Serendipities: Language and Lunacy

by Umberto Eco

Serendipities is a careful unraveling of the fabulous and the false, a brilliant exposition of how unanticipated truths often spring from false ideas. From Leibniz's belief that the I Ching illustrated the principles of calculus to Marco Polo's mistaking a rhinoceros for a unicorn, Umberto Eco offers a dazzling tour of intellectual history, illuminating the ways in which we project the familiar onto the strange to make sense of the world. Uncovering layers of mistakes that have shaped human history, Eco offers with wit and clarity such instances as Columbus's voyage to the New World, the fictions that grew around the Rosicrucians and Knights Templar, and the linguistic endeavors to recreate the language of Babel, to show how serendipities can evolve out of mistakes. With erudition, anecdotes, and scholarly rigor, this new collection of essays is sure to entertain and enlighten any reader with a passion for the curious history of languages and ideas.

Genres: Nonfiction, Essays, Philosophy, Language, History, Linguistics, Italian Literature

144 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1998

About the author

Umberto Eco was an Italian medievalist, philosopher, semiotician, novelist, cultural critic, and political and social commentator. In English, he is best known for his popular 1980 novel The Name of the Rose, a historical mystery combining semiotics in fiction with biblical analysis, medieval studies and literary theory, as well as Foucault's Pendulum, his 1988 novel which touches on similar themes.

Eco wrote prolifically throughout his life, with his output including children's books, translations from French and English, in addition to a twice-monthly newspaper column "La Bustina di Minerva" (Minerva's Matchbook) in the magazine L'Espresso beginning in 1985, with his last column (a critical appraisal of the Romantic paintings of Francesco Hayez) appearing 27 January 2016. At the time of his death, he was an Emeritus professor at the University of Bologna, where he taught for much of his life. In the 21st century, he has continued to gain recognition for his 1995 essay "Ur-Fascism", where Eco lists fourteen general properties he believes comprise fascist ideologies.

Reviews

[Riku Sayuj · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Force of Falsity

Eco illustrates through multiple examples on what tenuous grounds much of our accepted history of today stands. What we believe, exists. And the belief outweighs the actual existence, or lack thereof.

Each of these stories/examples have a virtue: as narratives, they seem genuinely plausible, more than everyday or historical reality, which is far more complex and less credible. The stories seemed to explain something that was otherwise hard to understand. Hard to understand without accepting the “Force of Falsity” in shaping perception and thus History.

In other words, what links the essays collected here is that they are about ideas, projects, beliefs that exist in a twilight zone between common sense and lunacy, truth and error, visionary intelligence and what now seems to us stupidity, though it was not stupid in its day and we must therefore reconsider it with great respect.

It is not easy sailing, moving through these essays. Eco assumes a familiarity with the Italian language and histories of secret societies, that is hard to summon for the casual reader. But if you can just go along with the flow and accept the few over-shots, the general thrust and playfulness is still enjoyable enough.

The first half of the book on these 'falsities' and their impact on history is a delight. The rest of the pieces are half-lunatic essays into the origins of language, from a biblical perspective. It is very hard to follow with the numerous references to biblical scholars and medieval studies and almost exclusive obsession with the more obscure aspects of Dante scholarship.

"False tales are, first of all, tales, and tales, like myths, are always persuasive. And we could mention many, many other false tales,for example, the myth of the Terra Australis, that immense continent that supposedly extended all along the polar cap and subtropical Antarctica. The firm belief in the existence of this land (affirmed by countless maps showing the globe encircled, to the south, by a broad terrestrial band), drove navigators from various nations for at least three centuries to try to explore the south seas and even the Antarctic.

What can be said of the idea of Eldorado and the fountain of youth, which led mad, brave heroes to explore the two Americas? Or the stimulus given to nascent chemistry by hallucinations inspired by the phantom of the philosopher’s stone? And what about the tale of Phlogiston, the tale of cosmic ether?

Let us forget for a moment that some of these false tales produced positive effects, while others produced horror and shame. All created something, for better or worse. Nothing in their success is inexplicable. What represents a problem is rather the way they managed to replace other tales that today we consider true. Although instruments, whether empirical or conjectural, exist to prove that some object is false, every decision in the matter presupposes the existence of an original, authentic and true, to which the fake is compared. The truly genuine problem thus does not consist of proving something false but in proving that the authentic object is authentic.





And yet this obvious consideration must not lead us to the conclusion that a criterion of truth does not exist and that tales now called false and tales that today we believe true are equivalent because both belong to the genre of narrative fiction.There exists a process of verification that is based on slow, collective, public performance by what Charles Sanders Peirce called “the Community.”

It is thanks to human faith in the work of this community that we can say, with some serenity, that the Donation of Constantine was false, that the earth turns around the sun, and that Saint Thomas at least knew the planet is round. At most, recognizing that our history was inspired by many tales we now recognize as false should make us alert, ready to call constantly into question the very tales we believe true, because the criterion of the wisdom of the community is based on constant awareness of the fallibility of our learning."

[Salmaism سلمى الهلالي · Rating 4 out of 5]

قراءة من 2009
كتيب فيه ثلاث محاضرات لإيكو:0
الأولى (حلم اللغة المثالية)، تتحدث عن حلم البشر باللغة الكاملة، و ربما تلك التي تحدث بها آدم و من بعده حتى تبلبلت ألسنتهم بحسب رواية التوراة... ثم كيف صار يرى كل قوم أن لغتهم هي الأكمل... مع أني شخصيا أجد اختلاف اللغات شيئا معجزا و مثاليا أكثر مما لو كانت متوحدة... أشبه باختلاف أصوات العصافير... أفكر كم سيكون الكون باهتا لو لم توجد إلا لغة واحدة... و حين أفكر بنعيم الجنة أفكر بأمتلاك القدرة على قراءة الشعر بكل اللغات... حتى لغة قبائل الزولو... 0
و الثانية (حكايات عن إساءة الفهم)، و هي أنه في كثير من الأحيان حين يحاكم المرء حضارة أخرى أو يسافر إلى بلد آخر فإنه لا يحاول أن يفهم الاختلافات و لا أن يحاول رؤية الواقع كما هو أو تعلمه من جديد و إنما كل ما يراه هو تطبيقات أفكاره المسبقة عن المكان... هذه المقالة ذكرتني بكيفية رؤية المستشرقين للشرق... لا يرون إلا الصورة المشكلة في مخيلتهم قبلا...0
الثالثة (المؤلف و مفسروه)، عن تلك العلاقة الجدلية بين ما عناه المؤلف و ما فهمه المتلقي... و قد ضرب إيكو أمثلة على كتاباته و قراءه و التأويلات التي لم تخطر بباله مطلقا... و في هذا السياق و بعد أن قرأت هذه المحاضرة فإني أسحب جملتي التي وسمت بها إيكو في روايته جزيرة اليوم السابق "بأن كل شيء فيها متعمد" إذ يستحيل أن يكون كل شيء متعمد فيها... لأن ذلك يعني أنه أحاط و تقصد كل الاحتمالات اللامنتيهة التي ستتوالد في أذهان القراء و من بينهم محدثتكم... و هذا أمر خارج عن قدرة البشر...0

على صغر الكتيب إلا أنه دسم و لا يخلو من صعوبة...0

[Jonfaith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thus Dante puts forth his own candidacy as a new (and more perfect) Adam.
11.2022 reread:
Simply stunning erudition, lovingly devoured whilst waiting for a plumber. Last weekend I enjoyed a conversation with my nephew who aspires to be a philosopher. Much of this collection resonated from my previous reading as I referred to it a few times. That is astonishing in itself.
Original Review:

Somewhere in an earlier Alomodovar film, maybe Flower of the Secret, a character describes a scenario for a film, one which actually A would eventually create as Volver. I really like that, the inclusion. Eco anticipates his Cemetery of Prague with a devilish delight in this one, little surprise as nearly all of PC, outside of the protagonist, is grounded in historical evidence. I liked this dizzying book, though the final section did leave me grasping, if not gasping.

[Ehsan Mohammadzadeh · Rating 4 out of 5]

خیلی سخته با رفقا رفته باشی بیرون و سر به کتاب‌فروشی بزنید و یهو یه کتاب از اکو تو قفسه‌ها ببینی و هی بهت چشمک بزنه و قبلش هم تو نمایشگاه کتاب انقدر خرید کرده باشی که دیگه دستت به خرید نره. خوشبختانه رضا QTA اونجا بود و کتاب رو در ازای یه کتاب ایلیاده برام گرفت به سنت قرض و این حرف‌ها.
و اما چه تجربه‌ی جذابی بود این کتاب. مشتمله بر پنج مقاله از اکو، که می‌شه گفت اولین تجربه‌ی من بود تو زمینه‌ی زبان‌شناسی و چقدر برام دوست‌داشتنی بود. این مقالات مکمل خیلی خوبی بودند برای درک شیوه‌ی شکل‌گیری پلات‌های داستان‌هایی مثل بائودولینو یا آونگ فوکو.
مقاله اول تمرکز بر یافته‌های ناجسته (به بیان اکو سرندیپیتی‌ها) دارد. سرندیپیتی یافته‌هایی را می‌گویند که یابنده با داده‌ها و اطلاعات اشتباه و از سر کج‌فهمی به صورت اتفاقی بهشان دست پیدا می‌کند. بسیارند این سرندیپیتی‌ها که گاهی نمی‌شود حتی آنچه را که بر بنیان استدلالیشان ساخته‌ایم به قطع و یقین حاصل نیروی دروغ و ناراستی دانست. مهم‌ترین آنها دین است که در هر منطقه‌ای مردم آنجا مدعای برحق بودن دین خود دارند و اگر به دنبال صدق و خطای گفتارشان برویم، باید آنچه را که دین برای آن جامعه برساخته است را زیر سوال ببریم.
یکی دیگر از مهم‌ترین این یافته‌های ناجسته کشف آمریکا توسط کریستوف کلمب است. عالمان سالامانکا او را نهیب زدند که گردش به دور زمین بسیار طولانی خواهد بود و او توان انجام این کار را نخواهد داشت،‌ اما کلمب که دریانورد ماهر اما ستاره‌شناس نابلدی بود زمین را کوچک‌تر از گفته‌های آنان می‌پنداشت و دل به دریا زد. کسی اطلاع از وجود چنین خشکی وسیعی در میانه‌ی راه او نداشت که اگر چنین نبود کلمب راه به جایی نمی‌برد و در میانه‌ی راه تلف می‌شد، اما سرنوشتش بر این بود که با وجود اشتباه در محاسبات، کشفی تاریخ‌ساز داشته باشد.
مطمئنم برای خوانندگان بائودولینو و آونگ فوکو بخش مرتبط با جان پریستر و همچنین چلیپا و قرارگاه صهیون هم می‌تواند خیلی جذاب باشد.

دومین مقاله به برج بابل و جدایی زبان‌ها بعد از آن می‌پردازد. سندیت روایت برج بابل را مورد سوال قرار می‌دهد و از آن زبانی که ابتدا آدم ابوالبشر در عدن با آن همه چیز را نام گذاری کرد و فرجام آن زبان می‌گوید. کابالای اسامی و حروفیه منشآت این گم شدن زبان برتر هستند. همچنین با نظریه‌ی زبان‌های بومی درخشان دانته آشنا می‌شویم.

سومین مقاله بیشترین ارتباط را با مقاله نخستین دارد. به تقابل فرهنگ‌ها می‌پردازد و ورود زبان‌ از خلال این تقابل‌ها. و خطا و اشتباهاتی که نتایجی جالب به بار می‌آورند. اما این تقابل منوط بر این است که دو فرهنگ همدیگر را به رسمیت شناخته باشند. مثلا اروپاییان خط و زبان چین و از آن بیشتر مصر را به خاطر قدرت اقتصادی و فرهنگیشان به رسمیت شناختند اما این اتفاق برای اهالی بومی امریکا نیفتاد. همچنین در این مقاله به نحوه‌ی کشف هیروگلیف‌ها و همچنین نماآواهای شرق دور می‌پردازد و نحوه‌ی گره‌گشایی زبان مصری با رزتا استون را نیز در این مقاله می‌خوانیم.

چهارمین مقاله غریب‌ترین مقاله برای من بود. به زبان بسیار پیچیده‌ی بومیان استرالیا پرداخته بود. زبانی که بسیار شباهت به فرمول‌های شیمیایی دارد، به این گونه‌ که برای مثلا بیان «ستاره‌ها» از AEB استفاده می‌کنند که A:آتش، E:هوا، B:روشن. نه صرف فعل دارند و نه حروف تعریف.

پنجمین مقاله به موضوع داغ این روزهای زبان ما می‌پردازد: زایایی زبان. اعتقاد دومستر را درباره‌ی کلمات بیگانه‌ی واردشونده به زبان بیان می‌کند و به برخوردهای سلبی و تحجرآمیزی که حتی امروز هم گریبانگیر آن هستیم می‌پردازد.

پنج مقاله را می‌توان جدا جدا خواند اما بعضا به هم ارتباط هم دارند. برای من تجربه‌ی خیلی جذابی بود و به عنوان کتاب رفرنس بهش مراجعه خواهم کرد. بله کتاب رو از رضا می‌خرم. D:

[Moshtagh hosein · Rating 5 out of 5]

اومبرتو اکو تجسم کامل پراگماتیسم در یک انسان است!
از اومبرتو اکو هرچه دید باید خواند،در واقع کسانی که ادعای کرم کتاب بودن دارند خاک پای اکو هم نیستند،اینقدر پیگیر مرد حسابی!
این کتاب برای من که قبلا رمان های اکو رو خونده بودم بسیار راه گشا بود،و به این سوال که ایده های نویسندگی اکو و زبان نوشتارش از کجا میاد تا حدودی پاسخ گفت.
کتاب پنج مقاله داره یکی از دیگری خواندنی تر و به مقوله زبان و صحبت و گویش و ریشه های اون میپردازه،عبری،سانسکریت،چینی و...

اما بخش جالب کتاب اشاره به نوع صحبت کردن کو مان و اطفال هست و این سوال که اگر به کودک زبان خاصی نیاموزم به چه زبانی صحبت خواهد کرد؟
بهش دیگری که به چشم میاد بخش زبان در بهشت هست،جتیی مه بعنوان مثال از دانته و کمدی الهی مثال میاره و زبان بهشتیان و دوزخیان و شیطان!

یادداشت پشت کتاب
پس چه چیز در زمان کلمب این چنین بحث انگیز بود؟ در حقیقت،محاسبات عالمان سالا مانکا بسیار دقیق تر از کلمب بود و ایشان می پنداشتند که زمین، گرچه به طور قطع مدوراست، امابیش از آن که دریانورد جنوایی باور دارد وسیع و گسترده است، پس تلاش وی برای گردش به دور زمین در دست یابی به مشرق از راه مغرب کاری است دیوانه وار ، در مقابل، کریستف کلمب که از آتش مقدس شعله ور شده بود، هر چند دریانوردی بود ماهر، اما ستاره شناسی بود نابلد و چنین می اندیشید که زمین کوچکتر است. طبیعتا نه او و نه خردمندان سالامانکا هیچ یک گمان نمی بردند که میان اروپا و آسیا، آن طرف دنیا قاره ای دیگر قرار دارد. از این رو، می بینیم که زندگی به چه میزان پیچیده است و تا چه حد مرزهای میان حقیقت و خطا، درستی و نادرستی شکننده اند، به هر جهت گر چه عالمان سالامانکا درست گفته بودند ، اما در نهایت اشتباه کردند؛ و کلمب که خطا کرده بود، با پیگیری مصرانه ی اشتباهش، درستی خود را ثابت کرد.

[lisa_emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this book because a friend gave it to me- he had an extra copy- and I wanted to read more Eco, (or at least another book by Eco, as so far I have read only one) this one looked thin and non-intimidating. If you have not read his "The Search for the Perfect Language", this little book of essays may seem as though it is coming from left field, since all the essays deal with the search for the original language and the degenerate manifestations of the so-called original language. You may also want to avoid drinking wine while reading these essays, even after one glass, nothing will make much sense and you may feel sad & stupid, as I did. Personally, I would have preferred a little more lunacy and a little less language.

[Mohammad · Rating 4 out of 5]

تابلوي مورد علاقه از نقاش مورد علاقه روي جلد كتابي از نويسنده مورد علاقه. دو مقاله ي اول شگفت انگيز بود. اونجا كه اكو با موشكافي و با استناد به انجيل، كمدي الهي و وقايع برج بابل، سعي در كشف راز زبان نخستين بشر دارد

[سلطان · Rating 2 out of 5]

لا خلاف على أن إيكو كاتب كبير، وفي الوقت نفسه ناقد مهم، لكني توقعت منه مادة أجمل وأبحاثا أكثر دقة في هذا الكتاب الذي ضم ثلاث محاضرات ألقاها في الأكاديمية الإيطالية بأمريكا.إذ تحدث في المحاضرة التي عنوانها حلم اللغة المثالية عن فرضيات اللغة الأولى وبداية تشكل الكلمات، وركز بقوة على اللغة العبرية التي نقل ما يقال عن فرضية أنها اللغة الأم للغات العالم، وأن والدنا آدم عليه السلام تحدث بها. كما تحدث عن اللغة الألمانية وبعض اللغات الأخرى، في إيحاء منه بأن اللغة الأم لا تخرج عن اللغات التي ذكرها.
العجيب أنه تجاهل اللغة العربية تماما، وهو ما ينقص كثيرا من القيمة العلمية لبحثه.
كنت أعتقد أن إيكو باحث وناقد رصين، لكن اعتقادي هذا تغير بعد قراءتي هذا الكتاب الذي يبدو أن لعنوانه نصيب في أفكاره التي يبدو أن فيها إساءة فهم مع سبق الإصرار والترصد.

[Lio Lio · Rating 4 out of 5]

إذا لم تكن مهتماً بما يطرح ولديك توق تجاه معرفة ماذا يمكن أن يكتب جماليُّ ومؤلفٌ عن الجمال والتأليف لا ترهق نفسك، والجزء الآخر أنّه نوعاً ما كان موجهاً ﻷكاديميين، فليس هناك مشكلة أن يستغلق عليك بعضه فتخضع نفسك للبحث ومحاولة الرؤية، لا تستكثر يوماً في مثل هذا الكتاب الذي قد تعُدّه قصيراً، فحتماً ليس طبيعياً مطالعة كتابٍ شبه أكاديميّ ذي طبيعة نقدية بنفس طريقة مطالعة روايات بوليسية متوسطة الجودة.

[أسيل · Rating 3 out of 5]

نجمة لكل محاضرة ونجمتان ناقصتان للصعوبة فيها ربما لأن هكذا دراسات جديدة عليي واسلوب جديد وأول عمل اقرأه للكاتب ولكن عالم المؤلف واضح جماله وسعة معرفته

ثلاثة محاضرات عن اللغة وتباين الثقافات والعلاقات بينها واساءة الفهم والنص وقارئه أدبياً
ويعزو اساءة الفهم الى تأثيرالخلفيات المعرفية والروحانية والأسطورية على الإنسان في علاقته بكل ما يحيط به أو يفعله واعتماده بكل ما يقوم به او يصبو اليه على خلفيته وان المشكلة الحقيقية في الانسان تتعلق بدافع الخلود بداخله الذي يجعله يظن ان قواعده هي القواعد الذهبية

المحاضر الاولى كانت بعنوان حلم اللغة المثالية وبحث علماء اللغة وسعيهم لاثبات ان هذه اللغة هي المثالية من منطلق خلفياتهم وما يهدفون للايصال اليه

المحاضرة الثانية حكايات عن إساءة الفهم بين ثقافتين
لكل ثقافة لغة ورؤية مختلفة عن ثقافة اخرى فعندما تتقابل ثقافتان فثمة اختلاف وفجوة بينهما
وهنا يبزغ ثلاث احتمالات في التقاء ثقافتين الإخضاع ، السطو الثقا‍فى ، التبادل
وضرب حكاية ماركو بولو، ‍فى رحلته إلي الصين ووصفه لاحادي القرن ((الذي جعل ماركو بولو لا يستطيع إعلان أن ما رآه لم يكن أحادي القرن هذا الكائن الخرا‍فى الذي خلقته الثقافة الأوروبية ليعيش ‍فى البلاد البعيدة العجائبية بل كان وحيد القرن "الكركدن))

المحاضرة الثالثة بعنوان المؤلف ومفسروه
يعتبر ايكو النص بمثابة آلة تخيلية لإثارة عمليات التفسير
وان كان ثمة تساؤل للقارئ فعلية الا يوجهه للمؤلف فكل فعل قراءة هو صفقة صعبة بين كفاءة القارئ
تحدث عن رواياته وخاصة اسم الوردة وبندول فوكو وسبب تسميتهما وتحدث عن قراءه
وعن ايكو كنموذج قارئ

[Dfordoom · Rating 4 out of 5]

The main theme running through the essays in Umberto Eco’s Serendipities is that false or deluded or distorted (or even just plain crazy) ideas can change the world just as significantly as ideas that are true. And like ideas that are true, these ideas can change the world in positive or negative ways. The medieval belief in a vast Christian kingdom in the east, ruled by Prester John, was completely false but it was a major stimulus to European exploration and expansion. He also has some stimulating things to say about the way we deal with the new, and the way our existing baggage of beliefs (what Eco calls our background books) can lead us to interpret new things in mistaken ways because the things we find in the new are the things we expect to find. The chapter on the spectacular misinterpretations of the nature and meaning of Egyptian hieroglyphics, and of other unfamiliar language systems, is particularly interesting. Eco is, as always, entertaining and provocative. An excellent little book.

[Ahmed Almawali · Rating 4 out of 5]

بموتِ الكاتبِ فإن أعمالَه تكتسبُ حسًّا خاصا بها لم تكنْ لتتلبسُ بهِ قبلَ رحيلِه. هذا الكتابُ عبارةٌ عن ثلاثِ محاضراتٍ بدأَها بالأسطورة الوردية عن حلمِ امتلاكِ لغة مثالية قبل أن تعاقبَ البشريةُ بتفرقِ ألسنتِها بين لغاتٍ كثيرةٍ ويزعمُ أن العبريةَ هي الاقربُ لأن تكونَ اللغةَ المثاليةَ ثم عن تأثيرِ المعرفةِ المسبقةِ في ذهنِ القارئِ والكاتبِ وتأثيرها في عملِهما كالرحالين والباحثينَ اللغويين، ويختمُ كتابَه بمحاضرةٍ ثالثةٍ يبحثُ فيها عن تفسيراتِ القراءِ للنصِ واكتشافهم علاقات قد لا يفطنُ أو لم ينتبهُ لها الكاتبُ فيما أسماه "القارئ التجريبي
على لذةِ الكتابِ وجمالِه إلا أن الترجمةَ لم تعجبْني وأعتقدُ أنها افتقدتْ كثيرا من المثاليةِ

[Rebecca · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is so terrible that I don't even feel remotely bad for abandoning it about 30 pages in. Frankly, those 30 pages were a waste of my time, and I'm only glad to have read them because I can now write this review. This book represented my first foray into the smoky and confusing world of Umberto Eco (not counting a few failed attempts to get past page 1 of The Name of the Rose over the years), and I hope never to return.

The first problem is that no one knows what this book is about, not even Eco himself. The title is Serendipities: Language and Lunacy. "Serendipities" refers to the accidental discoveries made when someone is looking for something else, such as Columbus accidentally discovering America on his way to the Indies. The first chapter, in a nutshell, is about how various errors and false beliefs (such as the mistaken belief that the sun orbits the earth) have influenced the course of history.

What's so noteworthy about this chapter is how distinctly un-noteworthy it is. Eco's thesis is: People have believed some crazy stuff that we now know to be untrue! And that's, like, had an effect on stuff. And stuff. Wow, deep. But a lack of originality, while disappointing, isn't sufficient to fill me with the kind of rage that this book inspired in me.

For that, it takes truly cringe-worthy writing.

Eco's writing makes me embarrassed to have ever been a participant in academia. His writing isn't just dry and deeply, profoundly boring -- which, after all, is par for the course among these types of intellectual windbags -- no, his writing descends to even deeper levels of ugliness than this. Nothing he says is clear. Consider the following paragraph:

"Why reject the story of the Rosicrucians, when it satisfied an expectation of religious harmony? And why reject the story of the Protocols, if they could explain so many historic events by the myth of the conspiracy? Karl Popper has reminded us that the social theory of conspiracy is like the one we find in Homer. Homer conceived the power of the gods in such a way that everything taking place on the plain before Troy represented only a reflection of the countless conspiracies devised on Olympus. The social theory of conspiracy, Popper says, is a consequence of the end of God as a reference point and of the consequent question, Who is there in his place? This place is now occupied by various men and powerful, sinister groups that can be blamed for having organized the Great Depression and all the evils we suffer. Why consider absurd the belief in plots and conspiracies when today they are still used to explain the failure of our own actions or the reason that events have taken a different turn from that desired?"

Aside from the fact that Eco seems to be justifying an unfounded belief in conspiracies simply because people can use those unfounded beliefs to provide false explanations about the world (which makes no sense at all), this paragraph is horrible from the point of view of clarity and readability. He writes like he's desperately trying to earn a PhD in literary criticism.

But, more to the point, what does any of that have to do with language or lunacy? Also, why exactly should I care about any of this? I open every book with a gesture of goodwill towards the author, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they will try their best to explain things helpfully and have something interesting to say. But you can't just make passing references to other authors, ask rhetorical questions that never lead to a coherent thesis, paraphrase other people's ideas, or string random thoughts together and still expect me to maintain that goodwill.

I'm guessing that at some point Eco read a lot of Dante, and maybe even earned a degree or two from all that Dante reading. Good for him. But unless Dante is self-evidently relevant to what you're talking about, there's no place for it. And yet every couple of pages, it would be, "In Dante, blah blah blah." You can't just throw together a list of things you've noticed during your reading, give the whole thing a vague title, and slap a picture of the Tower of Babel on the cover. Or I guess you can if you're Umberto Eco.

I think I stopped reading right around the point where he began discussing whether, in Genesis, Adam named the fish (because it only says that he named the beasts of the field and the fowl of the air!!). After all, it is difficult to imagine God dragging all the fish up from the ocean and parading them through the Garden of Eden, as Eco points out (but gathering together all the beasts and fowl and parading them through the garden? That's easy to believe). Before you ask yourself what this has to do with anything and why you are spending your time reading about it, just wait for a second and let me explain why this is a truly earth-shatteringly important question that warrants inclusion in a scholarly book. Oh wait -- that's what I was hoping Eco was going to say, but didn't.

Here is my conclusion about Umberto Eco: either he is a charlatan who knows he's an awful writer, but he's smug and devious enough to continue churning out books because he can, or he genuinely doesn't know he's a bad writer and believes that he is actually doing someone a favor by writing down the fevered disconnections of his pompous, overeducated mind. He may have a bigger vocabulary and be better-read than your average undergraduate student, but his writing has the same meandering, name-dropping, list-like quality to it, with page after page of "Look what I know!"

Honestly, I sometimes believe that elderly scholars like Eco believe that if they speak or write too clearly, younger souls will be able to gain the knowledge that they have hoarded like dragons over the decades and which they had hoped to take with them to the grave. I can find no other explanation for the pernicious obscurantism and ugliness of Eco's writing.

[أحمد هاني · Rating 4 out of 5]

ماذا لو لم يوجد ايكو !!!

[Hon Lady Selene [on a hiatus] · Rating 3 out of 5]

"If anything, the fore-fathers were concerned about another linguistic puzzle: the Bible clearly states that God brought before Adam all the beasts of the field and all the fowl of the air. What about fish?
Did Adam name the fish? Perhaps it seemed difficult (even for God) to drag them all up from the depth of the seas and parade them in the garden of Eden. We may think this a slight matter, yet
the question, whose last trace is still to be found in theological discussions of the eighteenth century, was never satisfactorily resolved, even though Augustine had suggested that the fish were named one at a time, step by step, as they were discovered (De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim XII, 20). "

Commendable of him to attempt to follow Borges's perfected recipe in writing non-fiction, criticism in particular, however I couldn't help stumbling all over Eco's ubermensch Ego almost on every page...

He describes these writings as "erudite excursions of mine", good lord Umberto, how heavy is that crown no one but yourself tasked you to wear?

And speaking of Borges, was it not him who noticed how others brag of writing books, whilst he is alone in bragging of reading them?

[W R · Rating 4 out of 5]

رغم انه كتاب صغير نسبيًا وموضوعاته قد تبدو بسيطة لأول وهلة لكنه يحتاج تركيز شديد
القراءة لرجل مثل ايكو مرهقة حتى اذا كان الكتاب عبارة عن محاضرات مُجمعة
ثقافته الواسعة واطلاعه على كل شيء تقريبًا يجعلك ترغب ما بين كل صفحة واخرى ان تتوقف كي تلتقط أنفاسك
.. وتتأكد من استيعابك لكم المعلومات الهائل التي يضعها أمامك مع كل سطر
الجزء الخاص بحلم اللغة المثالية كان لطيف ،بيوضح الرغبة الملحة لكل مواطن بيتحدث لغة ما
في إثبات ان لغته هي الأكثر بساطة وسهولة ،وانها اللغة الأكثر مثالية في العالم كله
الفصل الثاني بيتحدث فيه ايكو عن اساءة الفهم بين ثقافتين
ويناقش في الفصل أو المحاضرة ،بعض المفاهيم المغلوطة التي تنتج عندما لا يسع بعض الأشخاص أن يفهموا
أن للثقافات المختلفة لغات مختلفة ورؤى مختلفة تجاه العالم
وانه عندما تتقابل ثقافتان فثمة صدام يحدث بينهما وعند هذه النقطة هناك ثلاث احتمالات
الاخضاع ،السطو الثقافي ،التبادل
واخيرًا فصل بعنوان المؤلف ومفسروه
وهو الفصل الذي دفعني لتغيير التقييم من ثلاث نجوم إلى اربعة لأنه رائع جدًا
بيتطرق فيه إلى روايته اسم الوردة بالتحليل وبتوضيح اراء بعض القراء فيها
وبيتكلم عن رواية أخرى ـ لم اقرأها بعد ـ هي بندول فوكو
بطريقة ممتعة للغاية ومضحكة ايضًا في بعض الفقرات
بشكل عام كتاب مهم ويستحق القراءة

[Yesterday's Muse Bookstore · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another solid performance by Eco, though I don't think this book delivers what it advertises. What is supposed to tie together the five essays is a theme of mistakes that led to success, or ill-founded projects that facilitated great progress. I would say the first three essays are more successful than the final two in this regard, and also more enjoyable to read. They seem to have more of Eco's trademark flare for humor, and they seem to say what they intend to say more effectively.

I understand that this is one of Eco's more academic works, but I couldn't help but expect something more like his How to Travel with a Salmon, which I devoured eagerly and still recommend. If you are deeply interested in linguistics, this book will certainly find a place on your shelf eventually, but for those who enjoy his unique writing style and themes, there are several of his that you should add to your library before this one.

[Owen Townend · Rating 4 out of 5]

Umberto Eco has an eye for some fascinating subjects that are worth bringing to public attention. However this book feels like it's a midway point through a lifelong discussion.

His writing style is often clear and as accessible as the topic allows but I still found it rather difficult to keep my bearings at times.

It was amusing to hear about how avidly philosophers and theorists pursue the 'Adamic language' (the first language) and the mistakes made during cultural appropriation that led to unmistakable change is fascinating but these feel like small details that I plucked from a much grander, more complex discourse.

As such I just can't recommend this for first time readers of Eco's non-fiction. I intend to look out for a better introduction to the great thinker's philosophy and style.

[Wafaa Golden · Rating 1 out of 5]

ما حبيته!

[Marwa Eletriby · Rating 2 out of 5]

كان ممكن يطلع بصورة أفضل من كده

[Olia · Rating 5 out of 5]

I need a hard copy of this book to read every year.

[Dina Nabil · Rating 4 out of 5]

الكتاب هو 3 محاضرات القاها ايكو بالانجليزية على طلبة الاكاديمية الايطالية بامريكا تتناول 3 مواضيع شيقة و فلسفية يتناولها ايكو -على غير عادته ابدا- بالتبسط و التنقل السريع السلس و بجمل قصيرة مركزة تهدف اولا الى الشرح ... و نحن ها هنا نتقمص دور المستمع للمحاضر العظيم يعلمنا عن اللغة , العلاقات بين الثقافات , و العلاقة المعقدة بين القارئ و الكاتب و النص

و نحن تماما كمترجم الكتاب نتعجب من خفة و وضوح ايكو و تحليله و نتمنى ان تكون تلك البداية لتجاوز حالة الرهبة التى تنتاب قارئ ايكو لكثرة ما اشيع عنه من صعوبة و غموض و نخبوية

و ايكو هنا رغم المامه -الدائم- بالتاريخ و الفلسفة و تنقله الرشيق بين المصدر و الاخر الا اننا نلاحظ تبسط متناقض مع اعماله الكبرى خاصة "بندول فوكو" التى مر على حولين و لم اصل الى صفحتها الاخيرة قط
*************
المحاضرة/المقال الاول عن "اللغة المثالية" او بالاحرى حلم و اسطورة اللغة المثالية الانسانية العامة التى حلم بها الفلاسفة و المفكرين و لم تخطر ببال الانسان العادى ابدا و هو حلم شرع الانسان فى تحقيقه مرارا و فشل فى ذلك كعادته مع الاحلام الخيالية

يقدم العهد القديم حل عبرانى بسيط -كعادة الاديان- لمعضلة التشتت اللغوى بقصة بابل الشهيرة , و هنا يفترض الجميع ان العبرانية كانت اللغة الام و يبذل الجميع المجهود لايجاد الاصل العبرى فى كل كلمة من كل لغه و هو على العموم ان لم يجد فبعض من "لى ذراع الحقائق" كافى لاثبات ما وضعه المفكر فى ذهنه من الاصل
و الامر عند ايكو تعدى البحث البحث عن لسانى مثالى للبحث فى خيبات المشروع الكبير

و البحث عن لغة مثالية تدفعنا دفعا الى السؤال الاقدم عن ماهية اللغة ذاتها و عن اذا كان الكل موجود تحت التسمية من الاصل؟ او ان الاصل مستعصى على التصنيف و الاسماء؟ و هنا لا نود ان ندخل الى فلسفة ابلار و مشكلته اللاهوتية القديمة الا بقدر ما يسعفنا ان نصل الى هدفنا

المدخل التوراتى فى قصة الخلق ان ادم هو من اختار اسماء حيوانات الكون تبع لسفر التكوين "و جبل الرب الاله من الارض كل حيوانات البرية و كل طيور السماء فاحضرها الى ادم ماذا يدعوها, و كل ما دعا به ادم ذات نفس حيه فهو اسمها" ...و هو مختلف كثيرا فى الواقع مع الرواية الاسلامية للامر ان الاله الرب هو من علم ادم تلك المسميات..و ان كان ادم منح الاشياء اسمها او تعلمها جميعا فما هى الفترة التى استغرقها هذا فى جنة عدم؟...و هنا تفرض جبرية اوغسطيوس نفسها على تفكيرنا فى نموذج التصميم الذكى الذى يحمل كل شئ فيه علامة عليه اسمه و تجعل من تطور اللغه و تشتت اللسانيات اشبه ما يكون بخطيئة و مخالفة لادارة عليا و ان الشتات كتب علينا , و عموما فاصحاب تلك المدرسة لا يرون فى الحياة نفسها الا عقاب من الاله الغاضب

و لوجود حلم "اللغة العالمية الموحدة" او غريزة الانسان هو تفضيل الاشياء على بعضها ظل المفكرين فى عراك نسميه بالسخيف فى الاشارة الى تلك اللغة او تلك على انها الاهم... فنجد دانتى يشيد بالعبرية بانها اللغة الاهم لكنه كتبها باللاتينية و رفع الايطالية اللغة المحلية فى وقتها الى ذروة المجد حين خلدها بكوميديته الالهية , ولا نرى لغة الا و شرح اهلها لما هى الاهم و مركز الكون فالتوسكانية عند جيوفانى نانى هى اصل العالم لانها لغه "اتروريا" التى شادها نوح , و الهولندية عند بكانكس هى اهم لغة فى العالم لانها تحوى اكبر عدد ممكن من الكلمات احادية المقطع , و الحوار فى الجنة عند اندرياس كيمب عندما يتحدث الله السويدية و ادم الدانمركية بينما الحية فتغوى حواء بالفرنسية الفصيحة , و الالمانية عند هاردسرفر هى اكثر لغة معبره عن الطبيعة و اصواتها , و هيدجر لا يرى لغه تحوى معانى الفلسفة الا الاغريقية و الالمانية , و انتوتى دى ريفارول يتعجب عن بحثنا عن لغه عالمية و الفرنسية على وجه الارض من الاصل,و الهيلوغرافية عند كيرشر ادم و ليس موسى فقط, و الصينية عند جون ويب هى لغة نوح بالضرورة و هى التطور الطبيعى لعبرية ادم

و لن نتحدث عن الادلة التى يسوقها المسلمون فى فضل اللغة العربية من جانب لان ايكو لم يذكرها الا فى اقتباس على لسان ابن حزم و من جانب الاخر لاننا يحزننا ان مفكرين يومنا يستعيرون افكار علماء العصور الوسطى الاوروبين فى الوقت الذى يخبرنا فيه ابن حزم: "جعل الله القران فى كلمات عربية ليتمكن الناس الذى اختارهم لينزله عليهم ان يفهموه و ليس لان اللغه العربية لها ما يميزها و يمنحها سبقا خاص ففى اى لغه يستطيع الناس اكتشاف الروح , التنفس, العطر, و اثار اللسان الاصلى متعدد اللغات"

ربما لم يقدر ادم السلطة التى وقعت فى يديه لكننا ايضا لم نقدر المسؤولية التى حملتها اكتافنا
***********
المحاضرة التالية التى جلسنا مستمتعين امام حديث ايكو الخلاب كانت عن اساء الفهم بين ماركو بولو الى ليبنتز
و هو مقال مكثف ممتع عن دور القناعات المسبقة فى الاكتشافات الحديثة و هى تطبيق عملى ان من يبحث عن شئ يجده , حين يرى ماركو بولو القادم من اساطير ايطاليا العصور الوسطى و يرى وحيد القرن فى الصين لا يرى فيه الا تجسيد لاسطورة احادى القرن الشهيرة عن حيوان نادر يحمل جسم فرس و ذيل اسد و قرن واحد فى وسط رأسه و هنا يبدى بولو اسفه ان ما رأه لم يكن بهذا الجمال الاسطورى ابدا , و كيرشر يعشق اللغة المصرية القديمة فيراها قمة السحر و الاشارات الغامضة فنراه يخلق هالة مقدسة حول كل حرف و كلمة ادت الى تفسير صائب احيانا و خطأ غالبا و بخلق الجو القبلانى/الصوفى حول الالفاظ و اللغه اصبحت بيئة مهيئة للمفكر بطرح افكاره هو و ان كان عن طريق لا وعيه

و بتلك الطريقة و غيرها اصبحت اعادة القراءة معين لا ينضب من الاكتشافات و نسقط مجهودنا الشخصى على النص القديم من فرط اعجابنا فنضيف الي النص ثم نصرح بروعته , و ربما لم يذكر ايكو هذا المثال لكنى ارى تشابه بين ذاك و بين ما فعله الكتاب الانسانيون فى عصر النهضة حين فخموا من الاعمال اللاتينية -حتى تلك التى لم تكن ذات قيمة فى عصرها- و اضافوا لتلك المجهود العقلى عبر الف عام من العصور الوسطى

و حين اعاد العالم اكتشاف الصين العظيمه التى انغلقت كثيرا و فاجئت الجميع بتطورها و ثباتها فكان هناك نظريتين لهذا الحدث , الاول عندما تسيطر الروح الدينية على العصر او المفكر المعاصر فلم يرى فى الصين الا بلد تأثر بالروحانية الفرعونية القديمة التى اعتبرها مفكرين ذلك العصر الاب الشرعى للعقيدة المسيحية فاشمئزوا من لغتها الصورية التى لا تهدف الا للتصوير فالشمس فى تلك اللغة لا تعنى الاله او خالق الاكوان بل مجرد شمس , و مركز للتبشير لعودتها الى حظريتها الروحية المسيحية ...و الاخرى حين سيطرت روح العقلانية على يد روسو و ديدرو و غيرهم الى الرفع من شأن العلمانية الصينية الشهيرة و الاقلال من المصرية
و الصين ظلت هى الصين و الثقافة المصرية ظلت مصرية لكن زاوية الرواية و اضافات الرائى على الرؤية تغير كل شئ
*************
و فقط فى المقال التالت نجد ايكو يرجع ل ايكو مؤلف اسم الوردة و بندول فوكو كروائى بالدرجة الاولى و هو المقال الاكثر متعة و الاقل فائدة بين الثلاثة
و فيه يتشعب ايكو فى الحديث عن العلاقة العجيبة بين القارئ و الكاتب و النص و بيان الفروقات المهمة بين القارئ النموذجى و القارئ التجريبى و ضرورة الا يفسر المؤلف اعماله او يسخف تفسيراتها و فيها يروى نوادر و قصص حول اعماله الكبرى وقت كتابتها و ما وجده من تفسيرات النقاد و القراء لقصصه
و عموما نشارك فى نصيحتنا للقاص و القارئ الا يتشعب فى تقديم تفسيرات فالنص سيظل النص المتحدث الاول عن نفسه
دينا نبيل
يوليو 2015

[Jack Haringa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eco explains directly and lucidly how language development intersects with historical events, cultural changes, and other anthropological shifts. He covers, in these essays, some of the same ground as in The Search for the Perfect Language, another fantastic book, though much longer than this short collection of essays. The length of reading time was entirely my fault, not the author's, as I mislaid the book for a while.

[Garry · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am not the target audience for this book. This is for philologists and linguists. I barely comprehended 50% of it. Yet, I enjoyed the journey.

Eco explored the concept of serendipity in language, or how errors in learning/language led to greater understanding in other areas. It makes more sense when he writes about it.

[Gustavo Iván · Rating 4 out of 5]

The philosophical deepness of this book left me satisfied. Serendipity is a beautiful concept that evokes both order and chaos. In this book, Eco brings the power of this idea to try and reconstruct the reasons behind our desires to understand not only language in itself, but its origins. If you wish to amuse yourself in the somewhat esoteric nature of words, languages and cultures that build both, this book will surely leave you satisfied.

[ReadBecca · Rating 3.75 out of 5]

I really enjoyed the topic of the odd scholarship around trying to identify perfect language and discussion of the unintended findings resultant from a somewhat silly pursuit, at the same time I am decidedly not smart enough for this book.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Language creates. This much has always been obvious to human cultures; as Eco reminds us, it is through an act of speech that God in the Genesis creates the universe: “Let there be Light.” When God wanted to stop humanity’s ability to create and rival him, symbolised in the Tower of Babel, he chose to confound their language, their ability to create.

Language creates alternate realities of its own, and in this way can be used to make up false realities; “fable” in English, “fiaba” in Italian, and “ħrafa” in Maltese, to name a few, all have connotations of made-up stories. In his first essay, Eco explores what he calls The Force of the False. Much of human history directly results from the belief in falsities created by language, which in turn either results in the accidental discovery of factual truths (serendipities), as was the discovery of America, or bring about new historical truths, like the Holocaust. As the stories created by Language move to other cultures, and thereby languages, those other languages too create their own reality, modifying the truth of an orginary text with their false deviations which masquerade as the truth. In this way, the Force of the False continues to reign, inevitably directing our lived truths.

In his other essays Eco continues to explore the link between language, creation, and our beliefs and actions (political, historical, and otherwise). What language did God and Adam speak? Greek or Hebrew, some would probably say - but those are human languages. Italian, Dante would say - or at least such does Adam speak in the Divina Commedia. Ascribing truth to any of these created realities gives an elevated status to a certain language, with all the implications this Force of the False brings about in the real world. Eco reminds us how, in a similar historical situation, it was believed that “Greek man spoke the Language; the rest were Barbarians, that is, in etymological terms, those who stutter, who have no language.” The status of languages can have profound sociopolitical implications on their speakers, and so we form myths to elevate the status of our own tongue while diminishing that of the Other. By believing “the naive belief that one’s own tongue is the only existing and perfect one”, the Force of the False changes the reality of millions of people.

In his third essay, Eco explores the points of interaction between different cultures. This, too, is conditioned by the language or stories we have been reared with. We all have what Eco calls “background books”, the preconceived ideas derived from our culture’s stories that condition how we see other cultures when we encounter them (Marco Polo, for instance, was conditioned to believe in unicorns and therefore he mistook the rhinoceros for a unicorn upon encountering the species in an exotic land). In turn, this conditions whether we desire to conquer them (view them as inferior), to emulate them (view them as superior), or to engage in reciprocal exchange with them (view them as equals). The key to change, then, is language. These background books operate to a large extent through the Force of the False, and can sometimes lead to serendipity.

People, however, don’t only “see the unknown in the light of the already known”; sometimes, “something already known is reconsidered in a new and uncanny way in the light of an as-yet-unknown book”. The same text placed in a different context, perhaps with a new author’s name or a different title, or simply a different time and place, is received and interpreted differently. Every different translation of a text is received differently, and does different things.

In the final two essays Eco carries on the discussion about the search for the perfect language with reference to different thinkers. All in all, a short yet thought-provoking book about the power of language and the force of the false on history.

[Nathan Albright · Rating 5 out of 5]

This particular book is a collection of essays, and they demonstrate the approach that Umberto Eco has taken as a semiotician through the course of his career as a philosopher.  With a strong interest in language and in the difficulties that result from errors being fruitful to future research and inquiry, Eco brings what is certainly a complicated and nuanced perspective to the question of language as well as the way that what we say is often highly colored by the beliefs and worldviews we bring as well as the language that we have to bring to bear on describing our observations.  While I cannot say that I agree with the author's understanding of all of what he discusses, I must say that I appreciate the seriousness he takes to the problems of understanding the use and understanding of language and even his appreciation of a greater biblical context to dealing with questions of languages than is often viewed to be the case.  Indeed, the author's understanding of the Bible can help us to understand the way that languages are born to this day, through the workings out of isolation and historical change rather than the active imposition of divine curses of incomprehension as at Babel, through his reading of both Genesis 10 and 11.

Coming in at just over 100 pages and containing five essays, this is a very short book with somewhat disparate contents.  Readers of nonfiction authors are likely quite used to such feasts of scraps, though, where somewhat related but largely independent essays are combined to make for books that can be published for royalties as well as to pad one's list of publications.  After a preface that introduces the concern of languages and the question of serendipity, the first essay looks at the force of falsity by making use of the powerful logic that whatever one's belief system, one believes that most of humanity has lived in darkness over the course of humanity, therefore there must be a powerful pull for deception and error (1) that humans struggle against.  After that the author examines the question of languages in paradise by giving a sound reading of Genesis 10 and 11 to balance different aspects of incomprehensibility in the biblical account (2) of early human history.  The third essay provides a fruitful examination of intellectual misunderstandings in the writings from Marco Polo to Leibniz as the rhino, for example, was viewed as being a confirmation of belief in unicorns (3).  After that the author looks at the language of the Austral land (4), before the book closes with a discussion of the linguistics of Joseph de Maistre (5) as well as notes and an index.

There are a great deal of insights that one can gain from this book, even though it is a short one.  The author shows that he can take questions of language seriously whether he is looking at, say, the false understanding (but momentous consequences) of Christopher Columbus regarding the distance between Spain and East Asia or whether he is examining the quest for perfect languages in early modern Europe or whether he is looking at the linguistics of fiction (like the Austral land) or the writings of an obscure but interesting European thinker.  The way that the author balances an appreciation for the unexpected results of misunderstandings and error as well as his own deep discussion into the question of tradeoffs as well as the limitations of language in expressing truth provides plenty of opportunities for the reader to ponder questions of semiotics in relationship to our own experience and understanding of the power and limitations of language.  And this is a subject well worth reading and appreciating.

[Simon Mcleish · Rating 4 out of 5]

Originally published on my blog here in October 2000.

Some of Eco's essays in semiotics (those in Travels in Hyperreality, for example), are to me fairly impenetrable. The five in this collection are not like that. Concentrating on aspects of the history of linguistic thought, they show a wide ranging and brilliant mind, but are written in a lass academic style. (It was the vast array of references to writers that I had never read that was daunting.) They read more like they are notes related to one of Eco's novels, and are particularly close in style to the digressions in Foucault's Pendulum.

The reason for this is that all the essays except the first deal with a subject similar in many ways to the pursuit of the ultimate conspiracy which is the theme of that novel - the quest for the original language of mankind, or, more specifically, for that used by Adam to name the beasts of the earth in Genesis and that used by God to speak to him. This may seem to be an obscure subject, but it says something about the way that those who discussed it felt about the relationship between language and the physical world, and that is an issue of some importance in philosophy as well as being of interest in itself.

These essays are not particularly closely connected; each concentrates on a particular small part of the theme (Dante's views, for example, or the supposedly fundamental languages devised by eighteenth century philosophers) with little reference to the others. Each is interesting in itself, and a book which contained them all as chapters would probably be fascinating, though I found Serendipities rather on the bitty side.

The first essay, based on a lecture given to open the academic year at Bologna University, is rather different in nature. Entitled The Force of Falsity, its subject is influential lies of the past. Forgeries have had a surprisingly big effect on history, from the Donation of Constantine, used to bolster the claims of the Papacy to dominion over the secular rulers of medieval Europe, to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which inspired Hitler. Both these forgeries led to wars, but others had a positive effect; eastward and westward exploration by Europeans in the fifteenth century were inspired by erroneous beliefs - eastward by Prester John, westward by an incorrect estimate of the circumference of the globe. The latter, which was Columbus' inspiration, has itself been the victim of misrepresentation, as Eco points out - anti-clerical campaigners in the nineteenth century claimed that the reason Columbus travelled was to prove that the earth was round in defiance of established church doctrine; few educated people in 1492 would have believed in a flat earth.

None of the essays are about anything of earth shattering importance; all are interesting and determinedly erudite.

[Sunny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting little book about language which i'm super interested in because i believe that the language you use can genuinely impact behavior. What you say you think and what you think you become …..

Here are the best bits from the book:


How, in the best instances, false beliefs and discoveries totally without credibility could then lead to the discovery of something true (or at least something we consider true today.

In the course of the following centuries- until the seventeenth- translated and paraphrased many times into various languages and versions, the letter had a decisive importance in the expansion of the Christian West toward the Orient. The idea that Beyond the Moslem territories there could be a Christian kingdom justified all ventures of expansion and exploration. Prester John was discussed by Pian del Carpine, William of Rubruck, and Marco Polo. Around the middle of the fourteenth century the kingdom of Prester John shifted from a vague Orient toward Ethiopia, as the Portuguese navigators began their African explorations. Attempts to communicate with John were made in the fifteenth century by Henry IV of England, by the duc de Berry, by Pope Eugene IV. In Bologna, at the time of the coronation of Charles V, there was still talk of Prester John as a possible ally in the reconquest of the Holy Sepulcher.

Where did Prester John's letter come from? What was its purpose? Perhaps it was a document of anti-Byzantine propaganda, produced in the scriptoria of Frederick I. But the problem is not so much its origin (fakes of every description were abundant at that lime) as its reception. The geographical fantasy gradually generated a political project. In other words, the phantom called up by some scribe with a knack for counterfeiting documents (a highly respected literary activity of the period) served as an alibi for the expansion of the Christian world toward Africa and Asia, a welcome argument favoring the white man's burden.


The text revised by Rachovskij probably represented the primary source of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Rachovski's version reveals its novelistic source because it is scarcely credible, except in a novel of Sue, that the bad guys should express so openly, so shamelessly, their evil plans. The Elders freely declare that they possess "boundless ambition, devouring greed, a pitiless desire for vengeance and an intense hatred." They want to abolish freedom of the press, but they encourage libertarianism. They criticize liberalism but support the idea of capitalist multinationals. To provoke revolution in every country they mean to exacerbate social inequality. They want to build subways the better to mine the big cities. They want to abolish study of the classics and ancient history; they mean to encourage sport and visual communication in order to make the working class stupid.

Thus Creation itself arose through an act of speech; it was only by giving things their names that God created them and gave them an ontological status.


Language must reflect the order of ideas


Adam could conceive ideas only through hearing linguistic sounds.


Before the Renaissance, a Christian thinker would scarcely wish to admit publicly that he drew on Hebrew doctrine. Like heretics, the Jewish community belonged to a category of outcasts that as Le Goff shrewdly observes the Middle Ages officially despised but at the same time admired, regarding them with an admixture of attraction and fear, keeping them at a distance but making sure that the distance was fixed near enough so they would always remain close at hand. *What was termed charity in their regard more resembled the game that cats play with mice."


We (in the sense of human beings) travel and explore the world, carrying with us some "background books." These need not accompany us physically; the point is that we travel with preconceived notions of the world, derived from our cultural tradition. In a very curious sense we travel knowing in advance what we are on the verge of discovering, because past reading has told us what we are supposed to discover. In other words, the influence of these background at books is such that, irrespective of what travelers discover and see, they will interpret and explain everything in terms of these books.





They had pelts like buffalo, and their hooves were as big as elephants. Their horns, too, were not white but black, their tongues were spiky, and their heads looked like wild boars? In fact, what Marco Polo saw was the rhinoceros. We cannot say Marco Polo lied. He told the simple truth, namely, that unicorns were not the gentle beasts people believed them to be. But he was unable to say he had found new and uncommon animals; instinctively, he tried to identify them with a well-known mage.



The advantage of this way of speaking is that you become philosophers, learning the prime elements, and in this country, nothing can be named without explaining at the same time its nature, which would seem miraculous to those unaware of the secret that they use to this end.



Borges speaks of a language structured spatially and not temporally, which proceeds not through agglutinations as in the languages so far examined but only by expressing temporal flow. In this language, nouns do not exist, but only impersonal verbs qualified by monosyllabic suffixes and prefixes with adverbial value. In brief, " there is no word corresponding to the noun moon, but there is a verb to moon or to moondle. The moon rose over the sea would thus be written hlör u fang axaxaxas mlö, or, to put it in order: upward beyond the constant flow there was moondling" (which suggests some passage in Joyce's Finnegans Wake)


I would like, however, to underline a fact, whose obviousness is undeniable, namely, the prodigious talent demonstrated by young peoples in forming words and, on the other hand, the absolute inability of philosophers to do the same, in the most refined centuries.


From these three words, CAro DAta VERmibus they have formed the word CA-DA-VER, "meat abandoned to the worms.? From two other words, MAgis and voLO, they have made MALO and NOLO, two splendid verbs that every language, Greek included, can envy Latin.
..The French have not totally ignored this system. For example, to give a name to those who were our ancestors, they formed the word AN-CETRE, joining part of the word ANCien [old, ancient] with the verb ETRE to be], just as they formed the term BEF-FROI [alarm bell], joining Bel [beautiful] and EFFROI [fright]. You see then how they utilized the two terms DUo and IRE to form the verb DUIRE, [to go in a pair] and, through natural extension of the verb condurre [conduct, lead], diriger [direct]. With the personal pronoun SE, with the relative adverb of place HORS [outside] and with the verbal ending TIR, they formed S-OR-TIR [to go out], that is, SE-HORS-TIR "to put one's own person outside the place where it was." All this to me seems wondrous.