A Canticle for Leibowitz has stood the test of time for a reason: the issues under discussion remain as poignant in the 1950’s when it was published as they do today. What is the value of knowledge, and how should it be used? Is technology productive or destructive in the hands of government? What role does religion play in a technologically advanced society? Under discussion in the work—and the reason it has garnered so much critical attention—are these profound themes, as well as Catholicism, scientific discovery and its subsequent application, the importance of preserved knowledge, and euthanasia.
Told in three windows of time, the narrative focuses on three basic steps of social evolution (from a technological standpoint) and what role the church plays throughout. Though classed science fiction, two of the post-apocalyptic eras Miller describes are not wholly unlike civilizations and cultures that exist in the world today. The only complaint about the book is its bias toward Catholicism; there are no Inquisitions or Crusades and the subjectivity of its beliefs is never questioned. The issues discussed, however, are important enough to ignore this flaw, as what remains becomes more pertinent with every technological advance society makes. All in all, one of the most interesting examinations of technology and religion literature has ever produced.
I wouldn't call it a flaw... More a deliberate theme. The Church saved us in the Dark Ages, and it will save us again, God willing. (paraphrase of Miller's views, not mine).
ReplyDeleteMy choice for the Galactic Stars this year, novel category.
http://galacticjourney.org/?p=160
You would hold the Catholic church, and all its history, infallible?
DeleteOf course not. And I don't think Miller would either.
ReplyDeleteThen I think you misunderstand my point about the flaw in Canticle. I pointed out that Miller Jr.'s presentation of the church is of its infallibility. Are there moments or scenes wherein the church does something wrong/morally objectionable?
DeleteMorally objectionable? By whose morals? I think there is a fascinating exploration of morality and the lack of absolute shades in the third section regarding the euthanasia camps.
DeleteIf there are no Inquisitions and Crusades, it is because the Church never has a dominant position in the post-apocalyptic world. It is always an underdog, an inferior to the polities which surround it. But it does its best to preserve a little light in the darkness.
(Note: I am recapitulating the Miller's theme, not my own views)
As for infallibility, the Church spends decades illuminating blueprints.
By "infallible" I was referring to the idea that the church does no wrong in Canticle. Like a superhero, they preserve mankind's wisdom through its dark ages and mediate its sins in real-time. There is no mention of the Inquisition, the popes who took advantage of their position to be gods among men, pedophilia, or any other major issue the Church is or has dealt with. By ignoring the Church's faults, Canticle presents a one-sided view, which to me is a flaw. Don't get me wrong, there needn't be a scene of a monk raping a boy to balance the narrative. But it would have been nice if Miller exposed a little of the Church's human side, perhaps like Graham Greene in The Power & the Glory, to give the novel a bit more realism, and hence plausibility (if I may use the word ;).
Delete