serenely for billions of years.”
Certainly God’s attempt to use use human language added to his befuddlement, but any reader can see that if He just hadn’t become so twitterpated with Daphne, He never would have bothered with language, thinking and all that other human stuff.
June 14, 2019
This is quite a funny book. And quite an intellectual feat. And quite a charming delight. And quite complex. And a great story.
God slowly falls in love with a human woman and, fairly quickly, falls out of love with her. His predicament as "deity in love" is highlighted by his self-knowledge, his own pleasure at the infinite depth of an active universe, and by his paradoxical scorn for human kind which, unique in creation, thinks, but never does anything right: seeks to build, but destroys constantly; sets its hand to a multitude of projects, but ruins all of them. God's asides and satires on humanity, his sarcasm, his cynical and superior tone are absorbing and sometimes hilarious. God's self-serving lies are also funny. They mainly have to do with rivals to his love. In the course of the book, God creates stomachaches and impotence to prevent guys from having sex with his own love interest. And then says blatantly that he had nothing to do with these matters. God himself is incorporeal, as we understand the word, and would never lower himself to the level of a Greek god, for example, who would claim his human love interest in corporeal form as an animal or otherwise. But of course, he does "see" everything and can be a bit prurient.
God is the narrator of this book. Therefore, by definition, he is an omniscient narrator. But he is also a character in the story in the story he narrates. Therefore, he is paradoxically beset by confusion. In the end, God becomes self-indulgent and amoral as he surprisingly falls in love. Perhaps, love is the greatest, in the sense of most powerful, of all things.
All the above is aided by an English that is peppy and smooth, sometimes colloquial. I don't know the Italian, but I assume it may have at least the same tone of voice.
I'm very happy this book was translated and published. It's nice to see foreign language authors appear in the USA. It doesn't happen enough IMO.
God slowly falls in love with a human woman and, fairly quickly, falls out of love with her. His predicament as "deity in love" is highlighted by his self-knowledge, his own pleasure at the infinite depth of an active universe, and by his paradoxical scorn for human kind which, unique in creation, thinks, but never does anything right: seeks to build, but destroys constantly; sets its hand to a multitude of projects, but ruins all of them. God's asides and satires on humanity, his sarcasm, his cynical and superior tone are absorbing and sometimes hilarious. God's self-serving lies are also funny. They mainly have to do with rivals to his love. In the course of the book, God creates stomachaches and impotence to prevent guys from having sex with his own love interest. And then says blatantly that he had nothing to do with these matters. God himself is incorporeal, as we understand the word, and would never lower himself to the level of a Greek god, for example, who would claim his human love interest in corporeal form as an animal or otherwise. But of course, he does "see" everything and can be a bit prurient.
God is the narrator of this book. Therefore, by definition, he is an omniscient narrator. But he is also a character in the story in the story he narrates. Therefore, he is paradoxically beset by confusion. In the end, God becomes self-indulgent and amoral as he surprisingly falls in love. Perhaps, love is the greatest, in the sense of most powerful, of all things.
All the above is aided by an English that is peppy and smooth, sometimes colloquial. I don't know the Italian, but I assume it may have at least the same tone of voice.
I'm very happy this book was translated and published. It's nice to see foreign language authors appear in the USA. It doesn't happen enough IMO.
February 26, 2020
i read this in translation and it made me laugh out loud in embarrassing places.
August 5, 2019
I don't understand why God is homophobic in this 'novel'.
August 13, 2017
Dio, solitamente in altre faccende affaccendato, guarda giù, osserva le sue creature terrene e rileva che una specie ha preso il sopravvento sulle altre. “Quegli scimmioni che perdevano sempre più peli e si davano sempre più un tono da intellettualini, con quei cuccioli così amorfi e mollicci, inerti bamboloni di mozzarella” sembravano fragili, “e invece con la loro gesuitica furbizia hanno saputo compensare l'inettitudine fisica, e dagli oggi, dagli domani, hanno fatto secchi i vari nemici”, finendo “per imporre la loro implacabile dittatura”. Ora stanno dominando, gli uomini, e anche se “si gargarizzano con i buoni propositi e le belle teorie” e “scrivono montagne di libri edificanti”, “ne combinano di tutti i colori”. Prima che distruggano l'intero pianeta, dovrà intervenire Lui, drasticamente: favorendo la loro, di estinzione.
Giacomo Sartori, trentino che vive a Parigi, ha scritto un libro molto ironico su un tema molto serio: indotta dal comportamento umano, la sesta estinzione è già in atto, dicono gli scienziati. Volendo, Dio potrebbe darci una mano, ma siamo anche in grado di annientarci da soli.
Giacomo Sartori, trentino che vive a Parigi, ha scritto un libro molto ironico su un tema molto serio: indotta dal comportamento umano, la sesta estinzione è già in atto, dicono gli scienziati. Volendo, Dio potrebbe darci una mano, ma siamo anche in grado di annientarci da soli.
May 12, 2019
What a strange and hilarious tale!
God never tires of telling us how he created everything and how he's in control. But then he feels that he has to, because lately he is not completely in control of his feelings (or whatever it is God has that is close to feelings).
He's been spending too much time enamored with an atheistic biologist who earns extra money by inseminating cows.
This God is not an exact figure we see in the bible, and he let's us know that. For example, he seems to really despise humans! He wishes he never made us.
On the other hand, he decries when we have casual sex, especially homosexual sex.
If our God here hates us so much, why should he give a shit what we do??
I don't have an answer to this, but then again, this is comedy, and I'm sure the author is aware of this conundrum. God himself is not as perfect as he cares to think. He can be very self-serving, which is part of the absurdist humor.
God never tires of telling us how he created everything and how he's in control. But then he feels that he has to, because lately he is not completely in control of his feelings (or whatever it is God has that is close to feelings).
He's been spending too much time enamored with an atheistic biologist who earns extra money by inseminating cows.
This God is not an exact figure we see in the bible, and he let's us know that. For example, he seems to really despise humans! He wishes he never made us.
On the other hand, he decries when we have casual sex, especially homosexual sex.
If our God here hates us so much, why should he give a shit what we do??
I don't have an answer to this, but then again, this is comedy, and I'm sure the author is aware of this conundrum. God himself is not as perfect as he cares to think. He can be very self-serving, which is part of the absurdist humor.
March 27, 2019
Started out enjoyable, but eventually the cringey, try-hard anti-religious juvenile sentiments accrued and made it sort of unpleasant. I also think the decision to have God observe just one main narrative through-line was such a miscalculation. Either start out that story with an 'omniscient narrator' that you slowly and masterfully reveal as the actual Chief Omniscience themself (or rather, himself, because this God is such a dude), or have your narrator announce himself as God and have his narration be a bit more free-wheeling than this.
Read
January 1, 2023“When a man takes a dive I certainly don’t grieve more than when, shall we say, a microbe or a turnip bytes the dust…. Not to mention the large marine mammals. How could anyone think I would prefer the lowest of humans to a nice walrus? That’s just crazy.”
July 16, 2020
Hilariously Profound
God with a sense of humor-much needed and appreciated!
Pleasantly unpredictable yet full of hope. I’m looking forward to reading more by this writer.
God with a sense of humor-much needed and appreciated!
Pleasantly unpredictable yet full of hope. I’m looking forward to reading more by this writer.
September 18, 2021
One of the best depictions of what I think God would be like. (Except not so much the love part)
January 27, 2020
This was a challenge to read. The narrator, God, wasn't believable or likeable. It was mildly amusing because god was obsessed with observing the troubled life of atheist only described as militaristic and a sex pervert. I wasn't that amused. God kept wondering why he wanted to even think let alone write down these complicated thoughts and, heavens, strange feelings. I wouldn't recommend the book to anyone. The author insults our intelligence even if you're a normal atheist.
November 14, 2022
Hilarious! And all the more the fete for having been translated from Italian.
God (the one true), for inexplicable reasons, writes a diary. Hampered as he is by human vocabulary and concepts, he struggles with the limited available tools to describe what's going on with him. Equally inexplicable, he finds himself focused / obsessed / unable to look away from a particular pinprick of a being in all the world, in a particular galaxy on a particular planet in a particular part of a particular country -- the atheist scientist Daphne. Even God has his struggles.
God (the one true), for inexplicable reasons, writes a diary. Hampered as he is by human vocabulary and concepts, he struggles with the limited available tools to describe what's going on with him. Equally inexplicable, he finds himself focused / obsessed / unable to look away from a particular pinprick of a being in all the world, in a particular galaxy on a particular planet in a particular part of a particular country -- the atheist scientist Daphne. Even God has his struggles.
April 21, 2024
Very interesting concept but fell flat. The idea of God falling in love with a mortal woman and fighting his emotions could have been used as the cornerstone of a power piece of commentary about divinity and its inability to blend with mortality.
However, the arrogance and lack of dimension in the character of God and the uniquely sexist perspective made it hard to digest. I also felt as though it could have been more complex and enriched.
However, the arrogance and lack of dimension in the character of God and the uniquely sexist perspective made it hard to digest. I also felt as though it could have been more complex and enriched.
January 13, 2026
p 82 —————-
Engraçado até e de leitura fácil, mas não é muito cativante.
“ (…) I know that tourism is widely considered anything but a spiritual activity, but I my view, if all tourists acted like tourists in their everyday lives too, the so-called world would be a lot better off.”
Engraçado até e de leitura fácil, mas não é muito cativante.
“ (…) I know that tourism is widely considered anything but a spiritual activity, but I my view, if all tourists acted like tourists in their everyday lives too, the so-called world would be a lot better off.”
May 12, 2019
thoughts coming shortly
February 5, 2026
Enjoyed this more as it went on - reminded me a lot of Nabokov
February 6, 2026
I feel so neutral about this book
November 7, 2017
In sintesi: sì, mi sono divertita, anche se questa (non)recensione potrebbe sembrare polemica in realtà mi sono solo permessa di giocare a mia volta sul tema. Ma alcontempo no, per me non è il libro del secolo, ma certamente c’è poca narrativa simile in giro.
E ora via agli sproloqui. (Mi si perdonino le digressioni ‘filosofiche’ che seguono, ma è l’autore stesso a giocarci nel testo e dunque non ho saputo esimermi dal rifletterci a mia volta).
L’interessante punto di partenza di questo libro è un paradosso: che Dio si innamori di una donna.
Imposto ciò, o Dio non possiede tutte le caratteristiche che siamo soliti attribuire a Dio (e quindi, in un certo senso, dobbiamo essere costretti ad ammettere che non è Dio) o non ama quella donna in senso umano (e quindi in un certo senso non la ama, magari amandola di quell’amore che siamo soliti definire divino che si rivolge indistintamente e in pari grado a tutti gli altri esseri viventi - ma la trama non parla certo di questo tipo d’amore, ma proprio di un innamoramento). Il risultato di questa premessa paradossale è un Dio sperduto e confuso.
Sicuramente l’espediente dona del divertimento intellettuale al lettore. Permette per es. una serie di commenti a diverse categorie dal suo particolarissimo punto di vista – a scrivere è infatti Dio, che non ha certo paura di mandarle a dire a nessuno. Si crea così un espediente per lanciare stoccate alla Chiesa come istituzione, al presunto Figlio di Dio, agli agnostici, insomma ce n’è per tutti – a me ha fatto sghignazzare soprattutto l’opinione sui vegani animalisti. Ma sono pur sempre frecciatine scritte da mente umana e messe in bocca a Dio (e torniamo al paradosso, ampliandolo al rapporto autore umano – punto di vista divino); ma: reggono sempre? Non sempre per me. Per intenderci: non ci si può fare beffe dei teologi medievali e poi utilizzare contro gli “atei militanti” l’argomento teleologico, o meglio la “via” teleologica, di Tommaso d’Aquino per provare Dio a partire dal Creato (“per loro [gli atei] l’universo s’è generato da solo […] senza alcun intervento esterno, alcuna ragione ultima: colpettino di bacchetta magica e tutto esiste, tutto funzionava alla perfezione. Non sono certo i soli, del resto anche i bambini credono che tutti i regali vengano da Babbo Natale” che però quando si parla di meccanismi automobilistici “non sono così ingenui da credere che la perfezione, o qualcosa che tende ad essa, sia apparsa di notte in un campo di cavoli.” Tralaltro, capitolo preceduto da un altro intitolato “il mio immenso senso estetico”).
Certo che non si può pretendere da Sartori il punto di vista divino. Ma resta senza risposta come Dio abbia potuto innamorarsi o come la trama abbia inizio. Qualche principio di spiegazione il romanzo prova a darlo. È interessante per esempio quando Dio si interroga sul linguaggio che usa, che è quello umano: in principium erat Verbum, e poi il Verbo si mise a scrivere, con parole umane. Ma perché? E chiedersi se “sono sicuro che questa lingua sciancata non mi abbia già contaminato con qualche istanza umana, come una micidiale infezione alle primissime fasi” gioca col problema ma non sa dare spiegazioni soddisfacenti per giustificare l’inizio della scrittura... Insomma: io come lettrice, stuzzicata su simili questioni, avrei voluto una risposta originale, non una risoluzione nell’imperscrutabilità divina (“non so nemmeno io perché mi sono risolto a esprimermi, o meglio a scrivere. […] Diciamo allora che non lo so. In realtà però nella mia onniscienza so anche questo. [..] non vedo però i vantaggi di una siffatta performance ermeneutica”). Forse però sono proprio io a cercare una soluzione divina che questo libro non può darmi. Per scrivere coerentemente un libro simile bisognerebbe comunque essere Dio, e onore all’autore che ha avuto il coraggio di cimentarsi in un’idea tanto pericolosa.
Questioni simili comunque sono il vero valore aggiunto del libro. Anche se non mi hanno sempre convinta, narrativa simile non credo di averne mai letta prima.
E ora via agli sproloqui. (Mi si perdonino le digressioni ‘filosofiche’ che seguono, ma è l’autore stesso a giocarci nel testo e dunque non ho saputo esimermi dal rifletterci a mia volta).
L’interessante punto di partenza di questo libro è un paradosso: che Dio si innamori di una donna.
Imposto ciò, o Dio non possiede tutte le caratteristiche che siamo soliti attribuire a Dio (e quindi, in un certo senso, dobbiamo essere costretti ad ammettere che non è Dio) o non ama quella donna in senso umano (e quindi in un certo senso non la ama, magari amandola di quell’amore che siamo soliti definire divino che si rivolge indistintamente e in pari grado a tutti gli altri esseri viventi - ma la trama non parla certo di questo tipo d’amore, ma proprio di un innamoramento). Il risultato di questa premessa paradossale è un Dio sperduto e confuso.
Sicuramente l’espediente dona del divertimento intellettuale al lettore. Permette per es. una serie di commenti a diverse categorie dal suo particolarissimo punto di vista – a scrivere è infatti Dio, che non ha certo paura di mandarle a dire a nessuno. Si crea così un espediente per lanciare stoccate alla Chiesa come istituzione, al presunto Figlio di Dio, agli agnostici, insomma ce n’è per tutti – a me ha fatto sghignazzare soprattutto l’opinione sui vegani animalisti. Ma sono pur sempre frecciatine scritte da mente umana e messe in bocca a Dio (e torniamo al paradosso, ampliandolo al rapporto autore umano – punto di vista divino); ma: reggono sempre? Non sempre per me. Per intenderci: non ci si può fare beffe dei teologi medievali e poi utilizzare contro gli “atei militanti” l’argomento teleologico, o meglio la “via” teleologica, di Tommaso d’Aquino per provare Dio a partire dal Creato (“per loro [gli atei] l’universo s’è generato da solo […] senza alcun intervento esterno, alcuna ragione ultima: colpettino di bacchetta magica e tutto esiste, tutto funzionava alla perfezione. Non sono certo i soli, del resto anche i bambini credono che tutti i regali vengano da Babbo Natale” che però quando si parla di meccanismi automobilistici “non sono così ingenui da credere che la perfezione, o qualcosa che tende ad essa, sia apparsa di notte in un campo di cavoli.” Tralaltro, capitolo preceduto da un altro intitolato “il mio immenso senso estetico”).
Certo che non si può pretendere da Sartori il punto di vista divino. Ma resta senza risposta come Dio abbia potuto innamorarsi o come la trama abbia inizio. Qualche principio di spiegazione il romanzo prova a darlo. È interessante per esempio quando Dio si interroga sul linguaggio che usa, che è quello umano: in principium erat Verbum, e poi il Verbo si mise a scrivere, con parole umane. Ma perché? E chiedersi se “sono sicuro che questa lingua sciancata non mi abbia già contaminato con qualche istanza umana, come una micidiale infezione alle primissime fasi” gioca col problema ma non sa dare spiegazioni soddisfacenti per giustificare l’inizio della scrittura... Insomma: io come lettrice, stuzzicata su simili questioni, avrei voluto una risposta originale, non una risoluzione nell’imperscrutabilità divina (“non so nemmeno io perché mi sono risolto a esprimermi, o meglio a scrivere. […] Diciamo allora che non lo so. In realtà però nella mia onniscienza so anche questo. [..] non vedo però i vantaggi di una siffatta performance ermeneutica”). Forse però sono proprio io a cercare una soluzione divina che questo libro non può darmi. Per scrivere coerentemente un libro simile bisognerebbe comunque essere Dio, e onore all’autore che ha avuto il coraggio di cimentarsi in un’idea tanto pericolosa.
Questioni simili comunque sono il vero valore aggiunto del libro. Anche se non mi hanno sempre convinta, narrativa simile non credo di averne mai letta prima.
February 20, 2019
'I am God. Have been forever, will be forever.' Thus starts God's journal- written wholly for himself (for who else could read it?). For the first time ever God might be in love- obsessed at the very least- and he is pissed. The tall atheistic scientist, Daphne, enchants and enthralls him. He can't stop watching her! It's madness! Ridiculous! Undignified! And yet.... and yet.... he can't tear his gaze from her. As she tries to improve on his creations- never giving him his due; as she moves from one sexual experience to another.... With feelings and thoughts that he's only ever observed in the past, how does the divine take to the human condition that is love, wanting, and heartache?
First, can we talk about this cover? I just love it, with the depiction of God as the form of man, but filled with galaxies of glitter. Very nice! Now then, I first heard of this book while going through last week's New York Times Book Review. With a premise like this, how could I resist? I was hoping for a more funny depiction of God (Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty or Jim Parsons in Hand of God), but this was being labeled as between the funny and the severe depictions. I was thinking dry wit, a satire maybe? And I would say that's about right. While serious at times, God's narrative takes you through some pretty ridiculous scenarios and he's got a few zingers mixed in his thoughts and opinions (of which God has many). It got a lot of laughs from me, this charming narrative.
I have to admit, though, that I haven't had to use a dictionary while reading a book this much since fourth grade when I wanted to read Stephen King and Shakespeare (I was an odd child). Thankfully I indulged in the eBook and so had my built in dictionary. I don't feel like my vocabulary is lacking, honestly I would say I am on par if not a tad above the average 30 year old woman without college education. It was definitely lowering to have to stop and look things up; but at the same time I rather like that they used a different vocabulary than I am used to.... and it did fit with the narrator's personality. (Verbose, overly proud, a bit of a know it all and old fashioned to top it off). For me, this is a definite five star book with an extra one for creativity.
On the adult content scale there's a good amount of moderately explicit sexual content and language. There are also some views from our narrator that might rub people the wrong way concerning religion in general and same sex relationships. I would say this one is for 18+. Let's give it a six.
First, can we talk about this cover? I just love it, with the depiction of God as the form of man, but filled with galaxies of glitter. Very nice! Now then, I first heard of this book while going through last week's New York Times Book Review. With a premise like this, how could I resist? I was hoping for a more funny depiction of God (Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty or Jim Parsons in Hand of God), but this was being labeled as between the funny and the severe depictions. I was thinking dry wit, a satire maybe? And I would say that's about right. While serious at times, God's narrative takes you through some pretty ridiculous scenarios and he's got a few zingers mixed in his thoughts and opinions (of which God has many). It got a lot of laughs from me, this charming narrative.
I have to admit, though, that I haven't had to use a dictionary while reading a book this much since fourth grade when I wanted to read Stephen King and Shakespeare (I was an odd child). Thankfully I indulged in the eBook and so had my built in dictionary. I don't feel like my vocabulary is lacking, honestly I would say I am on par if not a tad above the average 30 year old woman without college education. It was definitely lowering to have to stop and look things up; but at the same time I rather like that they used a different vocabulary than I am used to.... and it did fit with the narrator's personality. (Verbose, overly proud, a bit of a know it all and old fashioned to top it off). For me, this is a definite five star book with an extra one for creativity.
On the adult content scale there's a good amount of moderately explicit sexual content and language. There are also some views from our narrator that might rub people the wrong way concerning religion in general and same sex relationships. I would say this one is for 18+. Let's give it a six.
May 4, 2019
In English this is called I Am God. When I tried to look it up on Goodreads there seemed to be hundreds of books with that title or a close variation. That's interesting. And the book is too. A small book with very short chapters. At first I thought it might be the type of book best enjoyed by a true religious believer, but as I went though it I realized how wrong that was. It is pretty sacrilegious, I think, although I am not the best judge.
In this tale, God watches certain humans and starts to obsess about one young woman. I found the particulars of the human subplots occasionally confusing, but these details weren't really important to the book, which is, I suppose, a story of what it might really be like to be God. Or at least from the dim perspective of a human, since our existence couldn't be all that important to the creator of all the known and unknown universe. But of course since we are humans we can only think of God as he/she relates to us, and so in this book we see a very human side of God. God as he/she might be if a human ascended to the throne. It is not a pretty sight, but no worse than the humans in the tale.
I think I will remember this book, which for me is the best quality for a book to recommend. So I do.
In this tale, God watches certain humans and starts to obsess about one young woman. I found the particulars of the human subplots occasionally confusing, but these details weren't really important to the book, which is, I suppose, a story of what it might really be like to be God. Or at least from the dim perspective of a human, since our existence couldn't be all that important to the creator of all the known and unknown universe. But of course since we are humans we can only think of God as he/she relates to us, and so in this book we see a very human side of God. God as he/she might be if a human ascended to the throne. It is not a pretty sight, but no worse than the humans in the tale.
I think I will remember this book, which for me is the best quality for a book to recommend. So I do.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 132 reviews