What do you think?
Rate this book
O Reino
Obra-prima de um dos maiores escritores franceses da atualidade, este romance reconta os primórdios do cristianismo e investiga as vidas de São Paulo e São Lucas
O Reino mergulha — e busca reconstituir — as origens do cristianismo, no final do primeiro século depois de Cristo. Carrère descreve como dois homens, Paulo e Lucas, transformaram uma pequena seita judaica, centrada em seu pregador, crucificado durante o reinado de Tibério e que acreditavam ser o messias, em uma religião que em três séculos transformou a fé no Império Romano e a seguir conquistou o mundo.
Quem narra — e se coloca na história como investigador e personagem — é o próprio Emmanuel Carrère. Partindo de uma narrativa sobre sua juventude, quando se tornou um católico fervoroso, até suas dúvidas e sua renúncia à religião, Carrère mescla presente e passado numa história turbulenta, e procura descobrir as figuras humanas por trás desses dois personagens tão marcantes da história mundial: São Paulo e São Lucas.
Está é a obra-prima de Emmanuel Carrère, com mais de 300.000 exemplares vendidos na França.
O Reino mergulha — e busca reconstituir — as origens do cristianismo, no final do primeiro século depois de Cristo. Carrère descreve como dois homens, Paulo e Lucas, transformaram uma pequena seita judaica, centrada em seu pregador, crucificado durante o reinado de Tibério e que acreditavam ser o messias, em uma religião que em três séculos transformou a fé no Império Romano e a seguir conquistou o mundo.
Quem narra — e se coloca na história como investigador e personagem — é o próprio Emmanuel Carrère. Partindo de uma narrativa sobre sua juventude, quando se tornou um católico fervoroso, até suas dúvidas e sua renúncia à religião, Carrère mescla presente e passado numa história turbulenta, e procura descobrir as figuras humanas por trás desses dois personagens tão marcantes da história mundial: São Paulo e São Lucas.
Está é a obra-prima de Emmanuel Carrère, com mais de 300.000 exemplares vendidos na França.
440 pages, Paperback
First published August 29, 2014
813 people are currently reading
7406 people want to read
About the author
Emmanuel Carrère
69 books3,217 followersEmmanuel Carrère is a French author, screenwriter, and director. He is the son of Louis Carrère d'Encausse and French historian Hélène Carrère d'Encausse.
Carrère studied at the Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (better known as Sciences Po). Much of his writing, both fiction and nonfiction, centers around the primary themes of the interrogation of identity, the development of illusion, and the direction of reality. Several of his books have been made into films; in 2005, he personally directed the film adaptation of his novel La Moustache. He was the president of the jury of the book Inter 2003.
(Wikipedia)
Carrère studied at the Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (better known as Sciences Po). Much of his writing, both fiction and nonfiction, centers around the primary themes of the interrogation of identity, the development of illusion, and the direction of reality. Several of his books have been made into films; in 2005, he personally directed the film adaptation of his novel La Moustache. He was the president of the jury of the book Inter 2003.
(Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 605 reviews
January 10, 2021
Bleak Expectations
Part spiritual memoir, part intellectual self-portrait, part textual exegesis, part fictional dramatisation, The Kingdom is of a genre not often encountered in Anglo-Saxon letters. It is a French invention. Fame in France - in politics, in journalism, in the arts - brings with it the opportunity, possibly the obligation, to bare one's beliefs and motivations - or lack of the same. Perhaps this is a sort of rationalist Cartesian cultural legacy. Bernard Henri-Levy writes in the same vein, for example, in his The Genius of Judaism.
But whereas Henri-Levy writes about his lost and found Judaism, Emmanuel Carrere writes about his lost and found and lost again Catholicism. And whereas Henri-Levy celebrates Judaism, Carrere questions the credibility of Christianity as essentially an extension of Greek mythology. His basic question: How is it that a religion so soaked in Greek myth and magic emerged from Jewish monotheism and has come to dominate so much of the world? Carrerre is quite right to point the finger at Paul of Tarsus and his gospel-writing bag-man, Luke. For it is this dynamic duo, neither of whom ever met Jesus, who promoted his cause so effectively, and so weirdly.
Unlike the writers of other parts of the New Testament, Luke and Paul are real people. That is, we know for sure that their identities are not some symbolic or composite name. Mark, Matthew and John, for example, are unknowns aside from their gospel monikers. Paul is certainly the author of a number of letters (but not all ascribed to him). He speaks frequently in the first person: I saw, I believe, I command. And so does Luke in those parts of his writing, namely the Acts of the Apostles, in which he has first hand experience.
Carrere recognises that it is Paul's interpretation of Jesus's teaching and its significance that is the basis for Christianity. Paul, rather than Jesus, is the Christian Moses. And it is he who seeks to displace Moses, and with him Judaism, as the chosen people who proclaim the existence of the one God. Christianity rises or falls - intellectually, culturally, politically - depending on one's faith, therefore, not so much in Jesus but in Paul. And Paul has more than his fair share of credibility issues in Carrere's estimation.
Carrere's technique of interpolating, of imagining, scenes and dialogue that supplement the gospels is one that is an ancient pious practice. Without it, Jesus and his followers become formulaic and inhuman, even in the four versions that have been deemed orthodox. Carrere's inventions are at least as plausible as the various Christmas story embellishments, for example. And for the most part they are done sympathetically, as consistent with the 'official' texts.
Paul's fundamental message, in Carrere's view, was that the world had undergone an evolutionary change through the life, but especially the death, of Jesus. The being of the world, what is known in Greek philosophy as its ontology, had been altered for the better. This message is incomprehensible and meaningless to Jews, who had never been schooled in the categories of Greek thought.
To say that Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ, was one thing. Such a claim might be wrong but it was plausible and could be debated. It was certainly not heretical. To say that this Messiah saved by changing the basis of existence, however, was nonsensical, except to Greeks. This implied not simply a replacement-Moses but a replacement-Genesis. And this is indeed heresy: if God had found what he had done "good," what need could there possibly be for a second try?
So Paul abandons his fellow-Jews and proselytises among the Gentiles. His preaching isn't about Jesus, whom he only knows second-hand; it is about Christ, whose sacrifice of himself somehow, Paul claims, creates a new cosmic order. It is this new arrangement of the world, its ontological character, not the person Jesus which is what Paul announces. Jesus's purported resurrection from the dead is merely the miraculous evidence for this new order.
There is no subsequent gospel story that confirms this new order among the stay-at-home Jews. Nor is there a clear relationship in these stories between the God of Israel and Jesus. Yet Paul is confident that Jesus should be worshipped as divine as part of this new arrangement. He is also confident that this new order, which he calls the kingdom, will become visible imminently. Little wonder then that Paul desisted from spreading his message too close to Jerusalem.
Told in such a clinical way, it is clear that the spread of Pauline Christianity could only have taken place in a cultural and intellectual environment like that of the Roman Empire. Rome was the source and enforcer of law. But Greek was the language and philosophical font of a largely Hellenised population. And Paul's doctrines fit far more easily into the Greek Pantheon than into the Jewish Temple. Confident of the imminent end of the world, Paul attracted what today would be classified as a cult following of those who were eagerly anticipating an apocalyptic resolution of the world's miseries.
Carrere bases much of his interpretation of sacred texts on what is generally called the New Criticism, that serious exegetical study of the bible, which is a reading from rather than a reading into the text. This method began in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and continues as the dominant mode of biblical analysis today. One of its first proponents was the Frenchman Ernest Renan, whose Life of Jesus and History of the Origins of Christianity caused widespread scandal by treating biblical texts as historical documents. At Renan's hands, the pious myths of Christianity, particularly those of the kingdom, do not fare very well. Things have not improved at all since then for the credibility of the texts or the attempts over centuries to square Jewish monotheism with the Pauline divinity of Jesus. Carrere's summary of the results of the New Criticism, and his own speculations, are a good introduction to the discipline.
Alfred Loisy, the French theologian, excommunicated at the beginning of the 20th century because he dared to take the findings of the New Criticism seriously, created the enduring bon mot about Jesus, Paul, and the first Christians. "They expected the kingdom," he said, "But what arrived was the church." Not a bad summary of the summary.
Postscript: for more on Paul, see: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... and https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Part spiritual memoir, part intellectual self-portrait, part textual exegesis, part fictional dramatisation, The Kingdom is of a genre not often encountered in Anglo-Saxon letters. It is a French invention. Fame in France - in politics, in journalism, in the arts - brings with it the opportunity, possibly the obligation, to bare one's beliefs and motivations - or lack of the same. Perhaps this is a sort of rationalist Cartesian cultural legacy. Bernard Henri-Levy writes in the same vein, for example, in his The Genius of Judaism.
But whereas Henri-Levy writes about his lost and found Judaism, Emmanuel Carrere writes about his lost and found and lost again Catholicism. And whereas Henri-Levy celebrates Judaism, Carrere questions the credibility of Christianity as essentially an extension of Greek mythology. His basic question: How is it that a religion so soaked in Greek myth and magic emerged from Jewish monotheism and has come to dominate so much of the world? Carrerre is quite right to point the finger at Paul of Tarsus and his gospel-writing bag-man, Luke. For it is this dynamic duo, neither of whom ever met Jesus, who promoted his cause so effectively, and so weirdly.
Unlike the writers of other parts of the New Testament, Luke and Paul are real people. That is, we know for sure that their identities are not some symbolic or composite name. Mark, Matthew and John, for example, are unknowns aside from their gospel monikers. Paul is certainly the author of a number of letters (but not all ascribed to him). He speaks frequently in the first person: I saw, I believe, I command. And so does Luke in those parts of his writing, namely the Acts of the Apostles, in which he has first hand experience.
Carrere recognises that it is Paul's interpretation of Jesus's teaching and its significance that is the basis for Christianity. Paul, rather than Jesus, is the Christian Moses. And it is he who seeks to displace Moses, and with him Judaism, as the chosen people who proclaim the existence of the one God. Christianity rises or falls - intellectually, culturally, politically - depending on one's faith, therefore, not so much in Jesus but in Paul. And Paul has more than his fair share of credibility issues in Carrere's estimation.
Carrere's technique of interpolating, of imagining, scenes and dialogue that supplement the gospels is one that is an ancient pious practice. Without it, Jesus and his followers become formulaic and inhuman, even in the four versions that have been deemed orthodox. Carrere's inventions are at least as plausible as the various Christmas story embellishments, for example. And for the most part they are done sympathetically, as consistent with the 'official' texts.
Paul's fundamental message, in Carrere's view, was that the world had undergone an evolutionary change through the life, but especially the death, of Jesus. The being of the world, what is known in Greek philosophy as its ontology, had been altered for the better. This message is incomprehensible and meaningless to Jews, who had never been schooled in the categories of Greek thought.
To say that Jesus was the Messiah, the Christ, was one thing. Such a claim might be wrong but it was plausible and could be debated. It was certainly not heretical. To say that this Messiah saved by changing the basis of existence, however, was nonsensical, except to Greeks. This implied not simply a replacement-Moses but a replacement-Genesis. And this is indeed heresy: if God had found what he had done "good," what need could there possibly be for a second try?
So Paul abandons his fellow-Jews and proselytises among the Gentiles. His preaching isn't about Jesus, whom he only knows second-hand; it is about Christ, whose sacrifice of himself somehow, Paul claims, creates a new cosmic order. It is this new arrangement of the world, its ontological character, not the person Jesus which is what Paul announces. Jesus's purported resurrection from the dead is merely the miraculous evidence for this new order.
There is no subsequent gospel story that confirms this new order among the stay-at-home Jews. Nor is there a clear relationship in these stories between the God of Israel and Jesus. Yet Paul is confident that Jesus should be worshipped as divine as part of this new arrangement. He is also confident that this new order, which he calls the kingdom, will become visible imminently. Little wonder then that Paul desisted from spreading his message too close to Jerusalem.
Told in such a clinical way, it is clear that the spread of Pauline Christianity could only have taken place in a cultural and intellectual environment like that of the Roman Empire. Rome was the source and enforcer of law. But Greek was the language and philosophical font of a largely Hellenised population. And Paul's doctrines fit far more easily into the Greek Pantheon than into the Jewish Temple. Confident of the imminent end of the world, Paul attracted what today would be classified as a cult following of those who were eagerly anticipating an apocalyptic resolution of the world's miseries.
Carrere bases much of his interpretation of sacred texts on what is generally called the New Criticism, that serious exegetical study of the bible, which is a reading from rather than a reading into the text. This method began in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and continues as the dominant mode of biblical analysis today. One of its first proponents was the Frenchman Ernest Renan, whose Life of Jesus and History of the Origins of Christianity caused widespread scandal by treating biblical texts as historical documents. At Renan's hands, the pious myths of Christianity, particularly those of the kingdom, do not fare very well. Things have not improved at all since then for the credibility of the texts or the attempts over centuries to square Jewish monotheism with the Pauline divinity of Jesus. Carrere's summary of the results of the New Criticism, and his own speculations, are a good introduction to the discipline.
Alfred Loisy, the French theologian, excommunicated at the beginning of the 20th century because he dared to take the findings of the New Criticism seriously, created the enduring bon mot about Jesus, Paul, and the first Christians. "They expected the kingdom," he said, "But what arrived was the church." Not a bad summary of the summary.
Postscript: for more on Paul, see: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... and https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
April 27, 2019
A wild read, and a bold one, combining Carrere's own discovery and loss of Catholic faith in the early 90's with a detailed, lengthy re-imagination (a "non-fiction novel" is not quite accurate, it's more like creative non-fiction with lots of sources) of the life of Luke, and by extension, Paul, and by extension, Jesus.
Before reading THE KINGDOM, I didn't know much about the writers of the gospels - I'd read the works themselves, but a long time ago - and I enjoyed the alignment between Carrere and Luke. His loss of faith lets him view Luke as a fellow novelist, assembling disparate sources and quotations (particularly stunningly from the "Q source") with the same sweaty concerns of anyone worried about hooking a reader - and even more than a reader: a patron. The pragmatic treatment of Rome and intersections of history help to make these figures feel real and vivid. The suggestion that Luke mapped some of Paul's features onto Jesus, and that Paul was in some ways trying to form his own religion, was both bold and, in its impossibility to be proven, well argued.
There's an obvious Knausgaard connection here and a less obvious one. The autobiographical self-flagellation is familiar and good, but the similarity to A TIME FOR EVERYTHING, which is wildly under-read, is worth noting. A.T.F.E. is a better book because it deals with ephemera and constructs stunning novella length sequences, whereas the omnipresent voice of research here prevents narrative from truly flowing. But THE KINGDOM's accomplishment - you learn so much, and it is usually very good about pointing out where conjecture comes in, and the scenework is notable and good - is significant.
There is a 3 page Pornhub sequence in the middle of the book that is the big risk - I was so shocked that I laughed out loud on the train. It's like a finely pressed terrine of every writerly cliche that I can think of. And this was not a book that I can easily say I loved. I struggled occasionally, and I questioned quite a few choices. But I felt like I was in a dialogue with the author while I read it, and that sensation will stick with me. 4.51 stars.
Before reading THE KINGDOM, I didn't know much about the writers of the gospels - I'd read the works themselves, but a long time ago - and I enjoyed the alignment between Carrere and Luke. His loss of faith lets him view Luke as a fellow novelist, assembling disparate sources and quotations (particularly stunningly from the "Q source") with the same sweaty concerns of anyone worried about hooking a reader - and even more than a reader: a patron. The pragmatic treatment of Rome and intersections of history help to make these figures feel real and vivid. The suggestion that Luke mapped some of Paul's features onto Jesus, and that Paul was in some ways trying to form his own religion, was both bold and, in its impossibility to be proven, well argued.
There's an obvious Knausgaard connection here and a less obvious one. The autobiographical self-flagellation is familiar and good, but the similarity to A TIME FOR EVERYTHING, which is wildly under-read, is worth noting. A.T.F.E. is a better book because it deals with ephemera and constructs stunning novella length sequences, whereas the omnipresent voice of research here prevents narrative from truly flowing. But THE KINGDOM's accomplishment - you learn so much, and it is usually very good about pointing out where conjecture comes in, and the scenework is notable and good - is significant.
There is a 3 page Pornhub sequence in the middle of the book that is the big risk - I was so shocked that I laughed out loud on the train. It's like a finely pressed terrine of every writerly cliche that I can think of. And this was not a book that I can easily say I loved. I struggled occasionally, and I questioned quite a few choices. But I felt like I was in a dialogue with the author while I read it, and that sensation will stick with me. 4.51 stars.
January 4, 2019
Lo reconozco: me estoy volviendo un blando. He disfrutado como un niño con esta obra incalificable y monumental de Carrère, sin embargo, todo el rato me topaba con ciertas coletillas del autor como "ese niño con síndrome de Down que es el cristianismo" o la constante necesidad del autor de justificarse, de repetir una y otra vez "ya no soy cristiano", así como alguna que otra anécdota personal que podría haber sido obviada puesto que hacían de la lectura de 'El Reino' una lectura apasionante aunque imperfecta. Pero... y pese a estar convencido de que el autor hace trampa, el final me ha conmovido de una manera muy inesperada. Carrère me ha ganado. Ha roto mis reticencias con apenas un episodio. Si llevara sombrero, me lo quitaría.
November 6, 2024
"Poteva interessarmi la teologia, ma, citando Borges, come un ramo della letteratura fantastica."
Carrère si racconta e ci ricorda il passato, un periodo preciso del suo passato.
Inizia con una dissertazione sulla sua temporanea conversione al cattolicesimo, nata dalle esperienze di vita vissuta in un periodo di profonda crisi. Segue una personale, elaborata visione d'insieme sulla Chiesa degli albori, sulla figura esagerata, contraddittoria ed esaltata di quel Paolo di Tarso tratta dagli Atti degli Apostoli e quella della figura dell' evangelista Luca.
E qui ci si divide.
Chi cerca il saggio esegeta, il biblista, il letterato sopraffino, uno stile sublime da fare lacrimare, cade di testa e si fa un bernoccolo grande come un melone. Ci vorrebbe immaginazione ma non tutti ne hanno. Chi invece prende Carrère per quello che è Carrère, allora troverà una sua personalissima visione degli eventi narrati con uno stile da compagnone e adatto a tutti...o forse no. Astenersi quindi intellettualoidi radicali e ricercatori della sacra e "vera" letteratura doc. È un consiglio, fatene ciò che volete.
Quando ho iniziato "il Regno" sapevo che avrei trovato, senza alcun dubbio, una lettura brillante, piena di riferimenti e citazioni, condita da un senso di fine umorismo sotto la lente dell'egocentrico francese che mi ha causato più volte un bel sorriso stampato in faccia. La pagina su Ulisse e Calipso mi ha fatto sbellicare, da incorniciare. La lettura è anche questo, non dimenticatelo.
Peccato alla lunga sia anche piuttosto pesante e adatta, forse, ai più tenaci. Il resoconto degli eventi potrebbe stancare e il testo è lungo, forse troppo.
"Annoto nel mio quaderno questa massima biblica: tutto ciò che la tua mano è in grado di fare, fallo (oggi mi accorgo che può essere letta anche come un invito alla ....)".
-----------------------
"Theology could have interested me, but, quoting Borges, as a branch of fantastic literature."
Carrère talks about himself and reminds us of the past, a specific period of his past.
He begins with a dissertation on his temporary conversion to Catholicism, born from life experiences lived in a period of profound crisis. This is followed by a personal, elaborate overview of the early Church, of the exaggerated, contradictory and exalted figure of Paul of Tarsus taken from the Acts of the Apostles and that of the figure of the evangelist Luke.
And here he divides us.
Anyone looking for the wise exegete, the biblical scholar, the supreme scholar, a sublime style that makes you cry, falls on his head and gets a bump the size of a melon. It would take imagination but not everyone has it. Whoever takes Carrère for what Carrère is, will then find his own very personal vision of the events narrated in a companionable style suitable for everyone... or maybe not. Radical intellectuals and researchers of sacred and "true" doc literature should therefore abstain. It's advice, do with it what you will.
When I started "the Kingdom" I knew that I would find, without a doubt, a brilliant read, full of references and quotes, seasoned with a sense of fine humor under the lens of the egocentric Frenchman who caused me to smile several times in face. The page on Ulysses and Calypso made me go crazy, it should be framed. Reading is also this, don't forget it.
Too bad in the long run it is also quite heavy and suitable, perhaps, for the most tenacious. The account of the events could be tiring and the text is long, perhaps too long.
"I write down this biblical maxim in my notebook: whatever your hand is capable of doing, do (today I realize that it can also be read as an invitation to....)".
Carrère si racconta e ci ricorda il passato, un periodo preciso del suo passato.
Inizia con una dissertazione sulla sua temporanea conversione al cattolicesimo, nata dalle esperienze di vita vissuta in un periodo di profonda crisi. Segue una personale, elaborata visione d'insieme sulla Chiesa degli albori, sulla figura esagerata, contraddittoria ed esaltata di quel Paolo di Tarso tratta dagli Atti degli Apostoli e quella della figura dell' evangelista Luca.
E qui ci si divide.
Chi cerca il saggio esegeta, il biblista, il letterato sopraffino, uno stile sublime da fare lacrimare, cade di testa e si fa un bernoccolo grande come un melone. Ci vorrebbe immaginazione ma non tutti ne hanno. Chi invece prende Carrère per quello che è Carrère, allora troverà una sua personalissima visione degli eventi narrati con uno stile da compagnone e adatto a tutti...o forse no. Astenersi quindi intellettualoidi radicali e ricercatori della sacra e "vera" letteratura doc. È un consiglio, fatene ciò che volete.
Quando ho iniziato "il Regno" sapevo che avrei trovato, senza alcun dubbio, una lettura brillante, piena di riferimenti e citazioni, condita da un senso di fine umorismo sotto la lente dell'egocentrico francese che mi ha causato più volte un bel sorriso stampato in faccia. La pagina su Ulisse e Calipso mi ha fatto sbellicare, da incorniciare. La lettura è anche questo, non dimenticatelo.
Peccato alla lunga sia anche piuttosto pesante e adatta, forse, ai più tenaci. Il resoconto degli eventi potrebbe stancare e il testo è lungo, forse troppo.
"Annoto nel mio quaderno questa massima biblica: tutto ciò che la tua mano è in grado di fare, fallo (oggi mi accorgo che può essere letta anche come un invito alla ....)".
-----------------------
"Theology could have interested me, but, quoting Borges, as a branch of fantastic literature."
Carrère talks about himself and reminds us of the past, a specific period of his past.
He begins with a dissertation on his temporary conversion to Catholicism, born from life experiences lived in a period of profound crisis. This is followed by a personal, elaborate overview of the early Church, of the exaggerated, contradictory and exalted figure of Paul of Tarsus taken from the Acts of the Apostles and that of the figure of the evangelist Luke.
And here he divides us.
Anyone looking for the wise exegete, the biblical scholar, the supreme scholar, a sublime style that makes you cry, falls on his head and gets a bump the size of a melon. It would take imagination but not everyone has it. Whoever takes Carrère for what Carrère is, will then find his own very personal vision of the events narrated in a companionable style suitable for everyone... or maybe not. Radical intellectuals and researchers of sacred and "true" doc literature should therefore abstain. It's advice, do with it what you will.
When I started "the Kingdom" I knew that I would find, without a doubt, a brilliant read, full of references and quotes, seasoned with a sense of fine humor under the lens of the egocentric Frenchman who caused me to smile several times in face. The page on Ulysses and Calypso made me go crazy, it should be framed. Reading is also this, don't forget it.
Too bad in the long run it is also quite heavy and suitable, perhaps, for the most tenacious. The account of the events could be tiring and the text is long, perhaps too long.
"I write down this biblical maxim in my notebook: whatever your hand is capable of doing, do (today I realize that it can also be read as an invitation to....)".
April 22, 2022
While this book is on my “Goodreads made me do it” shelf, it would be more accurate to say “Charles made me do it”, and for that, I am grateful. It had been years since I had read Carrère, and I had forgotten how brilliant his writing is! Also, this is the second time in a few weeks that your recommendations have influenced my book selection, Charles! Maybe I should create a dedicated shelf just for you!
So, a little background: I am a lapsed Catholic who now identifies as a Zen Buddhist. I was raised by hippie, equally lapsed parents and a grandfather who was a defrocked Franciscan. I’m still fascinated by Catholicism – in the sense that I can’t believe how bonkers it is that this Middle Eastern Jewish socialist itinerant preacher’s story got turned into the baroque institution that claims to speak on his behalf. Also, they wear a stylized symbol of the contraption he was executed on for disturbing the social order as jewellery: that’s actually pretty metal, when you think about it. When our ridiculous little PM went to California and told governor Newsome that all Quebecers are Catholic, I wanted to crawl under the table: shut up, François, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people I know who are practising Catholics, we just like Easter chocolate (also it turns out Quebec is the least religious province in Canada, so…). Which brings me to my Easter tradition of reading books about Jesus, or Christianity, during the long weekend – while stuffing my face with Cadbury Crème Eggs (though there were none to be found this year because of supply chain breakdowns and I had to be content with gnawing on a Lindt chocolate bunny). My intellectual curiosity brings me back to the topic from time to time, I find the timing darkly hilarious – and also I do it in memory of my grandfather, who loved God and Jesus and who was so disappointed by what the Church made of Them.
I really loved one review of this book that points out that once you get past the narcissism, you realize you are reading a masterpiece; it’s an excellent way to prepare one who is about to read a book like this. It’s both a memoir of faith lost, found and then lost again – and of the inner turmoil you inevitably get when an intellectual “catches” spirituality, and a journalistic investigation into the life of Paul the Corinthian and Luke – all that written by a man who uses his intelligence as both shield and sword. The struggle between rational humanism and surrender to Faith is a tough, weird sea to navigate, and Carrère does an amazing job of articulating that strange limbo with respect and empathy.
I really appreciate the (admittedly self-centred) process Carrère went through researching and writing this book. I loved the way he re-contextualized some events to give readers an idea of what it would have been like from a modern perspective, if people like Paul and Luke suddenly showed up in our small town selling their weird little cult. And I kind of love his terribly French humor. I honestly couldn’t tell you exactly what’s so French about his humor, specifically, but this book is French as fuck: rarely will you find a book about the Bible that also contains an anecdote about the author’s favorite porn video (and the best part is that it’s relevant!). Reading this book really tickled my Francophile fiber, and I started rooting around for some (probably terrible) French tv shows and listening to some of my (arguably amazing) favorite French records on a loop.
“The Kingdom” is a very good, very well-written book. It did absolutely nothing to change my bad opinion of Paul (though I get the feeling Carrère is not too fond of him either) and it was lovely to read about the very honest quest to make sense of one’s relationship with Christianity.
So, a little background: I am a lapsed Catholic who now identifies as a Zen Buddhist. I was raised by hippie, equally lapsed parents and a grandfather who was a defrocked Franciscan. I’m still fascinated by Catholicism – in the sense that I can’t believe how bonkers it is that this Middle Eastern Jewish socialist itinerant preacher’s story got turned into the baroque institution that claims to speak on his behalf. Also, they wear a stylized symbol of the contraption he was executed on for disturbing the social order as jewellery: that’s actually pretty metal, when you think about it. When our ridiculous little PM went to California and told governor Newsome that all Quebecers are Catholic, I wanted to crawl under the table: shut up, François, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of people I know who are practising Catholics, we just like Easter chocolate (also it turns out Quebec is the least religious province in Canada, so…). Which brings me to my Easter tradition of reading books about Jesus, or Christianity, during the long weekend – while stuffing my face with Cadbury Crème Eggs (though there were none to be found this year because of supply chain breakdowns and I had to be content with gnawing on a Lindt chocolate bunny). My intellectual curiosity brings me back to the topic from time to time, I find the timing darkly hilarious – and also I do it in memory of my grandfather, who loved God and Jesus and who was so disappointed by what the Church made of Them.
I really loved one review of this book that points out that once you get past the narcissism, you realize you are reading a masterpiece; it’s an excellent way to prepare one who is about to read a book like this. It’s both a memoir of faith lost, found and then lost again – and of the inner turmoil you inevitably get when an intellectual “catches” spirituality, and a journalistic investigation into the life of Paul the Corinthian and Luke – all that written by a man who uses his intelligence as both shield and sword. The struggle between rational humanism and surrender to Faith is a tough, weird sea to navigate, and Carrère does an amazing job of articulating that strange limbo with respect and empathy.
I really appreciate the (admittedly self-centred) process Carrère went through researching and writing this book. I loved the way he re-contextualized some events to give readers an idea of what it would have been like from a modern perspective, if people like Paul and Luke suddenly showed up in our small town selling their weird little cult. And I kind of love his terribly French humor. I honestly couldn’t tell you exactly what’s so French about his humor, specifically, but this book is French as fuck: rarely will you find a book about the Bible that also contains an anecdote about the author’s favorite porn video (and the best part is that it’s relevant!). Reading this book really tickled my Francophile fiber, and I started rooting around for some (probably terrible) French tv shows and listening to some of my (arguably amazing) favorite French records on a loop.
“The Kingdom” is a very good, very well-written book. It did absolutely nothing to change my bad opinion of Paul (though I get the feeling Carrère is not too fond of him either) and it was lovely to read about the very honest quest to make sense of one’s relationship with Christianity.
December 3, 2019
Che delusione!
"Carrere sulla religione, che delusione" (Il Sole 24 ore)
Il romanziere (non oso chiamarlo scrittore) colloca le vicede di questo libro nel I secolo d. C. , tempo della prima diffusione del Cristianesimo.
Fra i protagonisti, Luca (l'evangelista) e Paolo (l'apostolo). Argomento, dunque, interessante e affascinante. Ma anche gli argomenti migliori possono essere trattati in modo superficiale fino al rischio della banalizzazione. E' ciò che accade qui.
Intanto il lettore deve sorbirsi decine di pagine 'autobiografiche' (che in altri autori leggo volentieri) supeficialone, quindi noiose. Poi si passa alle vicende del romanzo.
Occorre subito denunciare il forte sospetto di una brutta traduzione che, penso, abbia contribuito non poco alla sciatteria della scrittura. E qui , per chi non abbia letto il libro, devo riportare 'perle' di squallore estetico. Tenetevi forte.
A proposito di Luca, si legge che "a vederlo non gli si danno due lire" e "man mano che si scalda parla sempre più in fretta".
Di Paolo, "quando si è alzato, Paolo non ci vedeva più". Inoltre, "si spazientisce e in quattro e quattr'otto esorcizza la posseduta" , ma "la guarigione della schiava posseduta non va giù ai suoi padroni".
Ci viene anche ricordato che, durante le riunioni dei primi Cristiani, "nessuno va a letto con nessuno".
Leggiamo che Dio, per gli Ebrei, "non è un donnaiolo come Zeus. Non s'interessa alle ragazze, soltanto del suo popolo".
L'autore pare poi pungolarci : "Trasponiamo, sceneggiamo, non dobbiamo aver paura di darci dentro. Calipso è (...) quella che ogni uomo vorrebbe farsi".
E "come la circoncisione, anche i pasti erano un punto delicato".
Come sappiamo, la forma è messaggio. Il letteratura la scrittura è il mezzo con cui ci perviene il contenuto.
Basta così.
"Carrere sulla religione, che delusione" (Il Sole 24 ore)
Il romanziere (non oso chiamarlo scrittore) colloca le vicede di questo libro nel I secolo d. C. , tempo della prima diffusione del Cristianesimo.
Fra i protagonisti, Luca (l'evangelista) e Paolo (l'apostolo). Argomento, dunque, interessante e affascinante. Ma anche gli argomenti migliori possono essere trattati in modo superficiale fino al rischio della banalizzazione. E' ciò che accade qui.
Intanto il lettore deve sorbirsi decine di pagine 'autobiografiche' (che in altri autori leggo volentieri) supeficialone, quindi noiose. Poi si passa alle vicende del romanzo.
Occorre subito denunciare il forte sospetto di una brutta traduzione che, penso, abbia contribuito non poco alla sciatteria della scrittura. E qui , per chi non abbia letto il libro, devo riportare 'perle' di squallore estetico. Tenetevi forte.
A proposito di Luca, si legge che "a vederlo non gli si danno due lire" e "man mano che si scalda parla sempre più in fretta".
Di Paolo, "quando si è alzato, Paolo non ci vedeva più". Inoltre, "si spazientisce e in quattro e quattr'otto esorcizza la posseduta" , ma "la guarigione della schiava posseduta non va giù ai suoi padroni".
Ci viene anche ricordato che, durante le riunioni dei primi Cristiani, "nessuno va a letto con nessuno".
Leggiamo che Dio, per gli Ebrei, "non è un donnaiolo come Zeus. Non s'interessa alle ragazze, soltanto del suo popolo".
L'autore pare poi pungolarci : "Trasponiamo, sceneggiamo, non dobbiamo aver paura di darci dentro. Calipso è (...) quella che ogni uomo vorrebbe farsi".
E "come la circoncisione, anche i pasti erano un punto delicato".
Come sappiamo, la forma è messaggio. Il letteratura la scrittura è il mezzo con cui ci perviene il contenuto.
Basta così.
April 13, 2023
„Nem, nem hiszem, hogy Jézus feltámadt. Nem hiszem, hogy egy ember visszatért a halottak közül. De nem hagy nyugodni, elbűvöl, összezavar, felkavar – nem tudom, melyik a megfelelő ige -, hogy hinni lehet benne, hogy én magam is hittem benne. Azért írom ezt a könyvet, hogy ne higgyem azt, hogy azért, mert már nem hiszek benne, többet tudok, mint azok, akik hisznek benne, vagy mint akkor tudtam, amikor hittem benne. Azért írom ezt a könyvet, hogy ne higgyek túlzottan a magam igazában.”
Egészen elbűvölő szellemi kalandtúra ez a könyv, rendkívül élveztem. Carrère tulajdonképpen annak megy utána, hogyan hihetnek intelligens emberek olyasvalamiben, ami más, szintén intelligens emberek szerint egyértelműen babonaság, kár is szót vesztegetni rá. Ami az egész kutatást pikánssá teszi, az az, hogy a szerző maga is járt mindkét oldalon – három évet lehúzott buzgó katolikusként, fáradhatatlanul jegyzetelte János evangéliumát, miközben eltöltötte a Kegyelem. Csak aztán elmúlt. No most hívőként el sem tudott rosszabbat képzelni annál, mint hogy Krisztus nélkül éljen, ez számára a világvégét jelentette – aztán rá kellett döbbennie, hogy tök jól megvannak egymás nélkül*. Mostanra az Istenben eltöltött időszak csak valamiféle homályos álomképként vibrál benne, mintha egy idegen vette volna fel akkoriban az ő bőrét, akinek sem motivációi, sem érzésvilága nem megfejthető. Ám szerencsére az az idegen is író volt, következésképpen telekörmölt egy csomó füzetet, amelyekre lehet támaszkodni - Carrère tehát nyomozni kezd Carrère után. A végeredmény pedig egy nehezen kategorizálható szöveg, ami talán még leginkább Szent Ágoston vallomásaira emlékeztet**: személyes, kíváncsi írás, ami végig tisztában van azzal, hogy a személyesség miatt le kell mondania arról, hogy általános megállapításokat tehessen.
Carrère azért nem elégszik meg azzal, hogy saját magát teszi oda a boncasztalra, hanem nekiáll bejárni a hit forrásvidékét. Különösen Pál érdekli, ez a különös zseni, aki tulajdonképpen megteremtette azt a keresztény egyházat, amit mi ismerünk, no és hű padavanja, Lukács. Az ő feltérképezésükre olyan módszert választ, ami miatt alighanem minden magára valamit is adó történész körberöhögné: azonosul velük. (Különösen Lukáccsal.) Elképzelni, hogy az ő szemükkel lát, az ő fejükkel gondolkodik, ugyanazokat a bibliai tájakat járja be, hátha kijön az egészből valami értékelhető. Persze megtesz közben mindent, amit egy lelkiismeretes történész is meg szokott tenni: utánaolvas, aminek csak lehet, ellenőrzi a forrásokat, és világosan elkülöníti a tényt a véleménytől. De a lényeghez, a hit mibenlétéhez így aligha jutna el – ahhoz csak a személyességen keresztül vezet az út.
No de mire jön rá Carrère, ez itt a kérdés. Nyomára jut-e bármiféle igazságnak, valamiféle megfejtésnek. Hát, tulajdonképpen igen. Ahogy én értelmezem, megért valamit a kereszténység „igazságából” - ami tulajdonképpen a költészet igazságával rokon, tehát olyasvalami, amit az ember a lúdbőröző hátával érez, és amely igazság a szépség szinonimája. Mert valóban, tök szép dolog a Hegyi Beszéd, meg hogy a legkisebbek a legnagyobbak, meg hogy gyümölcséről ismerni meg a fát. Tök szépek a krisztusi mondatok, mélyek, sokrétűek, szikrázóak, akarjuk, hogy igazak legyenek. És végtére is tekinthetjük őket szépnek, igaznak és izgalmasnak. Akár ateistaként is, akár agnosztikusként is. Jézus nem csak a hívők privilégiuma.
* Ahogy amúgy a „hitetlen” Carrère is borzongva gondol arra, hogy véletlenül megint „olyan” hívővé válik, mint abban az ominózus három évben volt. Ennek oka merőben esztétikai – ezzel Carrère tisztában van és szégyelli is magát miatta -: mert hívőnek lenni számára azt jelenti, hogy elveszíti önazonosságát, és egy sokkal dagályosabb figura veszi át az ő helyét.
** Vallomásokról jut eszembe. A szerző egyáltalán nem fél a blaszfémiától – ez leginkább abban a fordulatban érhető tetten, amikor egy Szűz Máriáról szóló masszív fejtegetés után merész hajtűkanyarral elkezd arról beszélni, hogy van egy kedvenc pornóvideója, amit több tucatszor megnézett már, és amiben egy barna hajú nő maszturbál. Ezt elkönyvelhetnénk szimpla provokációnak, de szerintem nem erről van szó – nem csak azért, mert az adott kontextusban van értelme ennek az információnak, akármilyen szokatlan is, hogy előhozakodnak vele. Hanem mert a vallomás műfaja igenis erről szól: olyasvalamit is megosztani, amit amúgy elhallgatnánk. Ez adja meg a személyesség hitelét.
Egészen elbűvölő szellemi kalandtúra ez a könyv, rendkívül élveztem. Carrère tulajdonképpen annak megy utána, hogyan hihetnek intelligens emberek olyasvalamiben, ami más, szintén intelligens emberek szerint egyértelműen babonaság, kár is szót vesztegetni rá. Ami az egész kutatást pikánssá teszi, az az, hogy a szerző maga is járt mindkét oldalon – három évet lehúzott buzgó katolikusként, fáradhatatlanul jegyzetelte János evangéliumát, miközben eltöltötte a Kegyelem. Csak aztán elmúlt. No most hívőként el sem tudott rosszabbat képzelni annál, mint hogy Krisztus nélkül éljen, ez számára a világvégét jelentette – aztán rá kellett döbbennie, hogy tök jól megvannak egymás nélkül*. Mostanra az Istenben eltöltött időszak csak valamiféle homályos álomképként vibrál benne, mintha egy idegen vette volna fel akkoriban az ő bőrét, akinek sem motivációi, sem érzésvilága nem megfejthető. Ám szerencsére az az idegen is író volt, következésképpen telekörmölt egy csomó füzetet, amelyekre lehet támaszkodni - Carrère tehát nyomozni kezd Carrère után. A végeredmény pedig egy nehezen kategorizálható szöveg, ami talán még leginkább Szent Ágoston vallomásaira emlékeztet**: személyes, kíváncsi írás, ami végig tisztában van azzal, hogy a személyesség miatt le kell mondania arról, hogy általános megállapításokat tehessen.
Carrère azért nem elégszik meg azzal, hogy saját magát teszi oda a boncasztalra, hanem nekiáll bejárni a hit forrásvidékét. Különösen Pál érdekli, ez a különös zseni, aki tulajdonképpen megteremtette azt a keresztény egyházat, amit mi ismerünk, no és hű padavanja, Lukács. Az ő feltérképezésükre olyan módszert választ, ami miatt alighanem minden magára valamit is adó történész körberöhögné: azonosul velük. (Különösen Lukáccsal.) Elképzelni, hogy az ő szemükkel lát, az ő fejükkel gondolkodik, ugyanazokat a bibliai tájakat járja be, hátha kijön az egészből valami értékelhető. Persze megtesz közben mindent, amit egy lelkiismeretes történész is meg szokott tenni: utánaolvas, aminek csak lehet, ellenőrzi a forrásokat, és világosan elkülöníti a tényt a véleménytől. De a lényeghez, a hit mibenlétéhez így aligha jutna el – ahhoz csak a személyességen keresztül vezet az út.
No de mire jön rá Carrère, ez itt a kérdés. Nyomára jut-e bármiféle igazságnak, valamiféle megfejtésnek. Hát, tulajdonképpen igen. Ahogy én értelmezem, megért valamit a kereszténység „igazságából” - ami tulajdonképpen a költészet igazságával rokon, tehát olyasvalami, amit az ember a lúdbőröző hátával érez, és amely igazság a szépség szinonimája. Mert valóban, tök szép dolog a Hegyi Beszéd, meg hogy a legkisebbek a legnagyobbak, meg hogy gyümölcséről ismerni meg a fát. Tök szépek a krisztusi mondatok, mélyek, sokrétűek, szikrázóak, akarjuk, hogy igazak legyenek. És végtére is tekinthetjük őket szépnek, igaznak és izgalmasnak. Akár ateistaként is, akár agnosztikusként is. Jézus nem csak a hívők privilégiuma.
* Ahogy amúgy a „hitetlen” Carrère is borzongva gondol arra, hogy véletlenül megint „olyan” hívővé válik, mint abban az ominózus három évben volt. Ennek oka merőben esztétikai – ezzel Carrère tisztában van és szégyelli is magát miatta -: mert hívőnek lenni számára azt jelenti, hogy elveszíti önazonosságát, és egy sokkal dagályosabb figura veszi át az ő helyét.
** Vallomásokról jut eszembe. A szerző egyáltalán nem fél a blaszfémiától – ez leginkább abban a fordulatban érhető tetten, amikor egy Szűz Máriáról szóló masszív fejtegetés után merész hajtűkanyarral elkezd arról beszélni, hogy van egy kedvenc pornóvideója, amit több tucatszor megnézett már, és amiben egy barna hajú nő maszturbál. Ezt elkönyvelhetnénk szimpla provokációnak, de szerintem nem erről van szó – nem csak azért, mert az adott kontextusban van értelme ennek az információnak, akármilyen szokatlan is, hogy előhozakodnak vele. Hanem mert a vallomás műfaja igenis erről szól: olyasvalamit is megosztani, amit amúgy elhallgatnánk. Ez adja meg a személyesség hitelét.
June 16, 2015
Ammiro, e forse invidio, la capacità di Carrère di scrivere un libro di oltre 400 pagine su un argomento tanto complesso mantenendo la capacità di parlare al proprio lettore come se gli fosse seduto di fronte una sera in terrazza. A tratti viene quasi il dubbio che il buon Emmanuel sia un simpatico cazzaro, le sue digressioni personali hanno sempre un elevato grado di autoironia, al punto di farci quasi dubitare della sua autorevolezza. Invece questo è un libro complicato, scritto in modo molto semplice. Complicato per le tesi, complicato per la mole di studio che è stata necessaria per scriverlo, complicato per i livelli di lettura con cui si può affrontare. Una meditazione sulla fede, ma anche una meditazione su come nasce la religione Cristiana che molti di noi praticano e che comunque ha un così rilevante impatto sulla cultura occidentale e sulle relazioni con le altre culture. Carrère sceglie di raccontarci una storia, o meglio le tante storie che riguardano gli apostoli e i primi cristiani. Impariamo (o ricordiamo, se a scuola siamo stati molto attenti) la versione ufficiale, ma anche le molte versioni probabili. La storia degli apostoli viene inserita nel suo contesto storico, perché è innegabile che se i Vangeli e tutto il nuovo testamento sono stati scritti qualcuno deve averlo pur fatto, e quel qualcuno aveva una storia da raccontare. Il Cristo di Carrère è quindi prima di tutto un personaggio storico, la cui esistenza non è messa in discussione. Quello che Carrère mette invece in discussione è la coerenza tra il messaggio del Cristo predicatore e ciò che è arrivato fino a noi, attraverso revisioni, modificazioni, lotte di potere e umanissime invidie, e il tutto nei primi 60 anni dopo la sua morte. Leggendo questo libro capiamo quanto la cultura ellenica abbia avuto impatto sul Cristianesimo, capiamo la discontinuità con l’ebraismo che pure mantiene in comune il Vecchio Testamento, capiamo come Roma e il paganesimo non fossero il problema, in una questione inizialmente tutta ebraica.
Si imparano tantissime cose leggendo questo libro, e si apprezza l’approccio di Carrère, sempre onesto, sempre capace di mantenere la distanza tra ciò che le fonti dicono, ciò che è probabile sia accaduto, ciò che a lui piace credere sia accaduto. Alla fine non credo che il libro possa spostare le coscienze, chi credeva continuerà a credere e chi non credeva resterà non credente. Tuttavia credo che si acquisisca maggiore consapevolezza, e che credenti e non credenti possano trovare in questo libro un terreno di comune percezione culturale, una matrice di unità che spesso si smarrisce per alzare barriere ideologiche prima ancora che religiose.
Si imparano tantissime cose leggendo questo libro, e si apprezza l’approccio di Carrère, sempre onesto, sempre capace di mantenere la distanza tra ciò che le fonti dicono, ciò che è probabile sia accaduto, ciò che a lui piace credere sia accaduto. Alla fine non credo che il libro possa spostare le coscienze, chi credeva continuerà a credere e chi non credeva resterà non credente. Tuttavia credo che si acquisisca maggiore consapevolezza, e che credenti e non credenti possano trovare in questo libro un terreno di comune percezione culturale, una matrice di unità che spesso si smarrisce per alzare barriere ideologiche prima ancora che religiose.
December 27, 2015
il Regno di Carrère
cosa ci può mai essere di più indigesto di uno scrittore egomaniaco francese spocchioso intelligente e autoreferenziale?
dopo un centinaio di pagine penso di avere la risposta: uno scrittore egomaniaco francese spocchioso intelligente autoreferenziale e invasato dalla religione cattolica...per fortuna è durata poco, perchè l'unico Dio di Carrère è Carrère
confermo l'impressione iniziale, il libro dopo una breve introduzione esplicativa delle scelte esistenziali dell'autore, passa a una noiosissima esegesi delle fonti dei Vangeli, interi paragrafi pieni di speculazioni fatte a pelle da Carrère, che a ogni passo ci fa sapere che lui in persona, essendo intelligente, può ricavare a senso le fonti degli episodi descritti da Paolo e da Luca e, altrettanto a senso, scarta quelli che gli sembrano non realistici, come se la storia di un tizio risorto avesse bisogno del sostegno del concetto di realismo (è un dogma e come tale non è certo richiesto altro che un atto di fede, si sceglie di credere, non ci si convince a farlo), inoltre si serve come base per queste dotte analisi dei suoi scritti annotati nel periodo della sua breve ma intensissima conversione, conversione di cui un po' si vergogna, ma un altro po' fa fatica a mollare, pur ammettendo di esser più disincantato al riguardo e non spiegando mai del tutto come è possibile che un tipo così intelligente come lui non sappia dire se alla fine ci crede ancora o meno...
inutile dire che nonostante la speranza dell'autore che questo si riveli il suo capolavoro, quello che gli farà vendere milioni di copie, in realtà siamo assai lontani dall'onestà e dalla limpidezza di La Vita come un romanzo russo o anche di Limonov...ovviamente a mio modesto parere...
ps. il siparietto pseudo porno e tutte le allusioni alla sua speranza di mantenere intatta la libido anche in età avanzata se li poteva anche risparmiare, essendo questo un libro sul cristianesimo magari qualcuno poteva trovare irritanti gli accostamenti...o no?
ps. 2 il povero nonno "scomparso tragicamente alla fine della Seconda Guerra Mondiale" era in realtà un russo bianco scampato alla Rivoluzione e fatto sparire dai partigiani francesi per il suo operato apertamente collaborazionista durante l'Occupazione
January 31, 2016
Lo siento, pero me aburrí. Creo que el autor se empeña en dar vueltas a un tema para al final no concluirlo bien. Y no es la primera vez que me pasa eso con Carrere y sus finales. En este caso llegué con ganas por toda la repercusión y la crítica... pero me costó terminarlo
Want to read
October 19, 2017P-review (ie, Preview)
This book was recently reviewed in the New Yorker by James Wood. One doesn't often see a review of a book that's been something of a best-seller for about three years already. Presumably the English translation (from French) took most of that time to appear. Maybe the thought was that this novel(?), this imaginative history of early Christianity(?), this personal journey of the author from rationalist to believer to ...(?) - well, however it's described, and Wood hints at all of those, was just not the sort of book that crass Brits or Americans would care for?
In a brilliant essay, Wood tells us of the philosophical, psychological, and religious journey which the author shares with the reader. I'm not religious myself, but this book sounds like such a profound, and at the same time entertaining, narrative that I predict I will be changing that 'maybe' shelf to 'want to read' quite soon - meaning that I will have acquired the book.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/201...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Previous review: Prussian Blue Bernie Gunther #12
Random review: The Syllabus Verbivoracious Festschrift #3
Next review: Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova
Previous library review: Dirty Snow Simenon
Next library review: Dawn (The Night Trilogy #2) Elie Wiesel
This book was recently reviewed in the New Yorker by James Wood. One doesn't often see a review of a book that's been something of a best-seller for about three years already. Presumably the English translation (from French) took most of that time to appear. Maybe the thought was that this novel(?), this imaginative history of early Christianity(?), this personal journey of the author from rationalist to believer to ...(?) - well, however it's described, and Wood hints at all of those, was just not the sort of book that crass Brits or Americans would care for?
In a brilliant essay, Wood tells us of the philosophical, psychological, and religious journey which the author shares with the reader. I'm not religious myself, but this book sounds like such a profound, and at the same time entertaining, narrative that I predict I will be changing that 'maybe' shelf to 'want to read' quite soon - meaning that I will have acquired the book.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/201...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Previous review: Prussian Blue Bernie Gunther #12
Random review: The Syllabus Verbivoracious Festschrift #3
Next review: Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova
Previous library review: Dirty Snow Simenon
Next library review: Dawn (The Night Trilogy #2) Elie Wiesel
October 21, 2017
In the last pages of this book, Carrère comments on his experience washing feet at a retreat held at a home for the physically and mentally challenged, in response to the urging of a correspondent.
This is a thoughtful, engaging, and provocative book. Provocative in a good way, as Carrère invites the reader to participate in his reflections on the meaning and moral imperative of the Gospels and Acts, from the viewpoint of someone who once had a mystical conversion, believed passionately for two years, and then gradually fell away. Twenty years later he returns to his notebooks from that period of belief, and conducts what he calls an investigation into both how the gospels came to be written the way they are, and into what the truth of Jesus’s message might have been. Also into what that means for a serious person in a post-Christian world. Because this is very much a book written in France, the country of the Enlightenment, not in the United States, the continuing country of born again Christianity. It’s also a frank portrayal of the life of an intellectual in such a world, always self-questioning, and perhaps self-absorbed.
For those who might want to stop reading here, thinking it belongs on the religious self-help shelf, it’s far from that. Not too many books on the religion shelf include a detailed description of a porn video. It is serious literature about moral questions, in a conversational and historian fiction environment.
It’s important to note that Carrère’s mystical experience thrust him into two years of traditional Catholic practices and Bible study, not into praise worship. It’s also important to note his mystical experience as he embarks on his investigation by thinking about Paul’s parallel, violent experience on the road to Damascus. The book eventually turns into a mix of fiction and autobiography as Carrère provides a self-portrait of his thoroughly self-indulgent, unlikeable, miserable self at the time of his period of belief, reflections from his current state of agnostic consideration, and an admittedly fictionalized version of the early years of Christianity and the jockeying among the apostles and other early believers. He carefully delineates the differences that the authors brought to the task: Matthew the unknown, Mark as Peter’s secretary, Luke as Paul’s companion, and John, perhaps Jesus’s favorite apostle.
The early chapters are hard going because Carrère makes himself so disagreeable, but he also pens loving, rather saint-like portraits of his long-time friends who are long-time believers. That keeps you going. Gradually though, he shifts to his mature openness to the messages of the Gospels, if not the reality of the miracles and resurrection. This is interwoven with the mix of historical record and hypothetical bridging between facts to which years of study have brought him. He focuses most on Luke, who he was and how he melded and altered the stories he gathered. (And he recognizes that he is projecting himself on Luke during his own investigation.) Carrère is not proselytizing or arguing against Christianity, or even saying we really should behave according to Jesus’s instructions even if we don’t believe. Instead he explores how difficult that is for all, perhaps especially for an intellectual. At the same time he explores why the message still has such a profound meaning for many people. Certainly it is worth thinking about how the early messages of the sects competed and how some won out, given the subsequent effect on Western history.
By chance this arrived from a hold at the library just as I was reading Master and Margarita for a book group. So I was reading two very different ways of blending twentieth century experience and fictionalized New Testament stories. By two non-believers fascinated by the Gospels, and who want to talk about how far either their society, or themselves, are from the goals of charity and truth espoused there. But while Bulgakov wields a saber of satire with broad slashes, Carrère offers an intimate accounting of his personal wrestling match with the evidence, and where it takes him. As can be seen from the introductory quote, not back to belief, but to acknowledgement that he is on a lifelong investigation. Because his friend Hervé, who appears to be pan-theological, challenges his initial stance that there are just two equally valid views and kinds of people: those who believe and those who don’t; you can’t know. Hervé says
Carrère is a particularly intriguing guide to the Gospels because he comes at them from the viewpoint of a scriptwriter and author of several works that blend fiction and autobiography, and he wonders how the Gospel writers went about their work.
Still, I wouldn’t like to be touched by grace and return home converted like twenty-four years earlier just because I’ve washed some feet. Thankfully nothing of the sort happens.
This is a thoughtful, engaging, and provocative book. Provocative in a good way, as Carrère invites the reader to participate in his reflections on the meaning and moral imperative of the Gospels and Acts, from the viewpoint of someone who once had a mystical conversion, believed passionately for two years, and then gradually fell away. Twenty years later he returns to his notebooks from that period of belief, and conducts what he calls an investigation into both how the gospels came to be written the way they are, and into what the truth of Jesus’s message might have been. Also into what that means for a serious person in a post-Christian world. Because this is very much a book written in France, the country of the Enlightenment, not in the United States, the continuing country of born again Christianity. It’s also a frank portrayal of the life of an intellectual in such a world, always self-questioning, and perhaps self-absorbed.
For those who might want to stop reading here, thinking it belongs on the religious self-help shelf, it’s far from that. Not too many books on the religion shelf include a detailed description of a porn video. It is serious literature about moral questions, in a conversational and historian fiction environment.
It’s important to note that Carrère’s mystical experience thrust him into two years of traditional Catholic practices and Bible study, not into praise worship. It’s also important to note his mystical experience as he embarks on his investigation by thinking about Paul’s parallel, violent experience on the road to Damascus. The book eventually turns into a mix of fiction and autobiography as Carrère provides a self-portrait of his thoroughly self-indulgent, unlikeable, miserable self at the time of his period of belief, reflections from his current state of agnostic consideration, and an admittedly fictionalized version of the early years of Christianity and the jockeying among the apostles and other early believers. He carefully delineates the differences that the authors brought to the task: Matthew the unknown, Mark as Peter’s secretary, Luke as Paul’s companion, and John, perhaps Jesus’s favorite apostle.
The early chapters are hard going because Carrère makes himself so disagreeable, but he also pens loving, rather saint-like portraits of his long-time friends who are long-time believers. That keeps you going. Gradually though, he shifts to his mature openness to the messages of the Gospels, if not the reality of the miracles and resurrection. This is interwoven with the mix of historical record and hypothetical bridging between facts to which years of study have brought him. He focuses most on Luke, who he was and how he melded and altered the stories he gathered. (And he recognizes that he is projecting himself on Luke during his own investigation.) Carrère is not proselytizing or arguing against Christianity, or even saying we really should behave according to Jesus’s instructions even if we don’t believe. Instead he explores how difficult that is for all, perhaps especially for an intellectual. At the same time he explores why the message still has such a profound meaning for many people. Certainly it is worth thinking about how the early messages of the sects competed and how some won out, given the subsequent effect on Western history.
By chance this arrived from a hold at the library just as I was reading Master and Margarita for a book group. So I was reading two very different ways of blending twentieth century experience and fictionalized New Testament stories. By two non-believers fascinated by the Gospels, and who want to talk about how far either their society, or themselves, are from the goals of charity and truth espoused there. But while Bulgakov wields a saber of satire with broad slashes, Carrère offers an intimate accounting of his personal wrestling match with the evidence, and where it takes him. As can be seen from the introductory quote, not back to belief, but to acknowledgement that he is on a lifelong investigation. Because his friend Hervé, who appears to be pan-theological, challenges his initial stance that there are just two equally valid views and kinds of people: those who believe and those who don’t; you can’t know. Hervé says
If you admit that this world consists of change and suffering, which is the first of the Buddhist noble, truths, if you admit that life is being trapped in this state, then the question of whether there’s an exit or not is important enough to justify looking into it. You want to call your book Luke’s Investigation (that was my title at the time). It would be too bad to act as if you knew from the start that this investigation has no object, or to try to get yourself off the hook by saying that it doesn’t concern you. If it does have an object, it concerns everyone, you can’t disagree with that.”
Carrère is a particularly intriguing guide to the Gospels because he comes at them from the viewpoint of a scriptwriter and author of several works that blend fiction and autobiography, and he wonders how the Gospel writers went about their work.
Instead, I ask myself verse after verse: Where does Luke get his information?
Three possibilities. Either he’s read it and recopies it--most often from the Gospel of Mark, who anteriority is generally admitted and more than half of which finds its way into his own. Or someone told it to him, but then who? Here we enter the tangle of hypotheses first-hand, secondhand, thirdhand accounts, people who saw the man who saw the bear...Or finally, simply, he’s making it up. For many Christians, saying that is sacrilege, but I’m no longer a Christian. I’m a writer who’s looking to understand how another writer went about writing, and it strikes me as self-evident to say that he often made things up. Each time I have good reason to believe that a passage belongs in that category, I’m happy, all the more so in that some of what ends up here is pretty big game: the Magnificat, the Good Samaritan, the sublime story of the Prodigal Son. I appreciate these bits from the point of view of a fellow tradesman; I’d like to congratulate my colleague.
August 5, 2025
Podría contaros que este libro es una mezcla de autoficción y ensayo donde se explora la historia de los primeros cristianos, especialmente de Pablo y Lucas, intercalada con la propia crisis de fe que tuvo el autor y su experiencia vital con la religión.
Pero no es lo que parece.
Bueno sí lo es, pero no lo es.
La mejor carta de presentación para venderte este pedazo de libro no es la sinopsis, es el autor.
Confía en Carrère. Confía en que lo que te va a contar va a ser interesante. Confía en que te lo va a contar desde una una perspectiva diferente. Confía en que se va a abrir en canal. Confía en que es un libro muy trabajado. Confía en su inteligencia y en su talento para escribir. Confía incluso en los tramos en los que quizás se haga un poco cuesta arriba. Porque precisamente para los que sufren es El reino.
Estoy enamorada totalmente de este señor y ya no tiene remedio.
(4’5/5)⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ ¡me ha encantado!
Pero no es lo que parece.
Bueno sí lo es, pero no lo es.
La mejor carta de presentación para venderte este pedazo de libro no es la sinopsis, es el autor.
Confía en Carrère. Confía en que lo que te va a contar va a ser interesante. Confía en que te lo va a contar desde una una perspectiva diferente. Confía en que se va a abrir en canal. Confía en que es un libro muy trabajado. Confía en su inteligencia y en su talento para escribir. Confía incluso en los tramos en los que quizás se haga un poco cuesta arriba. Porque precisamente para los que sufren es El reino.
Estoy enamorada totalmente de este señor y ya no tiene remedio.
(4’5/5)⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ ¡me ha encantado!
April 30, 2019
Myth or truth? This genre-defying novel combines speculative fiction, memoir and documentary style to explore testimony versus factual evidence in the New Testament accounts. As a book within a book, written during a crisis of faith, it is as much about the author as his fascinating subject. His intimate conversational approach is witty, engaging and thought-provoking, whilst the topic should be of interest to believers and non-believers alike.
Reviewed for www.whichbook.net
Reviewed for www.whichbook.net
September 12, 2014
Un livre passionnant et frustrant. Passionnant car l'histoire des débuts du christianisme y est contée de manière vivante et érudite, si bien qu'on apprend beaucoup tout en prenant du plaisir à lire. Frustrant car le côté mise en scène de l'auteur et de sa vie privée fonctionne moins bien dans ce livre que dans les oeuvres précédentes de Carrère. C'est parfois pertinent mais pas toujours et à la longue, cela finit par sentir un peu la recette. Mais cela reste une excellente lecture, distrayante et enrichissante, ce qui est déjà énorme.
October 13, 2015
Li poso quatre estrelles, però li'n posaria només 3 i mitja, si pogués. Amb els dies, m'adono que la introducciço del «Carrère personatge» en «El Regne» no m'ha convençut. Temo que aquesta fòrmula —que tant i tant bé li va funcionar amb tantes altres novel·les seves, en Carrère ja l'ha esgotada en aquest llibre. Amb tot, he fruït com un camell del que al meu entendre és el nucli de la novel·la, la història dels Evangelis.
June 13, 2017
Книгата на Еманюел Карер се отправя към един особен момент в човешката история - най-ранното състояние на това, което по-късно ще се нарече християнство и което ще заеме цивилизационна позиция в Европа и всичко зависими от нея по един или друг начин територии и общества. Но тук не става въпрос за т.нар. период на “ранната църква”, а един малък момент преди оформянето на самата представата за Църквата като общността от вярващи последователи на Христос.
Разказа на Карер започва от… него самия. Разбрах от други негови читатели и почитатели, че този похват е изключително характерен за автора. Бивш “вярващ” католик (кавичките са мои, може би по-точното определение би било “последовател на религиозните практики и ритуали”), Карер постепенно започва да се губи в системите от правила, неподплътени от истинско разбиране и преживяване на реалността, стояща зад тях, и стига до позицията на ��гностик, агностик не без чувство за хумор, трябва да се признае. През тази призма тръгва и неговото пътешествие в миналото, целящо да си даде обяснение как една такава личност на мистичен учител и лидер от близкия изток дава началото на движение, което премоделира света. Макар тази първа част (относително 150 стр.) да натежава на моменти, тя се оказва в известен смисъл полезна за по-нататъшното разибиране на позицията, от която изхожда разказвача.
След това, условно казано, ретроспекцията се разслоява на два потока. Първият се занимава с личността на Христос, а вторият (по-интересният за мен)- със съдбата на последователите му след възнесението Му. Тук Карер се спира на Яков, братът на Исус и първият лидер на Ерусалимската църква, Петър и Павел и диномикато на отношенията между тях.
Множество ревюта и мнения за книгата изтъкват трудността тя да се постави безусловно в някое от стиловите чекмеджета, с които сме свикнали да си боравим. Съгласен съм с това мнение. Текстът се разлива ту в историческа фактология, ту в есеистични разсъждения, ту в наративи, провокирани от фантазията на Карер, целящи да споят конкретните откъслечни факти, с които разполагаме, с по-философските му и културологични разсъждения. Тези фантастични спойки понякога бяха леко дразнещи, понеже често се заявяваха като “със сигурност така трябва да е станало”, докато на други места авторът сам отбелязва, че това са само негови предположения. Струва ми се, че това е най-човешката страна на книгата и тя би допаднала на мнозина. В нея именно се усеща онова непосилно усилие на човешкия дух да обхване разсъдъчно една материя, един свят, който долавя само надинтуитивно, който не се побира в мисловния му потенциал, а който чувства, въпреки всичко, дълбоко свързан със себе си.
Книгата е, разбира се, в голямата си част (разказването, което не се основава на факти или раздъждения, а на авторовото въображение) спекулативна. Интересното е, че дори зад иронията, дори зад сарказма, отвъд желанието за леката комерсиализация чрез жлъчлив хумор, се долавя дълбокото отношение на Карер към християнството. Честно казано, това беше последното, което очаквах от книгата, която започнах с лекото притеснение, че ще се натъкна на вече клишираните опити за интелектуално оплюване на материята. Макар от заявена агностична гледна точка, според мен, книгата успява да долови това, което стои зад невзрачните, обикновени, съвсем несъвършени хорица, обекти на разказването - Царството вътре в тях. Останалото, проявяването на това Царство в човешкия свят - било чрез институции, било друго яче, е отделен въпрос, неотделим от същността на същите несъвършени хора и техните наследници, и нас.
В края на книгата си Карер пише:
Спомням си, понеже пиша този отзив повече от четири месеца, след като прочетох книгата, че тогава този последен параграф ме накара почти да настръхна. Не, защото ме удари с прозрението си, а защото видях написано нещо, което стояло като неясна идея в мен и може да се обобщи най-грубо като: Царството започва не някога си, а е насъщно сега, таящо се (даже и) под несъвършени, грубовати и отблъскващи реалности. Втренчването в разликите не принадлежи на него.
В края на това мнение, ще добавя още само това, че тази книга за християнството, писана от агностик, ми се струва, че се докосва доста повече до същината, отколкото друга, която четох по-рано, писана от възпитаник на католически колеж. Ако изобщо двете могат да се поставят на една везна.
Разказа на Карер започва от… него самия. Разбрах от други негови читатели и почитатели, че този похват е изключително характерен за автора. Бивш “вярващ” католик (кавичките са мои, може би по-точното определение би било “последовател на религиозните практики и ритуали”), Карер постепенно започва да се губи в системите от правила, неподплътени от истинско разбиране и преживяване на реалността, стояща зад тях, и стига до позицията на ��гностик, агностик не без чувство за хумор, трябва да се признае. През тази призма тръгва и неговото пътешествие в миналото, целящо да си даде обяснение как една такава личност на мистичен учител и лидер от близкия изток дава началото на движение, което премоделира света. Макар тази първа част (относително 150 стр.) да натежава на моменти, тя се оказва в известен смисъл полезна за по-нататъшното разибиране на позицията, от която изхожда разказвача.
След това, условно казано, ретроспекцията се разслоява на два потока. Първият се занимава с личността на Христос, а вторият (по-интересният за мен)- със съдбата на последователите му след възнесението Му. Тук Карер се спира на Яков, братът на Исус и първият лидер на Ерусалимската църква, Петър и Павел и диномикато на отношенията между тях.
Множество ревюта и мнения за книгата изтъкват трудността тя да се постави безусловно в някое от стиловите чекмеджета, с които сме свикнали да си боравим. Съгласен съм с това мнение. Текстът се разлива ту в историческа фактология, ту в есеистични разсъждения, ту в наративи, провокирани от фантазията на Карер, целящи да споят конкретните откъслечни факти, с които разполагаме, с по-философските му и културологични разсъждения. Тези фантастични спойки понякога бяха леко дразнещи, понеже често се заявяваха като “със сигурност така трябва да е станало”, докато на други места авторът сам отбелязва, че това са само негови предположения. Струва ми се, че това е най-човешката страна на книгата и тя би допаднала на мнозина. В нея именно се усеща онова непосилно усилие на човешкия дух да обхване разсъдъчно една материя, един свят, който долавя само надинтуитивно, който не се побира в мисловния му потенциал, а който чувства, въпреки всичко, дълбоко свързан със себе си.
Книгата е, разбира се, в голямата си част (разказването, което не се основава на факти или раздъждения, а на авторовото въображение) спекулативна. Интересното е, че дори зад иронията, дори зад сарказма, отвъд желанието за леката комерсиализация чрез жлъчлив хумор, се долавя дълбокото отношение на Карер към християнството. Честно казано, това беше последното, което очаквах от книгата, която започнах с лекото притеснение, че ще се натъкна на вече клишираните опити за интелектуално оплюване на материята. Макар от заявена агностична гледна точка, според мен, книгата успява да долови това, което стои зад невзрачните, обикновени, съвсем несъвършени хорица, обекти на разказването - Царството вътре в тях. Останалото, проявяването на това Царство в човешкия свят - било чрез институции, било друго яче, е отделен въпрос, неотделим от същността на същите несъвършени хора и техните наследници, и нас.
В края на книгата си Карер пише:
“Един индийски мъдрец обяснява какво е самсара и какво нирвана. Самсара е съставеният от промени, желание и мъки свят, в който живеем. Нирвана - светът, до който има достъп постигналият просветление: освобождаване, блаженство. Но, казва мъдрият индиец: този, който прави разлика между самсара с нирвана, е в самсара. Този, който вече не прави, е в нирвана.
Мисля, че това е Царството”.
Спомням си, понеже пиша този отзив повече от четири месеца, след като прочетох книгата, че тогава този последен параграф ме накара почти да настръхна. Не, защото ме удари с прозрението си, а защото видях написано нещо, което стояло като неясна идея в мен и може да се обобщи най-грубо като: Царството започва не някога си, а е насъщно сега, таящо се (даже и) под несъвършени, грубовати и отблъскващи реалности. Втренчването в разликите не принадлежи на него.
В края на това мнение, ще добавя още само това, че тази книга за християнството, писана от агностик, ми се струва, че се докосва доста повече до същината, отколкото друга, която четох по-рано, писана от възпитаник на католически колеж. Ако изобщо двете могат да се поставят на една везна.
March 28, 2015
Carrére, di cui mi è piaciuto tantissimo Limonov, si cimenta con un argomento sfidante: raccontare gli albori del cristianesimo e di come questo movimento universale sia nato da una ristretta cerchia di adepti per lo più illetterati e litigiosi.
Il punto di vista prescelto è quello della redazione del vangelo di Luca, un greco convertitosi per effetto della predicazione di Paolo. Ci viene raccontato come siano state queste due le figure - chiave che hanno permesso al cristianesimo di affermarsi nei due millenni successivi: Paolo - ebreo rinnegato o forse nemmeno ebreo - capisce subito che il "mercato" su cui puntare è quello dei gentili, ed in ciò entra in rotta di collisione con Pietro, Giacomo e Giovanni (l'altro evangelista) che preferirebbero coltivare l'orticello ebraico facendo di Gesù l'ultimo dei profeti. Luca - medico greco acculturato - è stato il divulgatore principe della vicenda dal punto di vista "paolino".
Carrére purtroppo ci avvisa quasi subito che considera questa l' opus magnum della sua carriera e profonde al di là di ogni ragionevole sopportazione le proprie vicende autobio/bibliografiche. Cosi ricapitola tutta la propria produzione letteraria e le fasi salienti della propria vita, dalla crisi mistica avuta intorno ai 30 anni alle sue preferenze in materia di filmati - porno, per finire a dirci (4 volte in due pagine) che nel 2010, finché stava concependo questo libro, è stato giurato a Cannes.
Oltre alla strabordante autoreferenzialità dell'autore c'è da segnalare anche un tono divulgativo - piacione tipo le "Storie d'Italia" di Montanelli - Gervaso che i più maturi certamente ricorderanno, che a volte diverte ed a volte risulta fuori luogo.
In definitiva si comprende come la figura di Paolo sia stata assolutamente fondamentale per la nascita del Cristianesimo quale si è poi sviluppato nei due millenni successivi.
Paolo ha capito ( e Carrére ce lo racconta con precisione) che quanto più il messaggio di Cristo si fosse staccato dalla tradizione giudaica e la sua complessità, tanto più universale ed accessibile sarebbe stata la sua diffusione; l'insistenza sul messaggio ultra-mondano (la risurrezione dei corpi era un suo mantra, quanto alla vita terrena conveniva accettarla così com'è...) e sul rito dell' eucarestia avrebbe creato una religione con eccezionale potere aggregante e "digeribile" da qualsiasi potere costituito.
Ecco, se Carrére ci avesse raccontato un po' meno delle sue morose e delle sue crisi mistiche ed avesse analizzato come (tema che a me incuriosisce molto) una religione che si basa sulla rinuncia ai beni terreni, che esalta i poveri ed i reietti e condanna i potenti e gli arroganti, si sia affermata in due millenni come religione dell' Occidente colonizzatore ed imperialista, diffondendosi ed affermandosi di pari passo con conquiste e genocidi, ecco che il libro avrebbe avuto una sua vera ragione d'essere.
Che sia stato tutto merito (o colpa, dipende dai punti di vista) di Paolo, vero genio del marketing, (a cui - tra l'altro - dobbiamo il fatto che noi maschietti nati cristiani non dobbiamo più circonciderci) lo deduciamo un po' da soli, e - per dare senso compiuto al titolo - sarebbe stato auspicabile che l'autore vi dedicasse un po' di analisi e meno ostentazione del proprio smisurato ego.
Il punto di vista prescelto è quello della redazione del vangelo di Luca, un greco convertitosi per effetto della predicazione di Paolo. Ci viene raccontato come siano state queste due le figure - chiave che hanno permesso al cristianesimo di affermarsi nei due millenni successivi: Paolo - ebreo rinnegato o forse nemmeno ebreo - capisce subito che il "mercato" su cui puntare è quello dei gentili, ed in ciò entra in rotta di collisione con Pietro, Giacomo e Giovanni (l'altro evangelista) che preferirebbero coltivare l'orticello ebraico facendo di Gesù l'ultimo dei profeti. Luca - medico greco acculturato - è stato il divulgatore principe della vicenda dal punto di vista "paolino".
Carrére purtroppo ci avvisa quasi subito che considera questa l' opus magnum della sua carriera e profonde al di là di ogni ragionevole sopportazione le proprie vicende autobio/bibliografiche. Cosi ricapitola tutta la propria produzione letteraria e le fasi salienti della propria vita, dalla crisi mistica avuta intorno ai 30 anni alle sue preferenze in materia di filmati - porno, per finire a dirci (4 volte in due pagine) che nel 2010, finché stava concependo questo libro, è stato giurato a Cannes.
Oltre alla strabordante autoreferenzialità dell'autore c'è da segnalare anche un tono divulgativo - piacione tipo le "Storie d'Italia" di Montanelli - Gervaso che i più maturi certamente ricorderanno, che a volte diverte ed a volte risulta fuori luogo.
In definitiva si comprende come la figura di Paolo sia stata assolutamente fondamentale per la nascita del Cristianesimo quale si è poi sviluppato nei due millenni successivi.
Paolo ha capito ( e Carrére ce lo racconta con precisione) che quanto più il messaggio di Cristo si fosse staccato dalla tradizione giudaica e la sua complessità, tanto più universale ed accessibile sarebbe stata la sua diffusione; l'insistenza sul messaggio ultra-mondano (la risurrezione dei corpi era un suo mantra, quanto alla vita terrena conveniva accettarla così com'è...) e sul rito dell' eucarestia avrebbe creato una religione con eccezionale potere aggregante e "digeribile" da qualsiasi potere costituito.
Ecco, se Carrére ci avesse raccontato un po' meno delle sue morose e delle sue crisi mistiche ed avesse analizzato come (tema che a me incuriosisce molto) una religione che si basa sulla rinuncia ai beni terreni, che esalta i poveri ed i reietti e condanna i potenti e gli arroganti, si sia affermata in due millenni come religione dell' Occidente colonizzatore ed imperialista, diffondendosi ed affermandosi di pari passo con conquiste e genocidi, ecco che il libro avrebbe avuto una sua vera ragione d'essere.
Che sia stato tutto merito (o colpa, dipende dai punti di vista) di Paolo, vero genio del marketing, (a cui - tra l'altro - dobbiamo il fatto che noi maschietti nati cristiani non dobbiamo più circonciderci) lo deduciamo un po' da soli, e - per dare senso compiuto al titolo - sarebbe stato auspicabile che l'autore vi dedicasse un po' di analisi e meno ostentazione del proprio smisurato ego.
December 17, 2018
L'ecclesiologia biblica di un Narciso
Carrère non può che essere definito un egocentrico narcisista, indubbiamente. Ma chi si irrita per questo e abbandona la sua lettura fa lo stesso errore di chi non guardasse un film di Orson Welles o evitasse una mostra di Dalì o di Picasso solo perchè questi artisti avevano un'elevata opinione di se stessi.
Come sempre, ciò che conta è solo la pagina scritta - ora, Carrère per me non è certo un genio della letteratura, ma riconosco che è davvero abile nell'affascinare il lettore e nel costruire trame accattivanti: quando l'incipit è del tipo "...sì, sembra Philip Dick, e la storia degli inizi del cristianesimo è la stessa dei Revenants" siamo davanti ad un blasfemo, arguto, furbetto e immodesto giocoliere della scrittura.
Ma una volta realizzato questo, possiamo goderci con soddisfazione i suoi virtuosismi.
E quindi la lettura di questo libro non delude e non viene inficiata dalle prime 100 pagine di autobiografismo assoluto ed egocentrico (perchè Carrère mai fa cadere il ritmo narrativo).
Tecnicamente, l'autore sceglie un approccio molto valido: l'identificazione con Luca, l'evangelista abbastanza distante da Gesù in spazio, tempo, cultura, funziona molto bene - il lettore riesce a seguire agevolmente la lenta scoperta del messaggio cristiano attraverso gli incontri di Luca con i maggiori protagonisti del primo secolo d.C. : Paolo e i suoi discepoli, Giacomo e i radicalisti ebrei, Pietro incastrato nelle diatribe dei primi due, Giovanni l'esiliato anziano massimalista.
Nulla di nuovo ovviamente per chiunque abbia anche una minima infarinatura dei testi biblici, ma in ogni caso interpretazioni coraggiose e intelligenti da parte di chi ha indubbiamente studiato con passione ed attenzione la materia facendola propria. Le provocazioni sul filo dell'anacronismo, gli arguti e rischiosi paralleli storici, le licenze letterarie prese "perchè mi piace così" sono stimolanti ed intelligenti proprio perchè dichiarati senza eccessivi scrupoli e con il mezzo sorrisetto di chi sa che i lettori gliela faranno passare sicuramente.
Sono rimasto un pò sorpreso che non sia mai citato nel libro il gruppo ebreo degli Esseni, molto spesso associato alla figura di Gesù e i cui rapporti sono stati molto discussi, in particolare dopo il ritrovamento dei codici di Qumran. Molto strano, perchè Carrère ha citato questo gruppo, mostrando di conoscerne almeno i tratti principali, nella biografia di Philip Dick...
Deludente, in ogni caso, la conclusione che non si eleva sopra una specie di happy end semplicistico dove tutto sembra risolversi nel lavarsi i piedi a vicenda e prendersi cura dei meno fortunati - per quanto consolatorio e confortante, non credo che il cristianesimo sia tutto qui
Carrère non può che essere definito un egocentrico narcisista, indubbiamente. Ma chi si irrita per questo e abbandona la sua lettura fa lo stesso errore di chi non guardasse un film di Orson Welles o evitasse una mostra di Dalì o di Picasso solo perchè questi artisti avevano un'elevata opinione di se stessi.
Come sempre, ciò che conta è solo la pagina scritta - ora, Carrère per me non è certo un genio della letteratura, ma riconosco che è davvero abile nell'affascinare il lettore e nel costruire trame accattivanti: quando l'incipit è del tipo "...sì, sembra Philip Dick, e la storia degli inizi del cristianesimo è la stessa dei Revenants" siamo davanti ad un blasfemo, arguto, furbetto e immodesto giocoliere della scrittura.
Ma una volta realizzato questo, possiamo goderci con soddisfazione i suoi virtuosismi.
E quindi la lettura di questo libro non delude e non viene inficiata dalle prime 100 pagine di autobiografismo assoluto ed egocentrico (perchè Carrère mai fa cadere il ritmo narrativo).
Tecnicamente, l'autore sceglie un approccio molto valido: l'identificazione con Luca, l'evangelista abbastanza distante da Gesù in spazio, tempo, cultura, funziona molto bene - il lettore riesce a seguire agevolmente la lenta scoperta del messaggio cristiano attraverso gli incontri di Luca con i maggiori protagonisti del primo secolo d.C. : Paolo e i suoi discepoli, Giacomo e i radicalisti ebrei, Pietro incastrato nelle diatribe dei primi due, Giovanni l'esiliato anziano massimalista.
Nulla di nuovo ovviamente per chiunque abbia anche una minima infarinatura dei testi biblici, ma in ogni caso interpretazioni coraggiose e intelligenti da parte di chi ha indubbiamente studiato con passione ed attenzione la materia facendola propria. Le provocazioni sul filo dell'anacronismo, gli arguti e rischiosi paralleli storici, le licenze letterarie prese "perchè mi piace così" sono stimolanti ed intelligenti proprio perchè dichiarati senza eccessivi scrupoli e con il mezzo sorrisetto di chi sa che i lettori gliela faranno passare sicuramente.
Sono rimasto un pò sorpreso che non sia mai citato nel libro il gruppo ebreo degli Esseni, molto spesso associato alla figura di Gesù e i cui rapporti sono stati molto discussi, in particolare dopo il ritrovamento dei codici di Qumran. Molto strano, perchè Carrère ha citato questo gruppo, mostrando di conoscerne almeno i tratti principali, nella biografia di Philip Dick...
Deludente, in ogni caso, la conclusione che non si eleva sopra una specie di happy end semplicistico dove tutto sembra risolversi nel lavarsi i piedi a vicenda e prendersi cura dei meno fortunati - per quanto consolatorio e confortante, non credo che il cristianesimo sia tutto qui
August 8, 2017
Secondo me quando si parla di spiritualità, le domande fondamentali che ci possiamo porre sono di due tipi:
1) esiste/non esiste un essere superiore?
2) crediamo/non crediamo alle religioni? (Ovviamente per religioni intendo le religioni "organizzate" in qualche modo dall'uomo, una per l'altra, fa poca differenza di quale si parli)
Io credo che alla domanda 1 non si possa dare una risposta. Si può stare a discutere per millenni, ma una risposta chiara e conclusiva non siamo in grado di darla e non lo saremo mai.
La domanda 2 è invece diversa. Alle religioni crede solo chi ha fede. E chi ha fede, le religioni non le discute, le digerisce così come sono, senza se e senza ma. Anche perché ogni analisi si fonda su argomentazioni storiche e logiche, mentre la religione non si basa né sulla logica né sulla storia. La discussione quindi su questa domanda è per me senza senso e porta esclusivamente alla frustrazione, visto che chi crede continua a credere, chi è scettico continua ad essere scettico, chi non crede continua a non credere.
Personalmente ritengo quindi abbastanza inutile discutere i dettagli della religione, perché presuppone non essere credenti e in tal caso l'epilogo della discussione non può che essere la confutazione dei fondamenti religiosi discussi.
Ergo: parlare e scrivere di religione non serve proprio a nulla, solo ad accendere un po’ gli animi.
Detto ciò, parliamo de "Il regno". Non è un libro di storia del Cristianesimo e neppure un romanzo storico. E' un saggio che tenta di analizzare e collegare fatti (presunti o certi) dei Vangeli e del primo cristianesimo.
Carrère, che si autodefinisce come "uno scettico, un agnostico, nemmeno abbastanza credente da essere ateo", nel suo libro fa proprio un'indagine del genere, dopo averci spiegato per benino la sua esperienza personale di cattolico praticante prima ed ex cattolico poi.
Ha studiato i testi sacri e analizzato i primi scrittori cristiani, ricostruito la biografia di Luca e Paolo, l'ambiente sociale dei decenni tra l'anno 50 e il 90 in Grecia, Giudea e Roma, scandagliato l'epoca in profondità per restituirci le dinamiche nella comunità dei seguaci di Gesù.
Alcuni particolari e dettagli sono indubbiamente interessanti. Ma la domanda fondamentale che ci rimane è: cosa racconta in pratica di nuovo Carrère nel libro? Con audaci paragoni, battute argute, interessanti citazioni, spregiudicati parallelismi storici, il libro dice in pratica il noto e l’ovvio. Dice che i Vangeli non sono stati scritti in presa diretta, che il cristianesimo non è una dottrina ma una narrazione, che c'è uno scostamento tra il pensiero di Gesù e il messaggio istituzionale della Chiesa.
Carrère non è credente. Ma le ultime righe lasciano intravedere qualcosa di più di uno spiraglio:
"Il libro che termino ora l'ho scritto in buonafede, ma cerca di avvicinarsi a qualcosa di tanto più grande di me da far sembrare questa buonafede ben poca cosa, lo so. L'ho scritto portandomi dietro il peso di ciò che sono: un uomo intelligente, ricco, con una posizione: altrettanti handicap per chi vuole entrare nel Regno. Comunque ci ho provato. E nel momento di lasciarlo mi chiedo se questo libro tradisca il giovane che sono stato, e il Signore in cui quel giovane ha creduto, o se invece vi sia rimasto, a suo modo, fedele. Non lo so."
Carrère sembra dire "non ci credo, ma è vero"; ossia finge di non crederci, o meglio, non riesce a credere che anche lui ci crede.
Un modo molto piacione per tenere il piede in due scarpe...
1) esiste/non esiste un essere superiore?
2) crediamo/non crediamo alle religioni? (Ovviamente per religioni intendo le religioni "organizzate" in qualche modo dall'uomo, una per l'altra, fa poca differenza di quale si parli)
Io credo che alla domanda 1 non si possa dare una risposta. Si può stare a discutere per millenni, ma una risposta chiara e conclusiva non siamo in grado di darla e non lo saremo mai.
La domanda 2 è invece diversa. Alle religioni crede solo chi ha fede. E chi ha fede, le religioni non le discute, le digerisce così come sono, senza se e senza ma. Anche perché ogni analisi si fonda su argomentazioni storiche e logiche, mentre la religione non si basa né sulla logica né sulla storia. La discussione quindi su questa domanda è per me senza senso e porta esclusivamente alla frustrazione, visto che chi crede continua a credere, chi è scettico continua ad essere scettico, chi non crede continua a non credere.
Personalmente ritengo quindi abbastanza inutile discutere i dettagli della religione, perché presuppone non essere credenti e in tal caso l'epilogo della discussione non può che essere la confutazione dei fondamenti religiosi discussi.
Ergo: parlare e scrivere di religione non serve proprio a nulla, solo ad accendere un po’ gli animi.
Detto ciò, parliamo de "Il regno". Non è un libro di storia del Cristianesimo e neppure un romanzo storico. E' un saggio che tenta di analizzare e collegare fatti (presunti o certi) dei Vangeli e del primo cristianesimo.
Carrère, che si autodefinisce come "uno scettico, un agnostico, nemmeno abbastanza credente da essere ateo", nel suo libro fa proprio un'indagine del genere, dopo averci spiegato per benino la sua esperienza personale di cattolico praticante prima ed ex cattolico poi.
Ha studiato i testi sacri e analizzato i primi scrittori cristiani, ricostruito la biografia di Luca e Paolo, l'ambiente sociale dei decenni tra l'anno 50 e il 90 in Grecia, Giudea e Roma, scandagliato l'epoca in profondità per restituirci le dinamiche nella comunità dei seguaci di Gesù.
Alcuni particolari e dettagli sono indubbiamente interessanti. Ma la domanda fondamentale che ci rimane è: cosa racconta in pratica di nuovo Carrère nel libro? Con audaci paragoni, battute argute, interessanti citazioni, spregiudicati parallelismi storici, il libro dice in pratica il noto e l’ovvio. Dice che i Vangeli non sono stati scritti in presa diretta, che il cristianesimo non è una dottrina ma una narrazione, che c'è uno scostamento tra il pensiero di Gesù e il messaggio istituzionale della Chiesa.
Carrère non è credente. Ma le ultime righe lasciano intravedere qualcosa di più di uno spiraglio:
"Il libro che termino ora l'ho scritto in buonafede, ma cerca di avvicinarsi a qualcosa di tanto più grande di me da far sembrare questa buonafede ben poca cosa, lo so. L'ho scritto portandomi dietro il peso di ciò che sono: un uomo intelligente, ricco, con una posizione: altrettanti handicap per chi vuole entrare nel Regno. Comunque ci ho provato. E nel momento di lasciarlo mi chiedo se questo libro tradisca il giovane che sono stato, e il Signore in cui quel giovane ha creduto, o se invece vi sia rimasto, a suo modo, fedele. Non lo so."
Carrère sembra dire "non ci credo, ma è vero"; ossia finge di non crederci, o meglio, non riesce a credere che anche lui ci crede.
Un modo molto piacione per tenere il piede in due scarpe...
December 31, 2023
En general es un libro muy interesante para un creyente, como es mi caso. Atrae porque te ves reflejado en numerosas dudas que se nos plantean a casi todos los que hemos leído, siquiera parcialmente, el Nuevo Testamento. Un texto que es, en esencia, su interpretación personal de los Evangelios y los evangelistas y a la que califica de investigación. En paralelo, diserta sobre el pilar paulino, central en el libro y en la historia del cristianismo. En mi opinión, de las 500 páginas sobran las 100 iniciales en las que narra su periplo vital, más otras 100 de relleno histórico o directamente de vulgaridades, cuando no groserías. Mi calificación se queda en un 3,75 con momentos de 4. ¿Recomendable? Probablemente sí.
June 28, 2023
Es un libro tremendísimo. No entiendo las reseñas criticando el narcisismo de Carrère: "si saben cómo me pongo, pa que me invitan?". Pues eso.
September 1, 2022
Cheguei a "O Reino" (2014), não por ter sido um enorme sucesso em França quando saiu, mas por ser apresentado como um ficcionar dos primeiros anos do cristianismo, focado nas vidas de Paulo e Lucas. Tenho-me interessado cada vez mais pelos chamados romances históricos, pelo modo como facilitam o nosso acesso ao conhecimento da História. Mas não foi nada disso que aqui encontrei. Carrère reconta e parafraseia a partir de dezenas de textos históricos e teológicos, oferecendo-nos a sua interpretação sobre os mesmos. Existe ficção nessa sua interpretação, na interpretação das ideias, mas não existe propriamente dramatização, ou seja, recriação das ações dos personagens. Carrère segue um discurso colado ao registo dos documentários de televisão, em que vai comentando os escritos e teorias, algo que poderia até funcionar como não-ficção, mas que se esfuma porque muito do que vai dizendo é pura especulação. Por isso, perde também aquilo que afirma ser a sua forma de escrever quando nos diz que nunca conseguiu acabar de ler as “Memórias de Adriano” de Marguerite Yourcenar, por não se rever no ato de ficcionar, dada a impossibilidade de imparcialidade das histórias. Mas estes seu discurso, mesmo estando sempre colado ao real, com reparos de dúvida constante, é o da sua pessoa e das suas memórias, por isso mesmo não deixa de estar pejado dessa parcialidade. Mais, não há aqui qualquer método para tentar diminuir esse viés, existe antes uma aceitação tácita que, segundo ele, lhe dá liberdade para dizer o que quiser, alardeando que o que diz pode mesmo ter acontecido assim, em certa medida colocando-se no lugar dos autores dos próprios Evangelhos.
ler o texto completo no blog:
https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...
ler o texto completo no blog:
https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...
April 22, 2025
The Kingdom is a monumental work. It’s a personal narrative overloaded with authorial comments and musings, personal anecdotes and associative digressive tangents with, at its heart, the author’s inquiry into the origins of Christianity in the years immediately following the death of Jesus.
The Book begins with the chapter “Crisis”, the trigger to Carrere’s journey in search of Christianity in its earliest form, that preached by Jesus the man, and that promulgated by the apostle Paul in the name of Christ the god. There is no Narrator facade in this work. The author, Emmaneul Carrere, is addressing his readers directly and it is of the utmost importance to him that we understand his motivation for this inquiry. And so he opens with the very personal circumstances of his crisis, his conversion and his subsequent lapse.
His approach to the beginnings of Christianity is historical, agnostic and literary, as opposed to metaphysical, and he will investigate the Gospel as he would investigate the cogs and motivations of any other literary venture. He shares his motivations and his methodology with the reader in great detail setting the ground for the inquiry to follow, and tempering the reader’s expectations to the author’s vision of this work.
Carrere will conduct his inquiry through the Gospel of Luke and the Acts attributed to Luke. He views him as a writer such as himself and senses an affinity with him that he doesn’t have with the larger-than-life Paul. Luke’s storytelling, Carrere informs us, is vivid, precise and detailed. One has the impression that he has thoroughly researched the events he is describing. As opposed to Paul who always takes center stage Luke is in the background and the story he tells is at the center.
Carrere invents for us a humane, thorough, intelligent and humble Luke.
Unfamiliar as I am with the New Testament, its stories and its protagonists, Carrere’s work was immensely illuminating for me and I read it with a copy of the New Testament on hand so that I could follow the sources he cites throughout his narrative.
The Kingdom is a massive, broad and detailed literary journey into the beginnings of the Christian church through a captivating and very personally constructed narrative.
The Book begins with the chapter “Crisis”, the trigger to Carrere’s journey in search of Christianity in its earliest form, that preached by Jesus the man, and that promulgated by the apostle Paul in the name of Christ the god. There is no Narrator facade in this work. The author, Emmaneul Carrere, is addressing his readers directly and it is of the utmost importance to him that we understand his motivation for this inquiry. And so he opens with the very personal circumstances of his crisis, his conversion and his subsequent lapse.
His approach to the beginnings of Christianity is historical, agnostic and literary, as opposed to metaphysical, and he will investigate the Gospel as he would investigate the cogs and motivations of any other literary venture. He shares his motivations and his methodology with the reader in great detail setting the ground for the inquiry to follow, and tempering the reader’s expectations to the author’s vision of this work.
Carrere will conduct his inquiry through the Gospel of Luke and the Acts attributed to Luke. He views him as a writer such as himself and senses an affinity with him that he doesn’t have with the larger-than-life Paul. Luke’s storytelling, Carrere informs us, is vivid, precise and detailed. One has the impression that he has thoroughly researched the events he is describing. As opposed to Paul who always takes center stage Luke is in the background and the story he tells is at the center.
Carrere invents for us a humane, thorough, intelligent and humble Luke.
Unfamiliar as I am with the New Testament, its stories and its protagonists, Carrere’s work was immensely illuminating for me and I read it with a copy of the New Testament on hand so that I could follow the sources he cites throughout his narrative.
The Kingdom is a massive, broad and detailed literary journey into the beginnings of the Christian church through a captivating and very personally constructed narrative.
August 24, 2018
i found this book to be often fascinating, deeply informative, and consistently entertaining. the premise of "a formerly devout religious man writes an entire history of the religion and gradually becomes terrified he still believes" is really cool too. that being said, this is so incredibly self-indulgent and in love with itself that it's hard to really connect with on more than a superficial level. the blend of nonfiction and fiction also doesn't do anything for me aside from cause confusion; i don't know what he's making up or what's real and i don't really care either. there are some details in this about the author, that, actually, i really didn't need to know about! it's fine
May 2, 2016
El Reino de Immanuel Carrière es un libro de imposible adscripción a un sólo género literario. Escrito en primera persona, permite transitar por todas las veredas que el autor ha recorrido en su peripecia vital: budismo, cristianismo, “nietzscherismo”... Cierto es que el mayor espacio se destina a una revisión e interpretación del cristianismo en su etapa de gestación, incluyendo sendos análisis de dos de sus protagonistas: Pablo de Tarso y Lucas. Precisamente a través de ellos interpreta, fustiga, incluso enternece, en páginas trufadas de Historia sin ser, en sentido estricto, investigación histórica. Algunas cuñas descriptivas, que sorprenden al lector, son de difícil ensamblaje en lo que parece sugerir el título y la imagen de portada.
El relato presenta algunos errores de fondo y forma en la edición española, a mi entender fácilmente corregibles. También se señala que la sintaxis a veces requiere una doble lectura para su correcta comprensión, pero en su conjunto la obra atrapa la atención del lector, que aprecia la vasta cultura del autor, su brillantez y la sobredimensión de su “yo”. La ironía, el escepticismo y la incredulidad se remansan en lo que Carrière considera la esencia del cristianismo: “Hijitos míos, amaos los unos a los otros”, repetido insistentemente por Juan en su vejez de Patmos.
La frase que cierra el libro es: No lo sé, expresión críptica que condensa las ambivalencias intelectuales y afectivas del autor.
El relato presenta algunos errores de fondo y forma en la edición española, a mi entender fácilmente corregibles. También se señala que la sintaxis a veces requiere una doble lectura para su correcta comprensión, pero en su conjunto la obra atrapa la atención del lector, que aprecia la vasta cultura del autor, su brillantez y la sobredimensión de su “yo”. La ironía, el escepticismo y la incredulidad se remansan en lo que Carrière considera la esencia del cristianismo: “Hijitos míos, amaos los unos a los otros”, repetido insistentemente por Juan en su vejez de Patmos.
La frase que cierra el libro es: No lo sé, expresión críptica que condensa las ambivalencias intelectuales y afectivas del autor.
October 20, 2017
Ok, as many reviews have suggested, you have to get past the relentless and overwhelming narcissism of the book before you realize you are reading an absolute masterpiece. Given our times, I suppose that it is somehow suiting that a book so taken with the self like this could become a representative masterpiece and it is interesting that the book functions so well as such. Even the Bible is here to illuminate the hero's self-love. Not what can he say about life and the early church but what can life and the early church say about him? You will hate him.
And yet, make no mistake this is a great masterpiece. It really calls to mind the Brothers Karamazov, which the author refers to several times in fact in the book. A philosophical novel in the old tradition-or a memoir gone crazy?- whateverthe genre it finally gets placed, it is definitely the best book I have read in memory (better than Laurus and better than Galileo's Dream)... His early church story is dazzling. It is also a fascinating meditation about what is belief and faith. Someone who had not been once a believer (even for a short time span) probably could never have written this book. He was a Christian who now flirts with Yoga and Buddhism and is very self-conscious of this all. Also, for anyone interested in Philip K. Dick, Carrere is brilliant. Wow. I don't think he has made any theologians mad yet either.
And yet, make no mistake this is a great masterpiece. It really calls to mind the Brothers Karamazov, which the author refers to several times in fact in the book. A philosophical novel in the old tradition-or a memoir gone crazy?- whateverthe genre it finally gets placed, it is definitely the best book I have read in memory (better than Laurus and better than Galileo's Dream)... His early church story is dazzling. It is also a fascinating meditation about what is belief and faith. Someone who had not been once a believer (even for a short time span) probably could never have written this book. He was a Christian who now flirts with Yoga and Buddhism and is very self-conscious of this all. Also, for anyone interested in Philip K. Dick, Carrere is brilliant. Wow. I don't think he has made any theologians mad yet either.
January 20, 2015
Bon, j'avoue, ma première première impression a été la déception. La déception car j'ai été floué. Je pensais lire, me fiant à la quatrième et aux diverses critiques, un roman, bien documenté disait-on, mettant en scène les premiers chrétiens. Que nenni, soyez averti, ce n'est pas un roman. Si je devais décrire ce livre sans le déflorer entièrement je dirais que c'est un essai. Un double même. D'une part Emmanuel Carrère nous livre son parcours spirituel d'incroyant à catholique, puis agnostique. C'est assez honnête de sa part, voire courageux même si c'est longuet. Le deuxième essai c'est un compte rendu d'enquête sur les premiers chrétiens, partant des sources historiques. Un peu comme Ernest Renan écrivant « la vie de Jésus ». À la nuance près qu'il analyse ces sources avec un regard littéraire, une démarche d'écrivain qui analyse d'autres écrivains. Il faut de plus ajouter que ces deux essais sont entremêlés. Je suis heureux de avoir lu ce livre, il faut être un tant soit peu obstiné, j'y ai appris des choses intéressantes. Mais ce n'est pas un roman...
August 9, 2024
De lo mejor que he leído este año. Me sigue sorprendiendo lo difícil que tiene que ser escribir un libro tan redondo, tan bien terminado, que ni se excede en todas las tramas que trata —que son muchas— ni se queda falto. Muy, muy recomendable.
February 5, 2025
Una lectura única y estimulante. Vale la pena.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 605 reviews