What do you think?
Rate this book
The Gospel According to Jesus Christ
A wry, fictional account of the life of Christ by Nobel laureate José Saramago
A brilliant skeptic, José Saramago envisions the life of Jesus Christ and the story of his Passion as things of this earth: A child crying, the caress of a woman half asleep, the bleat of a goat, a prayer uttered in the grayish morning light. His idea of the Holy Family reflects the real complexities of any family, and—as only Saramago can—he imagines them with tinges of vision, dream, and omen. The result is a deft psychological portrait that moves between poetry and irony, spirituality and irreverence of a savior who is at once the Son of God and a young man. In this provocative, tender novel, the subject of wide critical discussion and wonder, Saramago questions the meaning of God, the foundations of the Church, and human existence itself.
A brilliant skeptic, José Saramago envisions the life of Jesus Christ and the story of his Passion as things of this earth: A child crying, the caress of a woman half asleep, the bleat of a goat, a prayer uttered in the grayish morning light. His idea of the Holy Family reflects the real complexities of any family, and—as only Saramago can—he imagines them with tinges of vision, dream, and omen. The result is a deft psychological portrait that moves between poetry and irony, spirituality and irreverence of a savior who is at once the Son of God and a young man. In this provocative, tender novel, the subject of wide critical discussion and wonder, Saramago questions the meaning of God, the foundations of the Church, and human existence itself.
400 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1991
About the author
José Saramago
287 books15.2k followersJosé de Sousa Saramago (16 November 1922 – 18 June 2010) was a Portuguese novelist and recipient of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Literature, for his "parables sustained by imagination, compassion and irony [with which he] continually enables us once again to apprehend an elusory reality." His works, some of which have been seen as allegories, commonly present subversive perspectives on historic events, emphasizing the theopoetic. In 2003 Harold Bloom described Saramago as "the most gifted novelist alive in the world today."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,405 reviews
April 17, 2024
“And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” Luke 9:62
José Saramago put his hand to the quill and looked back… He looked back deep into the past…
José Saramago is exactly that someone… He came to retell us the greatest story of all times… and to put our thoughts straight… or at least to make them less wry...
Who is Jesus? Is he god or man? Or did he get stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea? For God he is just a cat’s paw and for Devil he is just a decoy. He tries to set rules but he is just a toy played in a higher heavenly games.
In the end any actual human life becomes forgotten and sinks into oblivion. And only myths and legends are eternal.
José Saramago put his hand to the quill and looked back… He looked back deep into the past…
…thought, when all is said and done, as others and we ourselves have observed before, is like a great ball of thread coiled around itself, loose in places, taut in others, inside our head. It is impossible to know its full extent, one would have to unwind and then measure it, but however hard one tries or pretends to try, this cannot be done without assistance. One day, someone will come and tell us where to cut the cord that ties man to his navel and thought to its origin.
José Saramago is exactly that someone… He came to retell us the greatest story of all times… and to put our thoughts straight… or at least to make them less wry...
…human words are like shadows, and shadows cannot explain light, and between shadow and light stands the opaque body from which words are born.
Who is Jesus? Is he god or man? Or did he get stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea? For God he is just a cat’s paw and for Devil he is just a decoy. He tries to set rules but he is just a toy played in a higher heavenly games.
…forgetting is all too easy, that is life.
In the end any actual human life becomes forgotten and sinks into oblivion. And only myths and legends are eternal.
April 16, 2024
Everyone knows more or less about the birth of Jesus: the manager, the donkey, the ox, the three wise men, and all that. Adult life, too: without a Christian education, one has a vague idea of preaching, miracles, crucifixion, and resurrection. And between the two, childhood and adolescence? We don't know: the bible does not say anything about it, and no credible source exists on the subject (although some myths (trips to Egypt, Asia, and England) emerged later.
José Saramago gives us his vision of this unknown Jesus while reinterpreting some biblical subjects in his sauce. The result is probably not canonical since we see Jesus first educated by the Devil, then discovering sexuality in the arms of Mary Magdalene, a prostitute with whom he falls in love. However, I did not see any desire for satire; on the contrary, we discover a character torn by the codes of the society of his time, the gradual discovery of his identity, and above all, the feeling of being a toy of fate.
The author managed to get me interested in this character again, much to my surprise. Because my catechism lessons and then discussions with a few stubborn fundamentalists had given me a rather old-fashioned image: either a character of absolute drought or, on the contrary, sticky with marshmallow, his questions, doubts, and errors also ended up making him endearing. The story, strongly tinged with humor, also contributes to this, mainly when certain miracles represent a bit of common sense: thus, when Jesus brings out a demon from a man to move him into a herd of pigs, he must flee. The village is running, chased away with stones by the owners of the livestock, who are not very happy to lose their precious source of income. If the prestige takes a hit, one can only feel sympathy for this clumsy full of good intentions.
A wonderful moment in this book company started deliberately at the end of the year's holidays, but it finally fascinated me from the first page to the last page.
José Saramago gives us his vision of this unknown Jesus while reinterpreting some biblical subjects in his sauce. The result is probably not canonical since we see Jesus first educated by the Devil, then discovering sexuality in the arms of Mary Magdalene, a prostitute with whom he falls in love. However, I did not see any desire for satire; on the contrary, we discover a character torn by the codes of the society of his time, the gradual discovery of his identity, and above all, the feeling of being a toy of fate.
The author managed to get me interested in this character again, much to my surprise. Because my catechism lessons and then discussions with a few stubborn fundamentalists had given me a rather old-fashioned image: either a character of absolute drought or, on the contrary, sticky with marshmallow, his questions, doubts, and errors also ended up making him endearing. The story, strongly tinged with humor, also contributes to this, mainly when certain miracles represent a bit of common sense: thus, when Jesus brings out a demon from a man to move him into a herd of pigs, he must flee. The village is running, chased away with stones by the owners of the livestock, who are not very happy to lose their precious source of income. If the prestige takes a hit, one can only feel sympathy for this clumsy full of good intentions.
A wonderful moment in this book company started deliberately at the end of the year's holidays, but it finally fascinated me from the first page to the last page.
February 23, 2021
There are two topics that are both sensitive and ‘dangerous’ to discuss both in our everyday lives and in an online forum – politics and religion. I refuse to get into discourse on either subject even with the majority of close friends and family members. I have to know someone quite well and trust him or her implicitly before engaging in real life conversations. Therefore, this review is not going to contain much substance. Not just because I would like to avoid debate, but also due to the fact that I am not even close to being informed enough to take on the Bible and any controversial writings that follow it.
I have not read the Bible. I am familiar with many of the stories, however. I am not a religious person, but I am inquisitive and like to inform myself about the beliefs of others. I have been very curious about Saramago’s novel for quite some time and couldn’t quite get the idea out of my head that I needed to read this. So I made it a goal for 2021 and knocked it off early. I’m very glad I did. First of all, I found that it confirmed some of my own ideas about Jesus as well as the poor image of women that has been promoted by a number of world religions (something that irks me to no end!) Jesus is portrayed here as a human being with questions, doubts, and desires. Many of the gospel stories that we know are told from a very different perspective. I nearly started to count the number of times Saramago reminds us, with irony of course, the way women were perceived. Here are a couple of examples, which I imagine the author writing at his desk with tongue in cheek:
“Unlike Joseph her husband, Mary is neither upright nor pious, but she is not to blame for this, the blame lies with the language she speaks if not with the men who invented it, because that language has no feminine form for the words upright and pious.”
“Which part of woman’s nature is demonic and which divine and what kind of humanity they have… I was talking about women, who generate beings such as ourselves and who may be responsible, perhaps unknowingly, for this duality in our nature, which is base and yet so noble, virtuous and yet so wicked, tranquil and yet so troubled, meek and yet so rebellious.”
That’s as far as I go down this road. I have a lot of thoughts swirling around in my head and they’re likely to stay there, simmering. This is my first experience with Saramago. I’ll just finish up with a couple brief reflections on the writing. First of all, it was dense. Dense in subject matter especially! I often wanted to set this down and escape to something much lighter. Paragraphs are very lengthy, often going on for pages at a time. Anyone that resents a lack of quotation marks should be warned in advance. I don’t have a problem with this. In fact, after the first couple of chapters I grasped the flow of dialogue. The prose itself is tightly written and obviously skilled. There is no denying that Saramago was a master at his craft. However, I need to choose a different sort of novel altogether when I next pick him up, and I need to do so before long. I think we might have a bright future; but I’ve had my fill of anything remotely theological for quite some time, even if it does stand popular belief on its head.
“… we refrain from asking a question because we are unprepared or simply too afraid to hear the answer. And when finally we summon the courage to ask, no answer is forthcoming…”
I have not read the Bible. I am familiar with many of the stories, however. I am not a religious person, but I am inquisitive and like to inform myself about the beliefs of others. I have been very curious about Saramago’s novel for quite some time and couldn’t quite get the idea out of my head that I needed to read this. So I made it a goal for 2021 and knocked it off early. I’m very glad I did. First of all, I found that it confirmed some of my own ideas about Jesus as well as the poor image of women that has been promoted by a number of world religions (something that irks me to no end!) Jesus is portrayed here as a human being with questions, doubts, and desires. Many of the gospel stories that we know are told from a very different perspective. I nearly started to count the number of times Saramago reminds us, with irony of course, the way women were perceived. Here are a couple of examples, which I imagine the author writing at his desk with tongue in cheek:
“Unlike Joseph her husband, Mary is neither upright nor pious, but she is not to blame for this, the blame lies with the language she speaks if not with the men who invented it, because that language has no feminine form for the words upright and pious.”
“Which part of woman’s nature is demonic and which divine and what kind of humanity they have… I was talking about women, who generate beings such as ourselves and who may be responsible, perhaps unknowingly, for this duality in our nature, which is base and yet so noble, virtuous and yet so wicked, tranquil and yet so troubled, meek and yet so rebellious.”
That’s as far as I go down this road. I have a lot of thoughts swirling around in my head and they’re likely to stay there, simmering. This is my first experience with Saramago. I’ll just finish up with a couple brief reflections on the writing. First of all, it was dense. Dense in subject matter especially! I often wanted to set this down and escape to something much lighter. Paragraphs are very lengthy, often going on for pages at a time. Anyone that resents a lack of quotation marks should be warned in advance. I don’t have a problem with this. In fact, after the first couple of chapters I grasped the flow of dialogue. The prose itself is tightly written and obviously skilled. There is no denying that Saramago was a master at his craft. However, I need to choose a different sort of novel altogether when I next pick him up, and I need to do so before long. I think we might have a bright future; but I’ve had my fill of anything remotely theological for quite some time, even if it does stand popular belief on its head.
“… we refrain from asking a question because we are unprepared or simply too afraid to hear the answer. And when finally we summon the courage to ask, no answer is forthcoming…”
November 17, 2016
Ένα ριζοσπαστικό ευαγγέλιο.
Οι άνθρωποι ειναι ετερώνυμοι του καλού και του κακού. Ο Θεός και ο Διαβολος συνυπαρχουν. Χωρις το κακό δεν μπορεί να υπάρχει το καλό και αντίστροφα.
Σε καμία περίπτωση δεν θα μπορούσε να επικρατήσει κατα κράτος το καλό και η αγάπη,δεν έχουν λόγο ύπαρξης χωρις το κακό και το μίσος.
Ο Θεός εξαπατάει το ίδιο του το δημιούργημα. Χρησιμοποιεί τον Ιησού ως δόλωμα για να προσελκύσει στη Θεϊκή του επικράτεια περισσότερους πιστούς. Τον εκμεταλλεύεται για να νικήσει τις υπόλοιπες θρησκείες παγανιστικές ή ειδωλολατρικές. Τον εξαπατά. Τον σταυρώνει στο έλεος των άπιστων και κακόβουλων αιρετικών χωρις να ακολουθεί η Ανάσταση και η λύτρωση.
Ένας Θεός κατακτητής που ειναι συνυφασμένος με το Διαβολο. Ένας Ιησούς Ναζωραίος Βασιλεύς Ιουδαίων επαναστάτης και ρηξικέλευθος. Θεϊκά ανθρώπινος. Υποφέρει απο τύψεις. Αγαπάει. Συμπονάει. Αντεχει. Τυραννιέται. Ερωτεύεται. Σκέφτεται. Αποφασίζει. Αντιδράει. Υπομένει. Επιμένει. Απαρνιέται. Αναρωτιέται. Προσπαθεί να γλιτώσει την ανθρωπότητα απο τις προαναγγελθείσες αιματοχυσίες στο όνομα του Μοναδικού Θεού.
Ένας λατρεμένος συγγραφέας. Οργισμένος και τρυφερός. Ένας άνθρωπος με βαθύ σεβασμό στην πίστη και τη θρησκεία. Με απόλυτη,απολογητική γραφή, απλή και συμβολική σαν ευαγγελιστής.
Το βιβλιο αυτό δεν θεωρείται θεολογικό. Ειναι ανατρεπτικό χωρις να γίνεται υβριστικό και ισοπεδωτικό.
Ειναι τα πάντα γύρω απο την ιστορια του Ιησού ιδωμένα απο άλλη αισθητική γωνία.
Ειναι ένα λογοτεχνικό έργο τέχνης - κάθε ομοιότητα με πρόσωπα και γεγονότα ας θεωρηθεί συμπτωματική-που προσφέρει τροφή για σκέψη ή φαντασία.
Καλή ανάγνωση!
Οι άνθρωποι ειναι ετερώνυμοι του καλού και του κακού. Ο Θεός και ο Διαβολος συνυπαρχουν. Χωρις το κακό δεν μπορεί να υπάρχει το καλό και αντίστροφα.
Σε καμία περίπτωση δεν θα μπορούσε να επικρατήσει κατα κράτος το καλό και η αγάπη,δεν έχουν λόγο ύπαρξης χωρις το κακό και το μίσος.
Ο Θεός εξαπατάει το ίδιο του το δημιούργημα. Χρησιμοποιεί τον Ιησού ως δόλωμα για να προσελκύσει στη Θεϊκή του επικράτεια περισσότερους πιστούς. Τον εκμεταλλεύεται για να νικήσει τις υπόλοιπες θρησκείες παγανιστικές ή ειδωλολατρικές. Τον εξαπατά. Τον σταυρώνει στο έλεος των άπιστων και κακόβουλων αιρετικών χωρις να ακολουθεί η Ανάσταση και η λύτρωση.
Ένας Θεός κατακτητής που ειναι συνυφασμένος με το Διαβολο. Ένας Ιησούς Ναζωραίος Βασιλεύς Ιουδαίων επαναστάτης και ρηξικέλευθος. Θεϊκά ανθρώπινος. Υποφέρει απο τύψεις. Αγαπάει. Συμπονάει. Αντεχει. Τυραννιέται. Ερωτεύεται. Σκέφτεται. Αποφασίζει. Αντιδράει. Υπομένει. Επιμένει. Απαρνιέται. Αναρωτιέται. Προσπαθεί να γλιτώσει την ανθρωπότητα απο τις προαναγγελθείσες αιματοχυσίες στο όνομα του Μοναδικού Θεού.
Ένας λατρεμένος συγγραφέας. Οργισμένος και τρυφερός. Ένας άνθρωπος με βαθύ σεβασμό στην πίστη και τη θρησκεία. Με απόλυτη,απολογητική γραφή, απλή και συμβολική σαν ευαγγελιστής.
Το βιβλιο αυτό δεν θεωρείται θεολογικό. Ειναι ανατρεπτικό χωρις να γίνεται υβριστικό και ισοπεδωτικό.
Ειναι τα πάντα γύρω απο την ιστορια του Ιησού ιδωμένα απο άλλη αισθητική γωνία.
Ειναι ένα λογοτεχνικό έργο τέχνης - κάθε ομοιότητα με πρόσωπα και γεγονότα ας θεωρηθεί συμπτωματική-που προσφέρει τροφή για σκέψη ή φαντασία.
Καλή ανάγνωση!
June 2, 2023
دع انجيلك جانبا و من باب أولى أيضا لا علاقة لهذا الكتاب بما ورد عن المسيح في القرآن.
إن كنت قد قررت الدخول و خوض التجربة فاعلم ان هذه رواية و ليست انجيلا جديدا و لا كتابا في اللاهوت. رواية بها كل اضطررابات الكاتب و تناقضاته و نفسه القلقة و روحه الطامحة للحرية.
ماذا أراد ساراماجو أن يقول في هذا الكتاب الذي يلمح إلى أنه انجيل جديد يرويه المسيح نفسه لا أحد تلاميذه؟
هو كالممثل على خشبة المسرح الذي يلبس تاج الملك ليوجه رسالة ما إلى الجماهير دون أن يجعل ذلك منه ملكا و دون أن يدّعي بعد انتهاء دوره انه صاحب الصولجان.
لقد ألبس روايته ثوب الإنجيل و ألبس شخصياته رداء الله و المسيح و الشيطان و مريم و الحواريين ليخلق حالة من الجدل الفلسفي في قالب روائي عن الخير و الشر و الدم و العنف و صراع ابن الله و ابن الإنسان داخل كل منا.
هي إذن رواية تبحر بك بعيدا إلى أبعد مكان في هذا العالم لتجد نفسك في النهاية داخل ذاتك مواجها نفسك و ممسكا بالحقيقة من تلابيبها منكرا كل حرف مما فهمته عائدا أدراجك بملء إرادتك لعالم يتنفس زيفا و خطيئة.
February 23, 2008
Jose Saramago is atheist. This should be enough warning for everyone that desires to read the book. It is very explicit and so religion it’s exposed at its weakest and God as a character is revealed. I come from a Roman-Catholic background but I still wanted to read it, ever since the Gnostic gospel where Jesus childhood is revealed and he changes from a mischief bad behave kid to the Jesus from the new testament I wanted to see Saramago’s take on it. Saramago is such a master of words that he makes every bit of faith look totally illogical.
It does not take long for us to find out that Saramago is extremely sharp at finding all contradictions on roman-catholic religion. In the novel God seems to be the greediest of all gods, the vainer, the more detach from his people. Detached even from his son as he appeared to him in different shapes, only in the meeting at the lake did he appear to him as a man. God does not command, he orders, he tricks his own son into following his plan to the end. Ultimately Jesus’s betrayal was his last act of martyrdom.
The devil is given the name of Pastor. This has caused some confusion for English readers. When I was reading the book with some Jesuits this person contacted them just to let them know (as a good Christian I assume) how blasphemous was to name the devil pastor. It took me 30 minutes to explain that person that Pastor does not means priest, but rather it comes from the Latin word “pastor” meaning shepherd. Now did he use the word shepherd on purpose? Yes, what is the devil but a shepherd of men leading them to hell, just as Jesus is a fisherman of men. In the book Pastor is the most humanitarian, the more repented, so repented that when asked to be forgiven a clear distinction between right and wrong has to be made so God decides not to forgive him because what is a good God without evil? Saramago decides there cannot be one without the other.
The characters in the book are fascinating; my Jesuits friends and I laughed and enjoy this book. There were no doubts in our head by the end of the book. We did not feel like it shook our religion or affected the way we perceived God. This book was after all under fiction so everyone that is easily offended stay away from this book and stop complaining about blasphemy and crying around like little kids. Saramago is a Nobel price winner and foremost a grown man that is entitled to his own opinions. This one of his finest, if not the best, of his book in my opinion, a must read.
It does not take long for us to find out that Saramago is extremely sharp at finding all contradictions on roman-catholic religion. In the novel God seems to be the greediest of all gods, the vainer, the more detach from his people. Detached even from his son as he appeared to him in different shapes, only in the meeting at the lake did he appear to him as a man. God does not command, he orders, he tricks his own son into following his plan to the end. Ultimately Jesus’s betrayal was his last act of martyrdom.
The devil is given the name of Pastor. This has caused some confusion for English readers. When I was reading the book with some Jesuits this person contacted them just to let them know (as a good Christian I assume) how blasphemous was to name the devil pastor. It took me 30 minutes to explain that person that Pastor does not means priest, but rather it comes from the Latin word “pastor” meaning shepherd. Now did he use the word shepherd on purpose? Yes, what is the devil but a shepherd of men leading them to hell, just as Jesus is a fisherman of men. In the book Pastor is the most humanitarian, the more repented, so repented that when asked to be forgiven a clear distinction between right and wrong has to be made so God decides not to forgive him because what is a good God without evil? Saramago decides there cannot be one without the other.
The characters in the book are fascinating; my Jesuits friends and I laughed and enjoy this book. There were no doubts in our head by the end of the book. We did not feel like it shook our religion or affected the way we perceived God. This book was after all under fiction so everyone that is easily offended stay away from this book and stop complaining about blasphemy and crying around like little kids. Saramago is a Nobel price winner and foremost a grown man that is entitled to his own opinions. This one of his finest, if not the best, of his book in my opinion, a must read.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 22, 2011
This is a bold fearless work and definitely not for the faint-hearted readers. I am not surprised that when this was originally published in 1991, it created lots of controversies with the Catholic Church condemning Jose Saramago for harboring anti-religious vision and his own Portuguese government asking the European Literary Prize to remove this from its shortlist because of the book’s offensive content to religion. Despite this book’s existence, Saramago won the 1998 Nobel Prize for Literature.
This is my third Saramago (Blindness, Double were my others) and my fourth book in what seems to be an unnamed genre: re-telling of the life of Jesus Christ. Last year I read The Last Temptation of Christ (1960) by Nikos Kazantzakis and Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt (2005) and Christ the Lord: The Road to Cana (2008) by Anne Rice. In my “book,” Temptation came first and I am glad I read it first so the idea of twisting the canons by a mere mortal who lived in our generation is not new (translation: not shocking). For me, Anne Rice’s books now seem to be just afterthoughts of these two works.
But why re-tell the life of Jesus Christ? Because of the mysterious gap in his younger years? Because of the weakening fate of the believers? Because more and more people are now turning into atheism or other religions? This depends on what we believe or what each of us was taught to believe when we were younger. However, since this book is about the life of Jesus Christ who’s being venerated by more than half of the people in the world, then I don’t want to dwell on religion. I am leaving this kind of discussion on faith to some other forums like my review on my long staying currently-read book: The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Edition that I started reading in September last year and currently in The Book of Ezekiel and hope to finish all books before the end of this year.
I picked this book because I loved the two works of Saramago. Also, it is Lenten Season and I thought that a Nobel laureate like him would not blaspheme, paint false pictures or mock Jesus Christ. Yes, he did those in this book. I almost wanted to say that this should rather be called The Gospel According to Jose Saramago but for me, it is disrespectful to a great mind like him. After all, he is already dead, was an atheist and a writer so it is not nice for a mere literary enthusiast like me to criticize a dead person (who can no longer defend himself), argue with his beliefs (as he did not believe on any god and said to be a pessimist) and he can invoke poetic devise (twisting facts for the sake of telling a grappling story). In other words, he had or has all the right to come up with a work like this and his cries for oppression due to censorship when the Portuguese government or the Catholic Church called for banning of this are, in my opinion, all uncalled for.
Jesus having sex with Mary Magdalene in the whorehouse without the blessing of marriage. The demon asking Jesus to use a sheep for sexual release. An angel posing as a beggar during the Annunciation scene. The same beggar-angel walking with Mary to Bethlehem provoking jealousy to the doubting Joseph. Three shepherds instead of 3 kings visiting the family in the Bethlehem. Joseph crucified and dying on the cross mistaken as a zealot. Jesus seeing God in the desert. Jesus riding on the boat with the God and the Devil. These are some of the shocking deviations from the story that Saramago imagined and incorporated to come up with an “irreverent, profound, skeptical, funny, heretical, deeply philosophical, provocative and compelling work.” (Source: Harold Robbin who says that this is his favorite work of Saramago. So far, I agree).
So, how do you rate a book with a disgusting content yet beautifully written? Think J. G. Ballard’s Crash, Marquis de Sade’s 120 Days of Sodom or Bret Easton Ellis’ American Psycho or even Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. The first time I read them, I was totally disgusted and hated them to the max. Now I realized I missed the whole point. They are really written to shock so their authors can bring the message to the table.
So, what message does The Gospel According to Jesus Christ want us to realize? For me, it is beyond further humanizing Jesus Christ. It is more what choices, regardless whether he is man, god or a their combination, he had before he said yes to his Father for being the sacrificial lamb to propagate Christianity in the world.
But more than the message, one thing that I enjoyed reading this book is its storytelling style. Many parts are totally hilarious and that style when Saramago directly addressing the reader and he opens your thought by throwing contemporary works and philosophy is just awesome. I have never seen this in any of the works of novelists whose books I so far sampled.
I am rating this with a 4 (I really liked it) but will probably not recommend this to anyone. I'd rather that they decide for themselves. If they are as open-minded as my friend and reading-buddy Angus, then I would say go. If not, then check how strong is your faith as Saramago can sway you to question your long-held beliefs. It's like having an clever, sweet-talker and well-read atheist in your Bible reading group come one Sunday and he starts questioning what is written in the gospel but he is not obnoxious because he knows what he is talking about. If you are still in Cathecism 101, don't ever dare open this book.
This is my third Saramago (Blindness, Double were my others) and my fourth book in what seems to be an unnamed genre: re-telling of the life of Jesus Christ. Last year I read The Last Temptation of Christ (1960) by Nikos Kazantzakis and Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt (2005) and Christ the Lord: The Road to Cana (2008) by Anne Rice. In my “book,” Temptation came first and I am glad I read it first so the idea of twisting the canons by a mere mortal who lived in our generation is not new (translation: not shocking). For me, Anne Rice’s books now seem to be just afterthoughts of these two works.
But why re-tell the life of Jesus Christ? Because of the mysterious gap in his younger years? Because of the weakening fate of the believers? Because more and more people are now turning into atheism or other religions? This depends on what we believe or what each of us was taught to believe when we were younger. However, since this book is about the life of Jesus Christ who’s being venerated by more than half of the people in the world, then I don’t want to dwell on religion. I am leaving this kind of discussion on faith to some other forums like my review on my long staying currently-read book: The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Edition that I started reading in September last year and currently in The Book of Ezekiel and hope to finish all books before the end of this year.
I picked this book because I loved the two works of Saramago. Also, it is Lenten Season and I thought that a Nobel laureate like him would not blaspheme, paint false pictures or mock Jesus Christ. Yes, he did those in this book. I almost wanted to say that this should rather be called The Gospel According to Jose Saramago but for me, it is disrespectful to a great mind like him. After all, he is already dead, was an atheist and a writer so it is not nice for a mere literary enthusiast like me to criticize a dead person (who can no longer defend himself), argue with his beliefs (as he did not believe on any god and said to be a pessimist) and he can invoke poetic devise (twisting facts for the sake of telling a grappling story). In other words, he had or has all the right to come up with a work like this and his cries for oppression due to censorship when the Portuguese government or the Catholic Church called for banning of this are, in my opinion, all uncalled for.
Jesus having sex with Mary Magdalene in the whorehouse without the blessing of marriage. The demon asking Jesus to use a sheep for sexual release. An angel posing as a beggar during the Annunciation scene. The same beggar-angel walking with Mary to Bethlehem provoking jealousy to the doubting Joseph. Three shepherds instead of 3 kings visiting the family in the Bethlehem. Joseph crucified and dying on the cross mistaken as a zealot. Jesus seeing God in the desert. Jesus riding on the boat with the God and the Devil. These are some of the shocking deviations from the story that Saramago imagined and incorporated to come up with an “irreverent, profound, skeptical, funny, heretical, deeply philosophical, provocative and compelling work.” (Source: Harold Robbin who says that this is his favorite work of Saramago. So far, I agree).
So, how do you rate a book with a disgusting content yet beautifully written? Think J. G. Ballard’s Crash, Marquis de Sade’s 120 Days of Sodom or Bret Easton Ellis’ American Psycho or even Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. The first time I read them, I was totally disgusted and hated them to the max. Now I realized I missed the whole point. They are really written to shock so their authors can bring the message to the table.
So, what message does The Gospel According to Jesus Christ want us to realize? For me, it is beyond further humanizing Jesus Christ. It is more what choices, regardless whether he is man, god or a their combination, he had before he said yes to his Father for being the sacrificial lamb to propagate Christianity in the world.
But more than the message, one thing that I enjoyed reading this book is its storytelling style. Many parts are totally hilarious and that style when Saramago directly addressing the reader and he opens your thought by throwing contemporary works and philosophy is just awesome. I have never seen this in any of the works of novelists whose books I so far sampled.
I am rating this with a 4 (I really liked it) but will probably not recommend this to anyone. I'd rather that they decide for themselves. If they are as open-minded as my friend and reading-buddy Angus, then I would say go. If not, then check how strong is your faith as Saramago can sway you to question your long-held beliefs. It's like having an clever, sweet-talker and well-read atheist in your Bible reading group come one Sunday and he starts questioning what is written in the gospel but he is not obnoxious because he knows what he is talking about. If you are still in Cathecism 101, don't ever dare open this book.
April 24, 2023
Pe José Saramago nu l-au interesat lacunele biografice din evanghelii. L-a preocupat o singură întrebare: de ce a fost răstignit Iisus? Numai ca să șteargă păcatul oamenilor? Știm răspunsurile teologilor (sfîntul Augustin, sfîntul Anselm). Sînt, negreșit, mai multe și nu se împacă prea bine între ele. Dar aceste ipoteze n-au stîrnit mînia nimănui. În schimb, răspunsul lui Saramago a șocat. Evanghelia redactată de el i-a scos din minți nu doar pe episcopii catolici de pe lîngă Sfîntul Scaun, ci și pe cuvioșii politicieni. Să ne ferească bunul Dumnezeu de ignoranța lor agresivă...
A rămas de pomină numele Secretarului de Stat la Cultură care a retras cartea de la un important premiu literar european: António da Costa de Albuquerque de Sousa Lara, marchiz de Lara, conte de Guedes. Cînd porți un asemenea nume (a cărui sonoritate îți strivește auzul), ar trebui să fii ceva mai prudent. În opinia marchizului, romanul lui Saramago ar lovi în însăși temelia statului portughez. Narațiunea e o blasfemie, o imensă bătaie de joc, un atentat la morala nației. Și e profund regretabil că Inchiziția a fost desființată. A resuscitat-o, așadar, domnul marchiz și l-a interzis pe scriitor. În consecință, iritat de întîmplare, Saramago a emigrat în insula Lanzarote din arhipelagul Canarelor, teritoriu spaniol.
Să mă întorc la întrebarea prozatorului. Răspunsul îl putem afla din discuția celor trei personaje „principale”. Iisus a urcat într-o barcă, a vîslit pînă a ajuns la o negură deasă, nu mai avea nici un reper și s-a oprit derutat. Lîngă el se ivesc subit mai întîi Dumnezeu și, apoi, diavolul. Nu e Dumnezeul evangheliilor, ci Dumnezeul Vechiului Testament, care a spus: „Eu mă îndur de cine vreau să mă îndur şi am milă de cine vreau să am milă...” (Exodul, 33: 18-19; Romani, 9: 15). Cînd Iisus îl întreabă de ce va trebui să plătească cu viața, primește un răspuns scurt, cinic: „Pentru că așa am dispus eu, faci parte din program și va trebui să te supui...”. Dumnezeu nu mai dorește să fie doar stăpînul unui popor neînsemnat ca număr, vrea o Biserică, vrea să domnească peste cît mai multe seminții. Doar răstignirea poate avea o asemenea consecință. Iisus înțelege că e o victimă a unui Dumnezeu însetat de putere (prima victimă dintr-un șir nesfîrșit de martiri) și că va trebui să-i accepte cu resemnare decizia.
Chiar dacă ni se pare că Saramago a exagerat, romanul trebuie citit cu seninătate. S-au scris lucruri mult mai grele. S-au proferat blasfemii mult mai tăioase. În definitiv, nimeni nu-și pierde credința (multă-puțină, cîtă e) prin simpla lectură a acestui roman. Din păcate, cînd a redactat Evanghelia după Iisus Christos, nici Saramago n-a fost cu totul senin. Doar așa îmi explic ironia lipsită de orice haz din unele pasaje...
(15.03.23, luni)
A rămas de pomină numele Secretarului de Stat la Cultură care a retras cartea de la un important premiu literar european: António da Costa de Albuquerque de Sousa Lara, marchiz de Lara, conte de Guedes. Cînd porți un asemenea nume (a cărui sonoritate îți strivește auzul), ar trebui să fii ceva mai prudent. În opinia marchizului, romanul lui Saramago ar lovi în însăși temelia statului portughez. Narațiunea e o blasfemie, o imensă bătaie de joc, un atentat la morala nației. Și e profund regretabil că Inchiziția a fost desființată. A resuscitat-o, așadar, domnul marchiz și l-a interzis pe scriitor. În consecință, iritat de întîmplare, Saramago a emigrat în insula Lanzarote din arhipelagul Canarelor, teritoriu spaniol.
Să mă întorc la întrebarea prozatorului. Răspunsul îl putem afla din discuția celor trei personaje „principale”. Iisus a urcat într-o barcă, a vîslit pînă a ajuns la o negură deasă, nu mai avea nici un reper și s-a oprit derutat. Lîngă el se ivesc subit mai întîi Dumnezeu și, apoi, diavolul. Nu e Dumnezeul evangheliilor, ci Dumnezeul Vechiului Testament, care a spus: „Eu mă îndur de cine vreau să mă îndur şi am milă de cine vreau să am milă...” (Exodul, 33: 18-19; Romani, 9: 15). Cînd Iisus îl întreabă de ce va trebui să plătească cu viața, primește un răspuns scurt, cinic: „Pentru că așa am dispus eu, faci parte din program și va trebui să te supui...”. Dumnezeu nu mai dorește să fie doar stăpînul unui popor neînsemnat ca număr, vrea o Biserică, vrea să domnească peste cît mai multe seminții. Doar răstignirea poate avea o asemenea consecință. Iisus înțelege că e o victimă a unui Dumnezeu însetat de putere (prima victimă dintr-un șir nesfîrșit de martiri) și că va trebui să-i accepte cu resemnare decizia.
Chiar dacă ni se pare că Saramago a exagerat, romanul trebuie citit cu seninătate. S-au scris lucruri mult mai grele. S-au proferat blasfemii mult mai tăioase. În definitiv, nimeni nu-și pierde credința (multă-puțină, cîtă e) prin simpla lectură a acestui roman. Din păcate, cînd a redactat Evanghelia după Iisus Christos, nici Saramago n-a fost cu totul senin. Doar așa îmi explic ironia lipsită de orice haz din unele pasaje...
(15.03.23, luni)
February 7, 2017
I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SLIP SOME BENZEDRINE INTO THIS GUY’S COFFEE
This is a very peculiar novel. I’m not quite sure what the hell it is. Some of it reads like deleted scenes from Monty Python’s Life of Brian
Now be off with you, said God, for I have work to do and can’t stay here chatting all day
Or
Mary : Is there any proof that it was the Lord’s seed which engendered my first-born?
Angel : Well, it’s a delicate matter, and what you’re demanding is nothing less than a paternity test.
The rest of it is a whole lot of mumbling, bumbling, fumbling, irritating, rambling, moaning, groaning, huffing and puffing by a narrator who appears to be some ancient old codger who is a shoo-in for the world finals of the Most Boring Man in the World contest.
And the rewrite of the familiar tale of Jesus is so comprehensive that half way through the book Jesus is only 13 and two-thirds through he is still only 18. So it's very different.
AUTHOR VERSUS READER – DING DING, ROUND ONE
Is there any need for this or are we in the land of pretentious literary wankery? Jose Saramago serves us up massive slabs of undifferentiated prose, page after page – he ends a paragraph with extreme reluctance, it’s like pulling teeth with Jose, it’s like asking John Lee Hooker to change chords. Every paragraph is one or two pages long. As for indicators of dialogue, forget it, pal, you’re on your own. The dialogue is run into the giant paragraphs as part of the ongoing flow, and the lines of dialogue are not separated by anything helpful like he said or she said, and not even by full stops, only commas, maybe there was a full stop shortage in Portugal in the late 1980s. I never heard about that, you might think it would have made the news. (“Crates of full stops are still being held up at Lisbon airport as the dispute enters its 9th week”). Anyway, these stylistic choices make the reading a whole lot more annoying and turgid than it might be.
AUTHOR VERSUS READER – DING DING, ROUND TWO
As well as being an old fart, the narrator is a misogynist –
Joseph wondered if he should ask Mary if the pains were still there, but in the end said nothing, for we must not forget that this whole process is unclean from the moment of impregnation until the moment of birth, that horrific female organ, vortex and abyss, the seat of all the world’s evils, an inner labyrinth, blood, sweat, discharges, gushing waters, revolting afterbirth, dear God, how can you permit Your beloved children to be born from such impurity.
WORLD’S MOST BORING MAN – A FEW EXAMPLES
In the first place, there are Samaritans and Samaritans, which means that even at that time one swallow was not enough to make a summer, one needed two, that is to say, two swallows rather than summers, provided there is a fertile male and female and they have offspring.
Suddenly a beggar appeared at the yard gate, a somewhat rare occurrence in this village where people were poor, a fact unlikely to have escaped the begging fraternity which had a nose for places where there were rich pickings for the asking, and this was certainly not the case here.
As for possessions, the only thing Joseph and Job had in common was the number of sons. Job had seven sons and three daughters, while Joseph had seven sons and two daughters, giving the carpenter the advantage of having put one woman less into the world. And there’s no denying that it is one thing to feed two mouths, then a third, even if only indirectly during the first year, and quite another to find oneself saddled with a houseful of children who demand more and more food once they start growing.
This narrator even knows perfectly well how dull he is!
Four years hence, Jesus will meet God. This unexpected revelation, which is probably premature according to the rules of effective narration mentioned earlier, is simply intended to prepare the reader for some everyday scenes from pastoral life which will add little of substance to the main thread of our story, thus excusing any reader who might be tempted to jump ahead.
WAIT – COULD IT BE THAT THIS NARRATOR IS SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE A VILLAGE ELDER FROM THE PERIOD? THAT WOULD EXPLAIN ALL THE BORING RAMBLING
But no, this logical explanation is wrecked by comments like the following
It may seem wholly inappropriate to put the complex theories of modern thinkers into the head of a Palestinian who lived so many years before Freud, Jung, Groddeck and Lacan appeared on the scene.
… the only reason why that same Goliath did not become a basketball player is because he was born before his time
Maybe this narrator is deliberately unstable, unpindownable. That would be a nice copout for Jose. Yes, it doesn’t make too much sense, but that’s all calculated. Why? Er, I dunno.
THIS NOVEL MIGHT BE A TONGUE-IN-CHEEK ATHEIST SATIRE ON RELIGION
Because the concept of God as dished out by the old-fart narrator is ridiculously primitive. It appears that in this world God has to negotiate his turf with other gods, and also, in this world, if you are ill it is because you have sinned. Both these ideas can be found in the Bible of course, but at least by the time of Jesus Jewish thought had evolved to the point where they believed that there were no other Gods except the one God. Here’s a few things the narrator says about God :
For in truth, there are things God himself does not understand, even though he created them.
As God warned Eve after she sinned, I will greatly multiply your suffering and your conception, in sorrow you will bring forth children, and after centuries of sorrow and suffering, God is not yet appeased and the agony goes on.
At that time life was hard for the poor and God could not be expected to provide for everyone.
Jesus interrogates Him at one point :
Being God, You must know everything.
Up to a certain point, only up to a certain point.
What point is that?
The point where it starts to become interesting to pretend that I know nothing.
So sometimes it’s like this is all clearly a cheeky satire on religion, and sometimes the intractable concepts of God, salvation, sin and so on are presented as hard painful fact.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOSE SARAMAGO
(Note sort of spoilers follow)
The version of the story of Jesus we get here is a whole different thing from the actual gospels. The single event which dominates the first half of the book is something which is mentioned in only one Gospel (Matthew) and dismissed in three verses, the Massacre of the Innocents (When Herod realised that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old or under ). Joseph discovers Herod’s intention, rescues Mary and his own infant son Jesus, and after they make it back to Nazareth he is consumed by terrible remorse – why did he not warn the families of Bethlehem when he could? Why did he selfishly only rescue his own child? When Jesus learns about this he believes he takes on his father’s guilt, and he becomes obsessed. He leaves his family (aged 13) and joins up with a shepherd, then later with some fishermen where he discovers he has magical powers over fish (yes! I am not making this up, Saramago is, basing it on one of the gospel miracles. But in this book, Jesus makes his living for four years by controlling the fish in the Sea of Galilee!).
Then Jesus meets Mary Magdalene, a prostitute, and they fall in love and start travelling round together as man and wife. He encounters God a couple of times and finally gets God to tell him that he is God’s one and only Son, and that God has a task for him, which is to die a martyr’s death so that his followers can spread the word. And what is the point of it all?
To help me become God of more people says God.
I thought Blindness was a stone 5 star classic, in which the difficult narration perfectly mirrored the desperate difficult plight of the characters, but this Gospel just struck me as very loopy and probably not worth the amount of concentration required to plough through all the unrelenting density.
This is a very peculiar novel. I’m not quite sure what the hell it is. Some of it reads like deleted scenes from Monty Python’s Life of Brian
Now be off with you, said God, for I have work to do and can’t stay here chatting all day
Or
Mary : Is there any proof that it was the Lord’s seed which engendered my first-born?
Angel : Well, it’s a delicate matter, and what you’re demanding is nothing less than a paternity test.
The rest of it is a whole lot of mumbling, bumbling, fumbling, irritating, rambling, moaning, groaning, huffing and puffing by a narrator who appears to be some ancient old codger who is a shoo-in for the world finals of the Most Boring Man in the World contest.
And the rewrite of the familiar tale of Jesus is so comprehensive that half way through the book Jesus is only 13 and two-thirds through he is still only 18. So it's very different.
AUTHOR VERSUS READER – DING DING, ROUND ONE
Is there any need for this or are we in the land of pretentious literary wankery? Jose Saramago serves us up massive slabs of undifferentiated prose, page after page – he ends a paragraph with extreme reluctance, it’s like pulling teeth with Jose, it’s like asking John Lee Hooker to change chords. Every paragraph is one or two pages long. As for indicators of dialogue, forget it, pal, you’re on your own. The dialogue is run into the giant paragraphs as part of the ongoing flow, and the lines of dialogue are not separated by anything helpful like he said or she said, and not even by full stops, only commas, maybe there was a full stop shortage in Portugal in the late 1980s. I never heard about that, you might think it would have made the news. (“Crates of full stops are still being held up at Lisbon airport as the dispute enters its 9th week”). Anyway, these stylistic choices make the reading a whole lot more annoying and turgid than it might be.
AUTHOR VERSUS READER – DING DING, ROUND TWO
As well as being an old fart, the narrator is a misogynist –
Joseph wondered if he should ask Mary if the pains were still there, but in the end said nothing, for we must not forget that this whole process is unclean from the moment of impregnation until the moment of birth, that horrific female organ, vortex and abyss, the seat of all the world’s evils, an inner labyrinth, blood, sweat, discharges, gushing waters, revolting afterbirth, dear God, how can you permit Your beloved children to be born from such impurity.
WORLD’S MOST BORING MAN – A FEW EXAMPLES
In the first place, there are Samaritans and Samaritans, which means that even at that time one swallow was not enough to make a summer, one needed two, that is to say, two swallows rather than summers, provided there is a fertile male and female and they have offspring.
Suddenly a beggar appeared at the yard gate, a somewhat rare occurrence in this village where people were poor, a fact unlikely to have escaped the begging fraternity which had a nose for places where there were rich pickings for the asking, and this was certainly not the case here.
As for possessions, the only thing Joseph and Job had in common was the number of sons. Job had seven sons and three daughters, while Joseph had seven sons and two daughters, giving the carpenter the advantage of having put one woman less into the world. And there’s no denying that it is one thing to feed two mouths, then a third, even if only indirectly during the first year, and quite another to find oneself saddled with a houseful of children who demand more and more food once they start growing.
This narrator even knows perfectly well how dull he is!
Four years hence, Jesus will meet God. This unexpected revelation, which is probably premature according to the rules of effective narration mentioned earlier, is simply intended to prepare the reader for some everyday scenes from pastoral life which will add little of substance to the main thread of our story, thus excusing any reader who might be tempted to jump ahead.
WAIT – COULD IT BE THAT THIS NARRATOR IS SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE A VILLAGE ELDER FROM THE PERIOD? THAT WOULD EXPLAIN ALL THE BORING RAMBLING
But no, this logical explanation is wrecked by comments like the following
It may seem wholly inappropriate to put the complex theories of modern thinkers into the head of a Palestinian who lived so many years before Freud, Jung, Groddeck and Lacan appeared on the scene.
… the only reason why that same Goliath did not become a basketball player is because he was born before his time
Maybe this narrator is deliberately unstable, unpindownable. That would be a nice copout for Jose. Yes, it doesn’t make too much sense, but that’s all calculated. Why? Er, I dunno.
THIS NOVEL MIGHT BE A TONGUE-IN-CHEEK ATHEIST SATIRE ON RELIGION
Because the concept of God as dished out by the old-fart narrator is ridiculously primitive. It appears that in this world God has to negotiate his turf with other gods, and also, in this world, if you are ill it is because you have sinned. Both these ideas can be found in the Bible of course, but at least by the time of Jesus Jewish thought had evolved to the point where they believed that there were no other Gods except the one God. Here’s a few things the narrator says about God :
For in truth, there are things God himself does not understand, even though he created them.
As God warned Eve after she sinned, I will greatly multiply your suffering and your conception, in sorrow you will bring forth children, and after centuries of sorrow and suffering, God is not yet appeased and the agony goes on.
At that time life was hard for the poor and God could not be expected to provide for everyone.
Jesus interrogates Him at one point :
Being God, You must know everything.
Up to a certain point, only up to a certain point.
What point is that?
The point where it starts to become interesting to pretend that I know nothing.
So sometimes it’s like this is all clearly a cheeky satire on religion, and sometimes the intractable concepts of God, salvation, sin and so on are presented as hard painful fact.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOSE SARAMAGO
(Note sort of spoilers follow)
The version of the story of Jesus we get here is a whole different thing from the actual gospels. The single event which dominates the first half of the book is something which is mentioned in only one Gospel (Matthew) and dismissed in three verses, the Massacre of the Innocents (When Herod realised that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old or under ). Joseph discovers Herod’s intention, rescues Mary and his own infant son Jesus, and after they make it back to Nazareth he is consumed by terrible remorse – why did he not warn the families of Bethlehem when he could? Why did he selfishly only rescue his own child? When Jesus learns about this he believes he takes on his father’s guilt, and he becomes obsessed. He leaves his family (aged 13) and joins up with a shepherd, then later with some fishermen where he discovers he has magical powers over fish (yes! I am not making this up, Saramago is, basing it on one of the gospel miracles. But in this book, Jesus makes his living for four years by controlling the fish in the Sea of Galilee!).
Then Jesus meets Mary Magdalene, a prostitute, and they fall in love and start travelling round together as man and wife. He encounters God a couple of times and finally gets God to tell him that he is God’s one and only Son, and that God has a task for him, which is to die a martyr’s death so that his followers can spread the word. And what is the point of it all?
To help me become God of more people says God.
I thought Blindness was a stone 5 star classic, in which the difficult narration perfectly mirrored the desperate difficult plight of the characters, but this Gospel just struck me as very loopy and probably not worth the amount of concentration required to plough through all the unrelenting density.
November 17, 2020
The Vicar was not happy that I was reading, ‘Gospel according to Christ’ for he felt I would lose my faith, as though Faith is not a part of your inner being, but a handkerchief, one misplaces oh so casually.
I am glad I disobeyed him, for this book only made me surer of my faith.
This book shows Christ in all his Humanity, Humanity so naked, so simple and so beautiful that it humbles you to the core of your being.
If I could say, to this so very Human Christ,
‘Let me but touch the hem of your robe, and I would be healed, or be whole again’.
I am glad I disobeyed him, for this book only made me surer of my faith.
This book shows Christ in all his Humanity, Humanity so naked, so simple and so beautiful that it humbles you to the core of your being.
If I could say, to this so very Human Christ,
‘Let me but touch the hem of your robe, and I would be healed, or be whole again’.
June 20, 2017
Είχα καιρό να διαβάσω Σαραμάγκου κι είχα ξεχάσει πως οι προτάσεις του είναι σαν τον θειο μου τον ανακόντα, ένα πράγμα. Πας, πας, πας και τελειωμό δεν έχουν. Μαλωμένος ο Σαραμάγκου προφανώς εκ γενετής με τα σημεία στίξης και δη με τις τελείες, που αν πετύχεις πάνω σε τελεία, κάνεις το σταυρό σου, παίζεις κι ένα τζόκερ, γιατί τέτοια τύχη που θα την ξαναβρείς… Στις δέκα πρώτες σελίδες, τα ‘φτυσα… Είπα ‘φιδάκι μου όμορφο, πάει γέρασες, δεν είναι τα επικίνδυνα σπορ πια για σένα…’. Όμως όσο διάβαζα αυτός ο Πορτογάλος μάγος της λογοτεχνίας, που ούτε Πανεπιστήμια τελείωσε ούτε τίποτα [να τα βλέπουν αυτά κάποιοι λούμπεν κουλτουριάρηδες δικοί μας], με πήρε και με σήκωσε.
Το «κατά Ιησούν Ευαγγέλιο» είναι ένα «αιρετικό» ευαγγέλιο, είναι η άποψη του άθεου, κατά δήλωσή του, Σαραμάγκου για τη ζωή του Θεού και του ανθρώπου Ιησού. Όταν πρωτοκυκλοφόρησε, οι θεούσες της καθολικής εκκλησίας της Πορτογαλίας (δεν έχουμε μόνο εμείς το χάρισμα), τον έκραξαν, τον αποκήρυξαν και τον έστειλαν αυτοβούλως στο Λανθαρότε. Σαφώς, όποιος πάρει να διαβάσει το βιβλίο, περιμένοντας να δει τα γεγονότα όπως τα εξιστορεί η Καινή Διαθήκη, πράττει λάθος μεγάλο. Εδώ ο Σαραμάγκου αφηγείται την ιστορία αλλιώς, ξεκινώντας από τη σύλληψη μέχρι τη Σταύρωση, παρουσιάζοντας τα γεγονότα με τη δική του ματιά (σταύρωση του Ιωσήφ, ο θάνατος των βρεφών από τον Ηρώδη, το πρώτο θαύμα στην Κανά κλπ κλπ κλπ). Η συλλογιστική και οι πνευματικές ανησυχίες του Σαραμάγκου μου θύμισαν πολύ τον δικό μας Καζαντζάκη και κατέληξα στο συμπέρασμα πως τελικά οι ‘άθεοι’ αυτής της συνομοταξίας, είναι αυτοί που πραγματικά αγαπούν τον Θεό.
Ο Ιησούς παρουσιάζεται με όλες τις ανθρώπινες αδυναμίες του, με τις πνευματικές ανησυχίες του, με τα ηθικά του διλήμματα εάν πρέπει να ακολουθήσει το δρόμο που χάραξε ο Θεός για εκείνον, γνωρίζοντας το μακελειό που θα ακολουθήσει στην ανθρωπότητα για την εξάπλωση του χριστιανισμού. Η κοινωνική κριτική που ασκεί ο συγγραφέας, ιδίως όσον αφορά τη θέση της γυναίκας τότε και τώρα είναι διάχυτη σε διάφορα σημεία. Το χιούμορ, σαρκαστικό, ειρωνικό, λεπιδόπτερο (άσχετο αλλά μου άρεσε η λέξη) κόβει σαν χειρουργικό νυστέρι. Έπιασα πολλές φορές τον εαυτό μου να χαμογελάει με τις ατάκες του συγγραφέα.
Η μάχη του Καλού και του Κακού… η ύπαρξη του Κακού που είναι αναγκαία για να υπάρξει το Καλό… ένας Θεός Σύννεφο - Καπνός κι ένας Διάβολος Ποιμένας… η συζήτηση μεταξύ τους, από τα απολαυστικότερα σημεία του βιβλίου… Κι εγώ, ως όφις κατηραμένος, μαντέψτε προς ποιανού πλευρά έκλινα… Κρίμα να προδώσω και τη ράτσα μου…
Ένα βιβλίο απολαυστικό, χορταστικό, που το γέμισα κοκκινάδια (από το μαρκαδόρο υπογράμμισης – μην πάει το μυαλό σας στο πονηρό) για να μην χάσω καμιά από τις κρυμμένες σοφίες… ένα βιβλίο βαθιά πνευματικό, βαθιά θρησκευόμενο, ένα βιβλίο για όσους ψάχνουν το Θεό εδώ στη Γη ή στον ουρανό… ένα βιβλίο τόσο για ανθρώπους όσο και για φίδια με ή χωρίς ουρά…
Βαθμολογία: 10/10 Χ10 ω! 10
Readathon 2017: Ένα βιβλίο που ο πρωταγωνιστής είναι ιστορικό πρόσωπο [23/80]
http://skorofido.blogspot.gr/2017/06/...
February 17, 2009
Or: Adolescent Jesus as Imagined by a Brilliant Authorial Atheist.
That's unfair and reductive, however. Jose Saramago is an atheist, and the book does explore the parts of Jesus' life that most people pretend didn't exist (early adolescence to just before the time when he knew he had Messianic Son-of-God Superpowers), while at the same time gently but firmly questioning the nature of God, divinity, religious fervor manifesting itself as the oppression of others, bizarre religious ritual, and religious hypocrisy.
The familiar Biblical story arc of Mary and Joseph's pilgrimage to Bethlehem for a census begins the story, though Saramago quickly dispenses with any notion that Mary was a virgin; she also has, in quick succession, many other children after Jesus' birth. (Both of these points, of course, are regarded as highly sacred/controversial in most Church law; it is essential that the Mother of God be stripped of her sexuality, and it has long been denied, mostly by the Catholic church, that Mary gave birth to any other children besides Jesus.)
Throughout the novel, Jesus questions himself, his status as the son of God, the idea that he may be the Messiah of the Jewish people, and even God's own divine plan (revealed to Jesus as a stunning display of hubris, arrogance, and selfishness) - but always remains steadfast in his devotion to Mary Magdalene, with whom he lives freely and openly in a sexual relationship outside the bonds of marriage, and whom he treats as equally as any man. (The book makes clear from page one the wretchedly inferior status of women in ancient Judaic times.)
Saramago points out something that many modern Christians tend to forget, in their re-branding of God as a benevolent Father/Protector/Wish-Granter: the God of the ancient Jews and the Old Testament was a complete prick. If God singled you out for his special attention, that was just as frightening as his anger toward you. He pissed in Job's face, played keep-away with Moses and the Promised Land, turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt simply for showing a bit of momentary concern for her neighbors, and totally Punk'd Abraham about that whole son-sacrificing thing, with all the equal amounts of jealousy and wrath that Old Testament God is famous for.
Of course Satan makes an appearance as a character, but Saramago fashions him as a much more interesting, multifaceted figure, possessed of depth, humor, and perhaps not as evil as he's often cast. He and God are posited to be old friends, not necessarily enemies, and in a co-dependent relationship of sorts in an arrangement to preserve the others' power. A very morally/religiously complex and long chapter is devoted to this balance of power, and for me was the climax of the novel - while God is telling Jesus of the horrific events that will occur in his name, Saramago devotes four pages of God's dialogue to alphabetically listing the names of martyred saints and the graphically violent ways in which they were killed for their belief.
The prose is beautiful, but Saramago's authorial imprint and style is his distinct lack of quotation marks in dialogue, and lack of paragraph breaks during dialogue between characters. It can be difficult to follow, particularly in situations with more than two characters speaking.
This is highly recommended for believers and non-believers alike.
That's unfair and reductive, however. Jose Saramago is an atheist, and the book does explore the parts of Jesus' life that most people pretend didn't exist (early adolescence to just before the time when he knew he had Messianic Son-of-God Superpowers), while at the same time gently but firmly questioning the nature of God, divinity, religious fervor manifesting itself as the oppression of others, bizarre religious ritual, and religious hypocrisy.
The familiar Biblical story arc of Mary and Joseph's pilgrimage to Bethlehem for a census begins the story, though Saramago quickly dispenses with any notion that Mary was a virgin; she also has, in quick succession, many other children after Jesus' birth. (Both of these points, of course, are regarded as highly sacred/controversial in most Church law; it is essential that the Mother of God be stripped of her sexuality, and it has long been denied, mostly by the Catholic church, that Mary gave birth to any other children besides Jesus.)
Throughout the novel, Jesus questions himself, his status as the son of God, the idea that he may be the Messiah of the Jewish people, and even God's own divine plan (revealed to Jesus as a stunning display of hubris, arrogance, and selfishness) - but always remains steadfast in his devotion to Mary Magdalene, with whom he lives freely and openly in a sexual relationship outside the bonds of marriage, and whom he treats as equally as any man. (The book makes clear from page one the wretchedly inferior status of women in ancient Judaic times.)
Saramago points out something that many modern Christians tend to forget, in their re-branding of God as a benevolent Father/Protector/Wish-Granter: the God of the ancient Jews and the Old Testament was a complete prick. If God singled you out for his special attention, that was just as frightening as his anger toward you. He pissed in Job's face, played keep-away with Moses and the Promised Land, turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt simply for showing a bit of momentary concern for her neighbors, and totally Punk'd Abraham about that whole son-sacrificing thing, with all the equal amounts of jealousy and wrath that Old Testament God is famous for.
Of course Satan makes an appearance as a character, but Saramago fashions him as a much more interesting, multifaceted figure, possessed of depth, humor, and perhaps not as evil as he's often cast. He and God are posited to be old friends, not necessarily enemies, and in a co-dependent relationship of sorts in an arrangement to preserve the others' power. A very morally/religiously complex and long chapter is devoted to this balance of power, and for me was the climax of the novel - while God is telling Jesus of the horrific events that will occur in his name, Saramago devotes four pages of God's dialogue to alphabetically listing the names of martyred saints and the graphically violent ways in which they were killed for their belief.
The prose is beautiful, but Saramago's authorial imprint and style is his distinct lack of quotation marks in dialogue, and lack of paragraph breaks during dialogue between characters. It can be difficult to follow, particularly in situations with more than two characters speaking.
This is highly recommended for believers and non-believers alike.
April 12, 2024
"..giacchè non c'era, che lui sapesse, alcun uomo in tutto Israele che potesse vantarsi di aver visto Dio ed esser sopravvissuto".
---ATTENZIONE SPOILER---
(...anche se questa storia la conoscono tutti)
Per oltre un terzo del romanzo, perchè di romanzo si tratta e non di saggio, l'evangelista racconta gli eventi che precedono la nascita di Gesù soffermandosi sulla figura di Giuseppe.
Molti di questi eventi ripercorrono quelli dei vangeli sinottici, aggiungendo e omettendo, lasciando gran parte del narrato all'inventiva dell'autore. La figura di Maria rimane sempre in ombra, confermando ed evidenziando la realtà sociale della condizione inferiore della donna dettata dalla legge ebraica del tempo.
Il concepimento di Gesù avviene con un rapporto sessuale tra Giuseppe e Maria, nessuna nascita verginale, il che porta il romanzo su un piano più realistico dell'originale. Realismo che viene subito interrotto dalla visita di un Angelo del Signore, denunciando così la presenza dell'elemento sovrannaturale e divino all'interno del racconto.
Sono presenti sia eventi storici non accertati, come la Strage degli Innocenti ordinata da Erode, presente solo nel vangelo di Matteo, sia eventi come la ribellione contro i Romani capeggiata da Giuda il Galileo, figura storica riportata in "la Guerra Giudaica" dello storico Flavio Giuseppe.
Assistiamo ad eventi canonici e non, sui quali Saramago ricama una versione fortemente romanzata come il tormento interiore di Giuseppe per il massacro degli innocenti o la dinamica della sua morte, altri eliminati del tutto, come il viaggio in Egitto o i re Magi.
Le situazioni si alternano continuamente tra la ricerca del realismo nelle situazioni umane dei protagonisti, il seguire il racconto canonico e l'elemento sovrannaturale, comunque sempre presente. Nulla di troppo distante dai vangeli, finora. Non è ancora chiaro fin dove Saramago voglia spingersi.
Poi finalmente si parla di Gesù e di Dio.
Gesù è ormai cresciuto; sofferente per il rimorso della colpa ereditata dal padre Giuseppe abbandona la madre e i suoi fratelli e parte per Gerusalemme alla ricerca di risposte e verità.
(Da notare che i fratelli di Gesù sono cosa ben nota, presenti nei vangeli di Marco e Matteo, ma non accettati dalla chiesa cattolica che preferisce usare il termine "cugini").
Giunto al Tempio di Gerusalemme trova la conferma al suo dolore: la volontà degli uomini è una manifestazione di quella divina, il libero arbitrio solo una finta certezza, l'uomo una marionetta al servizio di Dio. La colpa dei padri ricade sui figli.
La visita a Betlemme e alla tomba degli infanti uccisi alla sua nascita sono una conferma che pesa sulla sua coscienza turbata. Egli è la causa delle loro morti innocenti, anche se indirettamente, per questo dovrà pagare. La colpa degli altri come supplizio interiore da portare sulle proprie spalle, fino alla morte.
Si giunge all'incontro con il Pastore/Dio/Diavolo.
Finalmente c'è l'occasione per il vero confronto, il dubbio sulle certezze acquisite in anni di indottrinamento, la sfida all'autorità proclamata, inflessibile, e al pensiero stagnante. Ecco cosa aspettavo! Un pò di riflessione filosofica tra uomo e divintà.
Purtroppo Gesù si limita al silenzio, rifiutando il confronto.
Il Pastore rappresenta la volontà del cambiamento, fonte del dubbio, che permette alle menti aperte di porsi domande, vera linfa vitale della crescita.
Poi avviene l'incontro con Dio nel deserto e anche questo confronto è imbarazzante, volutamente breve e del tutto a senso unico. Gesù si rivela incapace, succube, chiuso nelle sue tradizioni e preconcetti, non si pone alcun dubbio. Obbedisce.
La reazione del Pastore al suo ritorno, senza la pecora sacrificata, è semplicemente da applausi.
"Non hai imparato niente, vattene"
Come dargli torto?
Rimane il dubbio sull'identità del Pastore e Dio, forse andrebbero invertiti. Io tra i due preferisco senza alcun dubbio il Pastore.
E cosi gli eventi si susseguono.
La pesca abbondante, il miracolo del vino, ecc.. sono situazioni che poco si discostano da quelle dei vangeli. Il Gesù uomo agisce sempre per volontà di Dio, volente o nolente abbiamo già appurato che l'uomo non decide nulla.
Eventi rielaborati come il rapporto intimo tra Gesù e Maria di Magdala ed altre situazioni non canoniche non sono una novità per chi ha già letto saggi "alternativi" sull'argomento.
Il Gesù di Saramago continua tuttavia ad avere caratteristiche mistico-divine facendo miracoli, anche se vengono evidenziate maggiormente le sue sensazioni ed emozioni umane, basate sulle responsabilità e le colpe, i dubbi e le insicurezze. Gesù non ha motivi per essere diverso dai suoi coetanei ma finisce per fare esattamente il volere di Dio.
E' un Gesù incapace di ribellarsi, legato alla volontà divina senza possibilità di scelta.
A nulla serve la sua non accettazione del compito assegnatogli, finisce per fare comuque quello per cui è nato, esattamente come nei vangeli. (rileggetevi i vangeli e la passione, poi ditemi se il Gesù canonico non trasuda umanità. Accetta il suo triste destino con spirito stoico o piange lacrime di sangue, disperandosi?).
Il Dio presentato qui non è diverso da quello del Vecchio Testamento, che di misericordioso non ha alcuna caratteristica. Egli è il Dio degli Eserciti, promotore di massacri. Obbedisci o Muori.
Nulla di nuovo.
Forse per chi ha come riferimento solo il catechismo e la dottrina cristiana, questo romanzo potrà sembrare originale, scioccante o forse addirittura dissacrante. Per me invece non osa abbastanza.
E' lo stesso Saramago ad affermare nel testo che non osa discostarsi troppo dal racconto originale.
Affronta l'argomento alla larga e forse anche con timore rispetto ad altri autori che vanno ben oltre le trovate "alternative" di questo romanzo.
Senza ricorrere ad Angeli, Dio e Satana, nei loro testi questi autori arrivano ad eliminarli del tutto.
Rimane quindi la bravura indiscussa dello scrittore di cui ho già apprezzato "Cecità", ma questo vangelo di Gesù Cristo lo reputo un testo troppo romanzato, troppo poco diverso dai testi originali, poco coraggioso. Il suo messaggio di umanità, impotenza e controllo divino, pur essendo chiaro non discosta troppo questo Gesù dal suo alter ego canonico.
Su questi argomenti "delicati" preferisco rimanere su studi filologici e storici, che mettano davvero in dubbio alcune "certezze" accettate a tavolino e imposte come vere da duemila anni.
E' li che si può rimanere davvero sconvolti.
-------------------------------
"..for there was not, to his knowledge, any man in all Israel who could boast of having seen God and survived."
---SPOILER WARNING---
(...even if everyone knows this story)
For over a third of the novel, because it is a novel and not an essay, the evangelist recounts the events preceding the birth of Jesus, focusing on the figure of Joseph.
Many of these events retrace those of the synoptic gospels, adding and omitting, leaving much of the narrated to the author's inventiveness. The figure of Mary always remains in the shadows, confirming and highlighting the social reality of the inferior condition of women dictated by the Jewish law of the time.
The conception of Jesus occurs with sexual intercourse between Joseph and Mary, no virgin birth, which brings the novel to a more realistic level than the original. Realism which is immediately interrupted by the visit of an Angel of the Lord, thus denouncing the presence of the supernatural and divine element within the story.
There are both unverified historical events, such as the Massacre of the Innocents ordered by Herod, present only in the Gospel of Matthew, and events such as the rebellion against the Romans led by Judas the Galilean, a historical figure reported in "the Jewish War" by the historian Flavius Joseph.
We witness canonical and non-canonical events, on which Saramago embroiders a highly fictionalized version such as Joseph's internal torment for the massacre of the innocents or the dynamics of his death, others eliminated completely, such as the journey to Egypt or the Three Kings.
The situations continually alternate between the search for realism in the human situations of the protagonists, following the canonical story and the supernatural element, which is always present. Nothing too distant from the gospels, so far. It is not yet clear how far Saramago wants to go.
Then finally we talk about Jesus and God.
Jesus has now grown up; suffering from the remorse of the guilt inherited from his father Giuseppe, he abandons his mother and his brothers and leaves for Jerusalem in search of answers and truth.
(It should be noted that the brothers of Jesus are well known, present in the gospels of Mark and Matthew, but not accepted by the Catholic church which prefers to use the term "cousins").
Having arrived at the Temple of Jerusalem, he finds confirmation of his pain: the will of men is a manifestation of the divine will, free will is only a false certainty, man is a puppet in the service of God. The guilt of the fathers falls on the children of he.
The visit to Bethlehem and the tomb of the infants killed at his birth are a confirmation that weighs on his troubled conscience. He is the cause of their innocent deaths, albeit indirectly, for which he will have to pay. The guilt of others as an internal torment to be carried on one's shoulders, until death.
He comes to meet the Shepherd / God / Devil.
Finally there is the opportunity for true confrontation, doubt about the certainties acquired over years of indoctrination, the challenge to proclaimed, inflexible authority and stagnant thought. This is what I was waiting for! A bit of philosophical reflection between man and divinity.
Unfortunately, Jesus limits himself to silence, refusing confrontation.
The Shepherd represents the will for change, the source of doubt, which allows open minds to ask questions, the true lifeblood of growth.
Then the encounter with God in the desert occurs and this confrontation is also embarrassing, deliberately short and completely one-sided. Jesus reveals himself to be incapable, submissive, closed in his traditions and preconceptions, there is no doubt. He obeys.
The Shepherd's reaction to his return, without the sacrificed sheep, is simply applause.
"You haven't learned anything, leave"
How can you blame him?
There remains doubt about the identity of the Shepherd and God, perhaps they should be reversed. Of the two, I undoubtedly prefer the Pastor.
And so events follow one another.
The abundant catch, the miracle of the wine, etc. are situations that differ little from those of the gospels. The man Jesus always acts by the will of God, like it or not we have already established that man decides nothing.
Reworked events such as the intimate relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene and other non-canonical situations are nothing new for those who have already read "alternative" essays on the subject.
The Jesus of Saramago, however, continues to have mystical-divine characteristics, performing miracles, even if his human sensations and emotions are highlighted more, based on responsibilities and faults, doubts and insecurities. Jesus has no reason to be different from his peers but ends up doing exactly God's will.
He is a Jesus incapable of rebelling, tied to the divine will without the possibility of choice.
His non-acceptance of the task assigned to him is of no use, he ends up doing what he was born to do anyway, exactly like in the gospels. (reread the gospels and the passion, then tell me if the canonical Jesus doesn't exude humanity. Does he accept his sad fate with a stoic spirit or does he cry tears of blood, despairing?).
The God presented here is no different from that of the Old Testament, who has no merciful characteristics. He is the God of Armies, promoter of massacres. Obey or Die.
Nothing new.
Perhaps for those who only refer to the catechism and Christian doctrine, this novel may seem original, shocking or perhaps even irreverent. For me, however, it isn't daring enough.
It is Saramago himself who states in the text that he does not dare deviate too much from the original story.
He approaches the topic at a distance and perhaps even with fear compared to other authors who go far beyond the "alternative" ideas of this novel.
Without resorting to Angels, God and Satan, these authors manage to eliminate them completely in their texts.
Therefore, the undisputed skill of the writer whose "Blindness" I have already appreciated remains, but I consider this gospel of Jesus Christ to be too fictionalized a text, too little different from the original texts, not very courageous. His message of humanity, impotence and divine control, although clear, does not differ too much from this Jesus from his canonical alter ego.
On these "delicate" topics I prefer to remain on philological and historical studies, which really question some "certainties" accepted at the table and imposed as true for two thousand years.
That's where you can be really shocked.
---ATTENZIONE SPOILER---
(...anche se questa storia la conoscono tutti)
Per oltre un terzo del romanzo, perchè di romanzo si tratta e non di saggio, l'evangelista racconta gli eventi che precedono la nascita di Gesù soffermandosi sulla figura di Giuseppe.
Molti di questi eventi ripercorrono quelli dei vangeli sinottici, aggiungendo e omettendo, lasciando gran parte del narrato all'inventiva dell'autore. La figura di Maria rimane sempre in ombra, confermando ed evidenziando la realtà sociale della condizione inferiore della donna dettata dalla legge ebraica del tempo.
Il concepimento di Gesù avviene con un rapporto sessuale tra Giuseppe e Maria, nessuna nascita verginale, il che porta il romanzo su un piano più realistico dell'originale. Realismo che viene subito interrotto dalla visita di un Angelo del Signore, denunciando così la presenza dell'elemento sovrannaturale e divino all'interno del racconto.
Sono presenti sia eventi storici non accertati, come la Strage degli Innocenti ordinata da Erode, presente solo nel vangelo di Matteo, sia eventi come la ribellione contro i Romani capeggiata da Giuda il Galileo, figura storica riportata in "la Guerra Giudaica" dello storico Flavio Giuseppe.
Assistiamo ad eventi canonici e non, sui quali Saramago ricama una versione fortemente romanzata come il tormento interiore di Giuseppe per il massacro degli innocenti o la dinamica della sua morte, altri eliminati del tutto, come il viaggio in Egitto o i re Magi.
Le situazioni si alternano continuamente tra la ricerca del realismo nelle situazioni umane dei protagonisti, il seguire il racconto canonico e l'elemento sovrannaturale, comunque sempre presente. Nulla di troppo distante dai vangeli, finora. Non è ancora chiaro fin dove Saramago voglia spingersi.
Poi finalmente si parla di Gesù e di Dio.
Gesù è ormai cresciuto; sofferente per il rimorso della colpa ereditata dal padre Giuseppe abbandona la madre e i suoi fratelli e parte per Gerusalemme alla ricerca di risposte e verità.
(Da notare che i fratelli di Gesù sono cosa ben nota, presenti nei vangeli di Marco e Matteo, ma non accettati dalla chiesa cattolica che preferisce usare il termine "cugini").
Giunto al Tempio di Gerusalemme trova la conferma al suo dolore: la volontà degli uomini è una manifestazione di quella divina, il libero arbitrio solo una finta certezza, l'uomo una marionetta al servizio di Dio. La colpa dei padri ricade sui figli.
La visita a Betlemme e alla tomba degli infanti uccisi alla sua nascita sono una conferma che pesa sulla sua coscienza turbata. Egli è la causa delle loro morti innocenti, anche se indirettamente, per questo dovrà pagare. La colpa degli altri come supplizio interiore da portare sulle proprie spalle, fino alla morte.
Si giunge all'incontro con il Pastore/Dio/Diavolo.
Finalmente c'è l'occasione per il vero confronto, il dubbio sulle certezze acquisite in anni di indottrinamento, la sfida all'autorità proclamata, inflessibile, e al pensiero stagnante. Ecco cosa aspettavo! Un pò di riflessione filosofica tra uomo e divintà.
Purtroppo Gesù si limita al silenzio, rifiutando il confronto.
Il Pastore rappresenta la volontà del cambiamento, fonte del dubbio, che permette alle menti aperte di porsi domande, vera linfa vitale della crescita.
Poi avviene l'incontro con Dio nel deserto e anche questo confronto è imbarazzante, volutamente breve e del tutto a senso unico. Gesù si rivela incapace, succube, chiuso nelle sue tradizioni e preconcetti, non si pone alcun dubbio. Obbedisce.
La reazione del Pastore al suo ritorno, senza la pecora sacrificata, è semplicemente da applausi.
"Non hai imparato niente, vattene"
Come dargli torto?
Rimane il dubbio sull'identità del Pastore e Dio, forse andrebbero invertiti. Io tra i due preferisco senza alcun dubbio il Pastore.
E cosi gli eventi si susseguono.
La pesca abbondante, il miracolo del vino, ecc.. sono situazioni che poco si discostano da quelle dei vangeli. Il Gesù uomo agisce sempre per volontà di Dio, volente o nolente abbiamo già appurato che l'uomo non decide nulla.
Eventi rielaborati come il rapporto intimo tra Gesù e Maria di Magdala ed altre situazioni non canoniche non sono una novità per chi ha già letto saggi "alternativi" sull'argomento.
Il Gesù di Saramago continua tuttavia ad avere caratteristiche mistico-divine facendo miracoli, anche se vengono evidenziate maggiormente le sue sensazioni ed emozioni umane, basate sulle responsabilità e le colpe, i dubbi e le insicurezze. Gesù non ha motivi per essere diverso dai suoi coetanei ma finisce per fare esattamente il volere di Dio.
E' un Gesù incapace di ribellarsi, legato alla volontà divina senza possibilità di scelta.
A nulla serve la sua non accettazione del compito assegnatogli, finisce per fare comuque quello per cui è nato, esattamente come nei vangeli. (rileggetevi i vangeli e la passione, poi ditemi se il Gesù canonico non trasuda umanità. Accetta il suo triste destino con spirito stoico o piange lacrime di sangue, disperandosi?).
Il Dio presentato qui non è diverso da quello del Vecchio Testamento, che di misericordioso non ha alcuna caratteristica. Egli è il Dio degli Eserciti, promotore di massacri. Obbedisci o Muori.
Nulla di nuovo.
Forse per chi ha come riferimento solo il catechismo e la dottrina cristiana, questo romanzo potrà sembrare originale, scioccante o forse addirittura dissacrante. Per me invece non osa abbastanza.
E' lo stesso Saramago ad affermare nel testo che non osa discostarsi troppo dal racconto originale.
Affronta l'argomento alla larga e forse anche con timore rispetto ad altri autori che vanno ben oltre le trovate "alternative" di questo romanzo.
Senza ricorrere ad Angeli, Dio e Satana, nei loro testi questi autori arrivano ad eliminarli del tutto.
Rimane quindi la bravura indiscussa dello scrittore di cui ho già apprezzato "Cecità", ma questo vangelo di Gesù Cristo lo reputo un testo troppo romanzato, troppo poco diverso dai testi originali, poco coraggioso. Il suo messaggio di umanità, impotenza e controllo divino, pur essendo chiaro non discosta troppo questo Gesù dal suo alter ego canonico.
Su questi argomenti "delicati" preferisco rimanere su studi filologici e storici, che mettano davvero in dubbio alcune "certezze" accettate a tavolino e imposte come vere da duemila anni.
E' li che si può rimanere davvero sconvolti.
-------------------------------
"..for there was not, to his knowledge, any man in all Israel who could boast of having seen God and survived."
---SPOILER WARNING---
(...even if everyone knows this story)
For over a third of the novel, because it is a novel and not an essay, the evangelist recounts the events preceding the birth of Jesus, focusing on the figure of Joseph.
Many of these events retrace those of the synoptic gospels, adding and omitting, leaving much of the narrated to the author's inventiveness. The figure of Mary always remains in the shadows, confirming and highlighting the social reality of the inferior condition of women dictated by the Jewish law of the time.
The conception of Jesus occurs with sexual intercourse between Joseph and Mary, no virgin birth, which brings the novel to a more realistic level than the original. Realism which is immediately interrupted by the visit of an Angel of the Lord, thus denouncing the presence of the supernatural and divine element within the story.
There are both unverified historical events, such as the Massacre of the Innocents ordered by Herod, present only in the Gospel of Matthew, and events such as the rebellion against the Romans led by Judas the Galilean, a historical figure reported in "the Jewish War" by the historian Flavius Joseph.
We witness canonical and non-canonical events, on which Saramago embroiders a highly fictionalized version such as Joseph's internal torment for the massacre of the innocents or the dynamics of his death, others eliminated completely, such as the journey to Egypt or the Three Kings.
The situations continually alternate between the search for realism in the human situations of the protagonists, following the canonical story and the supernatural element, which is always present. Nothing too distant from the gospels, so far. It is not yet clear how far Saramago wants to go.
Then finally we talk about Jesus and God.
Jesus has now grown up; suffering from the remorse of the guilt inherited from his father Giuseppe, he abandons his mother and his brothers and leaves for Jerusalem in search of answers and truth.
(It should be noted that the brothers of Jesus are well known, present in the gospels of Mark and Matthew, but not accepted by the Catholic church which prefers to use the term "cousins").
Having arrived at the Temple of Jerusalem, he finds confirmation of his pain: the will of men is a manifestation of the divine will, free will is only a false certainty, man is a puppet in the service of God. The guilt of the fathers falls on the children of he.
The visit to Bethlehem and the tomb of the infants killed at his birth are a confirmation that weighs on his troubled conscience. He is the cause of their innocent deaths, albeit indirectly, for which he will have to pay. The guilt of others as an internal torment to be carried on one's shoulders, until death.
He comes to meet the Shepherd / God / Devil.
Finally there is the opportunity for true confrontation, doubt about the certainties acquired over years of indoctrination, the challenge to proclaimed, inflexible authority and stagnant thought. This is what I was waiting for! A bit of philosophical reflection between man and divinity.
Unfortunately, Jesus limits himself to silence, refusing confrontation.
The Shepherd represents the will for change, the source of doubt, which allows open minds to ask questions, the true lifeblood of growth.
Then the encounter with God in the desert occurs and this confrontation is also embarrassing, deliberately short and completely one-sided. Jesus reveals himself to be incapable, submissive, closed in his traditions and preconceptions, there is no doubt. He obeys.
The Shepherd's reaction to his return, without the sacrificed sheep, is simply applause.
"You haven't learned anything, leave"
How can you blame him?
There remains doubt about the identity of the Shepherd and God, perhaps they should be reversed. Of the two, I undoubtedly prefer the Pastor.
And so events follow one another.
The abundant catch, the miracle of the wine, etc. are situations that differ little from those of the gospels. The man Jesus always acts by the will of God, like it or not we have already established that man decides nothing.
Reworked events such as the intimate relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene and other non-canonical situations are nothing new for those who have already read "alternative" essays on the subject.
The Jesus of Saramago, however, continues to have mystical-divine characteristics, performing miracles, even if his human sensations and emotions are highlighted more, based on responsibilities and faults, doubts and insecurities. Jesus has no reason to be different from his peers but ends up doing exactly God's will.
He is a Jesus incapable of rebelling, tied to the divine will without the possibility of choice.
His non-acceptance of the task assigned to him is of no use, he ends up doing what he was born to do anyway, exactly like in the gospels. (reread the gospels and the passion, then tell me if the canonical Jesus doesn't exude humanity. Does he accept his sad fate with a stoic spirit or does he cry tears of blood, despairing?).
The God presented here is no different from that of the Old Testament, who has no merciful characteristics. He is the God of Armies, promoter of massacres. Obey or Die.
Nothing new.
Perhaps for those who only refer to the catechism and Christian doctrine, this novel may seem original, shocking or perhaps even irreverent. For me, however, it isn't daring enough.
It is Saramago himself who states in the text that he does not dare deviate too much from the original story.
He approaches the topic at a distance and perhaps even with fear compared to other authors who go far beyond the "alternative" ideas of this novel.
Without resorting to Angels, God and Satan, these authors manage to eliminate them completely in their texts.
Therefore, the undisputed skill of the writer whose "Blindness" I have already appreciated remains, but I consider this gospel of Jesus Christ to be too fictionalized a text, too little different from the original texts, not very courageous. His message of humanity, impotence and divine control, although clear, does not differ too much from this Jesus from his canonical alter ego.
On these "delicate" topics I prefer to remain on philological and historical studies, which really question some "certainties" accepted at the table and imposed as true for two thousand years.
That's where you can be really shocked.
August 5, 2019
Τελειώνοντας το πρώτο μέρος του βιβλίου (πρακτικά την ιστορία του Ιωσήφ), πίστευα ότι είχα στα χέρια μου το κορυφαίο βιβλίο όλων των εποχών και όλων των πλανητών.
Δυστυχώς το δεύτερο μέρος δεν ήταν το ίδιο δυνατό. Λίγο το χιούμορ έχασε ''αυτό το κάτι" που είχε μέχρι τότε, λίγο το όλο πράγμα πήγε πολύ προς το μεταφυσικό, και τελικά η αίσθηση που μου έμεινε ήταν αυτή ενός πολύ καλού και καλογραμμένου βιβλίου - καλά για τη γραφή του Σαραμάγκο δεν το συζητώ, άφθαστος - που όμως δεν εκπλήρωσε τις τεράστιες προοπτικές που ο ίδιος ο συγγραφέας είχε δημιουργήσει στην αρχή του.
Δυστυχώς το δεύτερο μέρος δεν ήταν το ίδιο δυνατό. Λίγο το χιούμορ έχασε ''αυτό το κάτι" που είχε μέχρι τότε, λίγο το όλο πράγμα πήγε πολύ προς το μεταφυσικό, και τελικά η αίσθηση που μου έμεινε ήταν αυτή ενός πολύ καλού και καλογραμμένου βιβλίου - καλά για τη γραφή του Σαραμάγκο δεν το συζητώ, άφθαστος - που όμως δεν εκπλήρωσε τις τεράστιες προοπτικές που ο ίδιος ο συγγραφέας είχε δημιουργήσει στην αρχή του.
March 26, 2016
Δεν ξέρω τί να γράψω γι'αυτό το βιβλίο,ειλικρινά..
Τράβηξα την ανάγνωσή του όσο μπορούσα,δεν ήθελα να τελειώσει!Αυτό νομίζω τα λέει όλα.Η ιστορία γνωστή(αν και τα γεγονότα,όπως μας παρουσιάζονται εδώ,άγνωστα):η ιστορία του Ιησού από τη Ναζαρέτ.Τα πρόσωπα της ιστορίας παρουσιάζονται μέσα από ένα καινούργιο πρίσμα,οι χαρακτήρες του Διαβόλου και του Θεού με άφησαν άφωνη,και ειδικά οι σελίδες 389-429 είναι από τα πιο συγκλονιστικά αποσπάματα λογοτεχνίας που έχω διαβάσει.
Η ιδιαίτερη γραφή άλλο ένα συν,χειμαρρώδης λόγος,που όμως δεν κουράζει.
Ένας συγγραφέας που μπήκε στη λίστα ��ων αγαπημένων μου,με ένα του βιβλίο μόνο.Τί να πω,διαβάστε το οπωσδήποτε,τρέξτε!Μακάρι να είχα τα κατάλληλα λόγια να περιγράψω τα συναισθήματα που μου άφησε!
Τράβηξα την ανάγνωσή του όσο μπορούσα,δεν ήθελα να τελειώσει!Αυτό νομίζω τα λέει όλα.Η ιστορία γνωστή(αν και τα γεγονότα,όπως μας παρουσιάζονται εδώ,άγνωστα):η ιστορία του Ιησού από τη Ναζαρέτ.Τα πρόσωπα της ιστορίας παρουσιάζονται μέσα από ένα καινούργιο πρίσμα,οι χαρακτήρες του Διαβόλου και του Θεού με άφησαν άφωνη,και ειδικά οι σελίδες 389-429 είναι από τα πιο συγκλονιστικά αποσπάματα λογοτεχνίας που έχω διαβάσει.
Η ιδιαίτερη γραφή άλλο ένα συν,χειμαρρώδης λόγος,που όμως δεν κουράζει.
Ένας συγγραφέας που μπήκε στη λίστα ��ων αγαπημένων μου,με ένα του βιβλίο μόνο.Τί να πω,διαβάστε το οπωσδήποτε,τρέξτε!Μακάρι να είχα τα κατάλληλα λόγια να περιγράψω τα συναισθήματα που μου άφησε!
May 18, 2007
Imagino Saramago, um ateu confesso, lendo e relendo a Bíblia para reescrever a história do homem mais conhecido que já pisou na face da Terra. Penso também no culhões que o autor teve para levar a publicação adiante. Mexer com religião é coisa séria. Vide a ilíada do escritor Salman Rushdie com seus “Versos Satânicos”. “O Evangelho Segundo Jesus Cristo” é uma obra corajosa e, diferente de textos que só têm como mérito a polemização, também é genial. A concepção de Jesus Cristo e o seu encontro com o diabo são trechos hilariantes e dotados inclusive de muita filosofia. “O Evangelho” conta história de um mito de forma humana, sem o misticismo sobrenatural da Igreja Católica, o que a torna muito especial.
October 15, 2020
“Padre, allontana da me questo calice, Che tu lo beva è la condizione per il mio potere e la tua gloria, Non desidero questa gloria, Ma io voglio questo potere”
Questo vangelo comincia con la descrizione di un'incisione. Si tratta de “La Grande Crocifissione” di Albrecht Durer del 1498.
Immagino che la scelta di descrivere l'incisione partendo dall'alto abbia un suo preciso significato: è l’annuncio di una lettura del vangelo che vuole tornare ad essere materia umana.
Finchè, infatti, si rimane circoscritti e limitati nella dimensione divina l’Uomo non può avere una reale comunione con il divino in quanto non c’è una reale comprensione:
" Si vede il sole in uno degli angoli superiori del rettangolo, quello alla sinistra di chi guarda, e l’astro re è raffigurato con la testa di un uomo da cui sprizzano raggi di luce pungente e sinuose lingue di fuoco, come una rosa dei venti indecisa in quali direzioni puntare, e quel viso ha un’espressione piangente, contratta da un dolore inconfortabile, e dalla bocca aperta emette un urlo che non potremo udire, giacché nessuna di queste cose è reale, quanto abbiamo davanti è solo carta e colore, nient’altro."
Saramago procede facendoci entrare in casa di Giuseppe e Maria:
novelli sposi, sorpresi nei loro bisogni, sottomessi ai loro umori psicologici e corporali.
Con queste immagini il lettore li sente più vicini.
Giuseppe ha una buona dimestichezza nel parlare ma non è poi un gran falegname; Maria è una ragazza di soli sedici anni e non ha qualità che la distinguono da altre donne del villaggio.
Fa quello che devono fare tutte le donne:
tacere, rimanere in un angolo, obbedire.
Dunque un uomo ed una donna in un mondo di pari uomini e donne.
E così questo vangelo si serve di più binari: un'amalgama ben equilibrata tra la verità del contesto storico, la fantasia che è permessa al romanziere, il mondo del possibile dato dalle notizie dei vangeli apocrifi.
Se il Gesù dei vangeli canonici ha poteri taumaturgici, il personaggio romanzato non è da meno ma è innanzitutto un Uomo anzi, un ragazzo con impeti e pulsioni più che naturali alla sua giovane età.
In particolare, è ribelle.
I dialoghi tra Dio e Gesù sono piccole sceneggiature teatrali cariche di sarcasmo ed ironia che provocano un sorriso amaro.
Di fronte ad un dio assetato di potere Gesù oppone un rifiuto alla prospettiva di un futuro di morte. Pagine e pagine elencano i martiri trucidati in modo orribile per difendere la propria fede. E la scia di sangue che si tradurrà in guerre senza confine provoca rabbia nel giovane Gesù che non vuole farsi portatore di un credo che tollera queste atrocità.
Questo è il fulcro:
"E qual è il ruolo che mi hai destinato nel Tuo piano, Quello di martire, figlio mio, quello di vittima, quanto c’è di meglio per diffondere una dottrina e infervorare una fede. Le parole martire e vittima, a Dio uscirono dalla bocca come se la lingua all’interno fosse di latte e miele, ma un improvviso gelo fece rabbrividire le membra di Gesù, quasi la nebbia lo avesse avvolto"
"A un martire si addice una morte dolorosa e, se possibile, infame perché l’atteggiamento dei credenti sia più facilmente disponibile, appassionato, emotivo"
Una riscrittura atea per chi rispetta la scelta di una fede ma non accetta chi per questa fede uccide.
[ La mancanza di punteggiatura di Saramago che alcuni lettori vivono come un peso dovrebbe essere spunto di riflessione. Perchè un autore sceglie questo stile? Pigro? Ignorante? E se avesse voluto semplicemente avere dei lettori attivi ? Che si cerchino da sé le proprie pause, che trovino da soli la strada per la giusta intonazione!]
Questo vangelo comincia con la descrizione di un'incisione. Si tratta de “La Grande Crocifissione” di Albrecht Durer del 1498.
Immagino che la scelta di descrivere l'incisione partendo dall'alto abbia un suo preciso significato: è l’annuncio di una lettura del vangelo che vuole tornare ad essere materia umana.
Finchè, infatti, si rimane circoscritti e limitati nella dimensione divina l’Uomo non può avere una reale comunione con il divino in quanto non c’è una reale comprensione:
" Si vede il sole in uno degli angoli superiori del rettangolo, quello alla sinistra di chi guarda, e l’astro re è raffigurato con la testa di un uomo da cui sprizzano raggi di luce pungente e sinuose lingue di fuoco, come una rosa dei venti indecisa in quali direzioni puntare, e quel viso ha un’espressione piangente, contratta da un dolore inconfortabile, e dalla bocca aperta emette un urlo che non potremo udire, giacché nessuna di queste cose è reale, quanto abbiamo davanti è solo carta e colore, nient’altro."
Saramago procede facendoci entrare in casa di Giuseppe e Maria:
novelli sposi, sorpresi nei loro bisogni, sottomessi ai loro umori psicologici e corporali.
Con queste immagini il lettore li sente più vicini.
Giuseppe ha una buona dimestichezza nel parlare ma non è poi un gran falegname; Maria è una ragazza di soli sedici anni e non ha qualità che la distinguono da altre donne del villaggio.
Fa quello che devono fare tutte le donne:
tacere, rimanere in un angolo, obbedire.
Dunque un uomo ed una donna in un mondo di pari uomini e donne.
E così questo vangelo si serve di più binari: un'amalgama ben equilibrata tra la verità del contesto storico, la fantasia che è permessa al romanziere, il mondo del possibile dato dalle notizie dei vangeli apocrifi.
Se il Gesù dei vangeli canonici ha poteri taumaturgici, il personaggio romanzato non è da meno ma è innanzitutto un Uomo anzi, un ragazzo con impeti e pulsioni più che naturali alla sua giovane età.
In particolare, è ribelle.
I dialoghi tra Dio e Gesù sono piccole sceneggiature teatrali cariche di sarcasmo ed ironia che provocano un sorriso amaro.
Di fronte ad un dio assetato di potere Gesù oppone un rifiuto alla prospettiva di un futuro di morte. Pagine e pagine elencano i martiri trucidati in modo orribile per difendere la propria fede. E la scia di sangue che si tradurrà in guerre senza confine provoca rabbia nel giovane Gesù che non vuole farsi portatore di un credo che tollera queste atrocità.
Questo è il fulcro:
"E qual è il ruolo che mi hai destinato nel Tuo piano, Quello di martire, figlio mio, quello di vittima, quanto c’è di meglio per diffondere una dottrina e infervorare una fede. Le parole martire e vittima, a Dio uscirono dalla bocca come se la lingua all’interno fosse di latte e miele, ma un improvviso gelo fece rabbrividire le membra di Gesù, quasi la nebbia lo avesse avvolto"
"A un martire si addice una morte dolorosa e, se possibile, infame perché l’atteggiamento dei credenti sia più facilmente disponibile, appassionato, emotivo"
Una riscrittura atea per chi rispetta la scelta di una fede ma non accetta chi per questa fede uccide.
[ La mancanza di punteggiatura di Saramago che alcuni lettori vivono come un peso dovrebbe essere spunto di riflessione. Perchè un autore sceglie questo stile? Pigro? Ignorante? E se avesse voluto semplicemente avere dei lettori attivi ? Che si cerchino da sé le proprie pause, che trovino da soli la strada per la giusta intonazione!]
April 8, 2015
★★★★★/★★★★★
ملاحظة في غاية الأهمية
********************
هذه النجوم الخمس لا تعبر عن تضامني الفكري مع ما ذُكر في الرواية من أفكار وأحداث.
المراجعة
قبل ان تشرع في قراءة هذه الرواية .. عليك أن تحضر صندوقا .. ضع جميع آراءك ومعتقداتك عن سيدنا عيسى _عليه السلام_ فيه.. أغلقه بإحكام .. ابدأ بقراءة الرواية ولا تنسى أن تصطحب معك
☂☂☂ مظلة ☂☂☂
لتقيك المصائب التي ستنزل على رأسك لحظة البدء بالقراءة
الانجيل يرويه خوسيه ساراماغو
الرواية تحكي قصة المسيح عليه السلام منذ ولادته حتى ... من وجهة نظر خوسيه ساراماغو والذي لعب دور المؤرخ لسيرة يسوع ابن يوسف النجار.. سيرة؛ قد لا توافق على ما ذُكر فيها بوصفك مسلما أو مسيحيا أو يهوديا لكن من الممتع والرائع أن تحيا هذه السيرة بقراءتها .. (ولا تنسى أن أفكارك ومعتقداتك مازالت في ذاك الصندوق ... فلا خوف هناك إذن)!!!!1
إذا قرأت هذه السيرة بحيادية فلسوف يتسع عقلك لمساءلة العديد من القضايا والأفكار الرائعة والتي طرحها ساراماغو بأسلوب خفي شيق....1
وستفاجأ خلال قراءتك أن الرواية ترمي إلى مناقشة الطبيعة البشرية أكثر مما ترمي إلى مناقشة سيرة يسوع الناصري
ثم هناك مصيبة كبرى رائعة تنتظرك في صفحة 320 وتمتد على مدار 30 صفحة إذ يجتمع الرب والشيطان ويسوع على قارب واحد وتبدأ مناظرة رائعةتشعر معها إن ساراماغو يمد يده إلى دماغك ويهزها هزا عنيفا ويسألك أن تفكر وتفكر وتفكر....1
هنا .. الكثير من الأفكار التي سوف تستغربها فإذا لم يكن صدرك رحبا؛ فلن تستطيع تلافيف دماغك التقاط موجات هذه الأفكار .. فكن صبورا وحياديا!!!!1
في النهاية أذكر الشيء الأهم الذي لم أشعر به أبدا سوى عندما صوره ساراماغو في هذه الرواية وهو مقدار المعاناة التي عاناها المسيح عندما بعثه الله لقومه والألم الذي شعر به عندما كذبه أقرب الأقربين له ... فلم ينجح أي كتاب قرأته قبل ذلك عن أي من الأنبياء في تجسيد معاناتهم _ عليهم السلام _ مثلما نجح ساراماغو في تجسيدها هنا
وآخر حاجة أحب أقول إني عارفة إني حروح النار من ورا المراجعة دي .. بس ربنا يغفر لي بقى
الرواية دي مصيبة ... مصيبة بجد
ملاحظة في غاية الأهمية
********************
هذه النجوم الخمس لا تعبر عن تضامني الفكري مع ما ذُكر في الرواية من أفكار وأحداث.
المراجعة
قبل ان تشرع في قراءة هذه الرواية .. عليك أن تحضر صندوقا .. ضع جميع آراءك ومعتقداتك عن سيدنا عيسى _عليه السلام_ فيه.. أغلقه بإحكام .. ابدأ بقراءة الرواية ولا تنسى أن تصطحب معك
☂☂☂ مظلة ☂☂☂
لتقيك المصائب التي ستنزل على رأسك لحظة البدء بالقراءة
الانجيل يرويه خوسيه ساراماغو
الرواية تحكي قصة المسيح عليه السلام منذ ولادته حتى ... من وجهة نظر خوسيه ساراماغو والذي لعب دور المؤرخ لسيرة يسوع ابن يوسف النجار.. سيرة؛ قد لا توافق على ما ذُكر فيها بوصفك مسلما أو مسيحيا أو يهوديا لكن من الممتع والرائع أن تحيا هذه السيرة بقراءتها .. (ولا تنسى أن أفكارك ومعتقداتك مازالت في ذاك الصندوق ... فلا خوف هناك إذن)!!!!1
إذا قرأت هذه السيرة بحيادية فلسوف يتسع عقلك لمساءلة العديد من القضايا والأفكار الرائعة والتي طرحها ساراماغو بأسلوب خفي شيق....1
وستفاجأ خلال قراءتك أن الرواية ترمي إلى مناقشة الطبيعة البشرية أكثر مما ترمي إلى مناقشة سيرة يسوع الناصري
ثم هناك مصيبة كبرى رائعة تنتظرك في صفحة 320 وتمتد على مدار 30 صفحة إذ يجتمع الرب والشيطان ويسوع على قارب واحد وتبدأ مناظرة رائعةتشعر معها إن ساراماغو يمد يده إلى دماغك ويهزها هزا عنيفا ويسألك أن تفكر وتفكر وتفكر....1
هنا .. الكثير من الأفكار التي سوف تستغربها فإذا لم يكن صدرك رحبا؛ فلن تستطيع تلافيف دماغك التقاط موجات هذه الأفكار .. فكن صبورا وحياديا!!!!1
في النهاية أذكر الشيء الأهم الذي لم أشعر به أبدا سوى عندما صوره ساراماغو في هذه الرواية وهو مقدار المعاناة التي عاناها المسيح عندما بعثه الله لقومه والألم الذي شعر به عندما كذبه أقرب الأقربين له ... فلم ينجح أي كتاب قرأته قبل ذلك عن أي من الأنبياء في تجسيد معاناتهم _ عليهم السلام _ مثلما نجح ساراماغو في تجسيدها هنا
وآخر حاجة أحب أقول إني عارفة إني حروح النار من ورا المراجعة دي .. بس ربنا يغفر لي بقى
الرواية دي مصيبة ... مصيبة بجد
July 22, 2022
"Deus é tanto mais Deus quanto mais inacessível for"
É sempre difícil começar a escrever sobre um livro de Saramago, sei que nunca vou encontrar as palavras que façam justiça à genialidade do Mestre, mas como começar a escrever sobre o livro mais polémico do nosso Nobel?
Saramago interpreta à sua maneira toda a história de vida de Jesus, desde o nascimento à morte na cruz. Sendo assim, todo o texto é pontuado por muita ironia, pessimismo e crítica. Este é um livro impróprio para cardíacos e crentes fanáticos, mas na minha opinião Saramago nunca desrespeitou a figura de Jesus Cristo.
De forma muito lúcida, o autor mostra como Jesus sempre foi a vítima do próprio Deus, aliás Saramago consegue humanizar Jesus Cristo, de uma forma que eu nunca tinha percebido. Saramago critica o Deus da Bíblia, um autoritário de primeira linha, ávido de poder. Já Jesus é-nos apresentado como um ser humano falível, cheio de dúvidas e incertezas, que também comete erros.
💭 "E qual foi o papel que me destinaste no teu plano, O de mártir, meu filho, o de vítima, que é o que de melhor há para fazer espalhar uma crença e afervorar uma fé."
Os diálogos entre Deus e Jesus, a forma como Saramago insere o Diabo na história, o momento em que José é crucificado, o retrato da relação de Jesus com Maria de Magdala. Ah e a conversa de Jesus, Deus e o Diabo!! Meu deeeeeus, que coisa absolutamente espectacular. Há capítulos absolutamente extraordinários, e este, na minha opinião, está a par do capítulo "O Grande Inquisidor" d'Os Irmãos Karamazov como o capítulo mais genial da literatura.
Penso ser impossível alguém ler este livro e ficar indiferente. É daqueles livros que nos muda radicalmente, não somos a mesma pessoa antes e depois de o lermos.
Esta foi uma das leituras mais fascinantes que já fiz na minha vida e sinto-me mesmo uma privilegiada por ter feito esta leitura. Ah Saramago, a falta que tu fazes ❤
É sempre difícil começar a escrever sobre um livro de Saramago, sei que nunca vou encontrar as palavras que façam justiça à genialidade do Mestre, mas como começar a escrever sobre o livro mais polémico do nosso Nobel?
Saramago interpreta à sua maneira toda a história de vida de Jesus, desde o nascimento à morte na cruz. Sendo assim, todo o texto é pontuado por muita ironia, pessimismo e crítica. Este é um livro impróprio para cardíacos e crentes fanáticos, mas na minha opinião Saramago nunca desrespeitou a figura de Jesus Cristo.
De forma muito lúcida, o autor mostra como Jesus sempre foi a vítima do próprio Deus, aliás Saramago consegue humanizar Jesus Cristo, de uma forma que eu nunca tinha percebido. Saramago critica o Deus da Bíblia, um autoritário de primeira linha, ávido de poder. Já Jesus é-nos apresentado como um ser humano falível, cheio de dúvidas e incertezas, que também comete erros.
💭 "E qual foi o papel que me destinaste no teu plano, O de mártir, meu filho, o de vítima, que é o que de melhor há para fazer espalhar uma crença e afervorar uma fé."
Os diálogos entre Deus e Jesus, a forma como Saramago insere o Diabo na história, o momento em que José é crucificado, o retrato da relação de Jesus com Maria de Magdala. Ah e a conversa de Jesus, Deus e o Diabo!! Meu deeeeeus, que coisa absolutamente espectacular. Há capítulos absolutamente extraordinários, e este, na minha opinião, está a par do capítulo "O Grande Inquisidor" d'Os Irmãos Karamazov como o capítulo mais genial da literatura.
Penso ser impossível alguém ler este livro e ficar indiferente. É daqueles livros que nos muda radicalmente, não somos a mesma pessoa antes e depois de o lermos.
Esta foi uma das leituras mais fascinantes que já fiz na minha vida e sinto-me mesmo uma privilegiada por ter feito esta leitura. Ah Saramago, a falta que tu fazes ❤
October 1, 2020
Τι είναι αυτός ρε σύ! Καμία σχέση με το περί τυφλότητος. Μου άρεσε πολύ η γραφή του. Σε ένα αρκετά μεγάλο μέρος του βιβλίου δεν είσαι σίγουρος αν μιλάει για έναν Ιησού που είναι άνθρωπος ή τελικά υπάρχει το μεταφυσικό στοιχείο. Αυτό ήταν μια λεπτομέρεια από τις ��κα��οντάδες που θα μπορούσα να σχολιάσω. Μου άρεσε ότι εκτός από τα ποικίλα βάθη που μπορείς να καταδυθείς στην ανάγνωση εμένα με έκανε συνεχώς να νιώθω ότι βρίσκομαι σε μια ατμόσφαιρα. Με έβαζε δηλαδή σε ένα μουντ που είχε να κάνει με ένα περιβάλλον αισθητικό και αισθητηριακό. Αν και σε κάποια σημεία φαίνεται η οπτική του σε θέματα θρησκείας δεν έμεινα σε αυτά αλλά στο τρόπο που στήνει το σύμπαν του.
April 10, 2017
Caveat: This book has a very limited audience. Those with little interest in the Christian religion will find it a difficult and unrewarding slog. Conversely those with strong religious beliefs may be challenged or offended and avoid the book for those reasons. Additionally, the writing is very dense and somewhat difficult and will deter casual readers who may be otherwise interested in the subject matter (while the book is only 340 pages, the font is small and tightly packed, and there are few paragraph breaks and no line breaks for dialogue, so this feels more like a 500+ page book). This leaves a very narrow band of likely readers, namely mildly or formerly religious people who enjoy reading difficult literature. People like myself, who are for reasons of upbringing or possibly masochistic tendencies, cursed with a deep fascination of the subject despite believing not a word of it.
This is a masterpiece of historical and philosophical fiction. It is simply a beautifully written book, both in the style of prose and the content. Overall, it is very respectful to the source material. There is no overt mocking element; the writing does not look down on religion. The characters are very real and human, and are treated with seriousness and dignity. The subversive element is quite subtle (with the arguable exception of one chapter close to the end of the book), and on the whole arises naturally from the interactions between the characters and the situations in which they are placed. The characters are forced to work through difficult moral situations and in doing so bring to light the absurdity of the various doctrines of the religion. This is treated so lightly that I fear the moral questions raised are likely to be missed if one is not paying attention.
One thing I really liked was the way the book handled depictions of ancient Jewish life. The role of women being completely subservient to men: first to their fathers, then husbands, and ultimately to their own children, and the effect this had on their relationship with their families. It also depicted honestly the ritual of quotidian animal sacrifice - the absolute savagery, cruelty and waste of this practice, which is often overlooked when we think about that culture and that time.
If I have one small criticism, it is that the final two chapters appear somewhat rushed, as if the author has said what he needed to say in the preceding chapter (which is in fact the crux of the book and seems to contain the culmination of the author's message) and was simply trying to conclude the book. It's a pity because those final chapters contain some key events that were worthy of closer scrutiny.
This is a masterpiece of historical and philosophical fiction. It is simply a beautifully written book, both in the style of prose and the content. Overall, it is very respectful to the source material. There is no overt mocking element; the writing does not look down on religion. The characters are very real and human, and are treated with seriousness and dignity. The subversive element is quite subtle (with the arguable exception of one chapter close to the end of the book), and on the whole arises naturally from the interactions between the characters and the situations in which they are placed. The characters are forced to work through difficult moral situations and in doing so bring to light the absurdity of the various doctrines of the religion. This is treated so lightly that I fear the moral questions raised are likely to be missed if one is not paying attention.
One thing I really liked was the way the book handled depictions of ancient Jewish life. The role of women being completely subservient to men: first to their fathers, then husbands, and ultimately to their own children, and the effect this had on their relationship with their families. It also depicted honestly the ritual of quotidian animal sacrifice - the absolute savagery, cruelty and waste of this practice, which is often overlooked when we think about that culture and that time.
If I have one small criticism, it is that the final two chapters appear somewhat rushed, as if the author has said what he needed to say in the preceding chapter (which is in fact the crux of the book and seems to contain the culmination of the author's message) and was simply trying to conclude the book. It's a pity because those final chapters contain some key events that were worthy of closer scrutiny.
January 10, 2021
O Evangelho Segundo Jesus Cristo não será o livro mais aclamado do Nobel Português, mas é, certamente, o mais polémico que escreveu, não só pelo questionamento da história bíblica de Jesus Cristo, mas também pelas consequências que teve na vida do escritor e da sua relação com o país que o viu nascer.
Saramago propõe-se aqui a reinterpretar a vida da figura central da religião mais importante da História da Humanidade. Ateu assumido, o autor foi acusado por representantes da Igreja e de outros católicos de desvirtuar os textos sagrados de forma abusiva e ofensiva, o que seria agravado pela sua condição de não crente. Eu diria que, para escrever este livro, terá sido necessário a Saramago não só um vasto conhecimento da Bíblia, como também reflexões profundas sobre a génese do texto e tudo aquilo que os seus ensinamentos implicam.
Opinião completa: https://www.estantedelivros.com/2021/01/opiniao-o-evangelho-segundo-jesus-cristo-jose-saramago.html
Saramago propõe-se aqui a reinterpretar a vida da figura central da religião mais importante da História da Humanidade. Ateu assumido, o autor foi acusado por representantes da Igreja e de outros católicos de desvirtuar os textos sagrados de forma abusiva e ofensiva, o que seria agravado pela sua condição de não crente. Eu diria que, para escrever este livro, terá sido necessário a Saramago não só um vasto conhecimento da Bíblia, como também reflexões profundas sobre a génese do texto e tudo aquilo que os seus ensinamentos implicam.
Opinião completa: https://www.estantedelivros.com/2021/01/opiniao-o-evangelho-segundo-jesus-cristo-jose-saramago.html
June 17, 2016
No es un tema menor el acometer mediante una obra literaria la vida y la obra de uno de los seres más trascendentales que han existido en la humanidad: la del Hijo de Dios hecho Hombre, y más difícil debe resultar el describir algunos de los hechos más importantes y significativos en la vida de ese Hijo de Dios, alejándolos diametralmente de la tradición Católica con la consecuente crítica y malestar de muchos sectores de esta religión.
Me incliné a leer este libro por dos razones: la primera por tratarse de una obra de José Saramago (1922-2010), Premio Nobel de Literatura en 1998 y a quien tenía ganas de leer desde hacía tiempo; y la segunda, porque el libro trata como tema central la vida de una de las presencias capitales en este planeta, cuya vida y obra marcaron un antes y un después en el desarrollo de la humanidad.
Siempre me he cuestionado muchas cosas acerca de la vida y de la obra de Jesús de Nazaret, me ha intrigado su personalidad y su vida y aquí en este libro he encontrado una versión alternativa de su vida.
Me imagino que Saramago habrá estudiado e investigado ampliamente el material que se tiene sobre Jesucristo y sobre sus pesquisas y conclusiones, sin olvidar el recurso de la imaginación de todo novelista, habrá tejido la interesante narración que aquí nos presenta, plasmando episodios de su vida en los que no me había puesto a pensar, como por ejemplo si tuvo o no tuvo hermanos.
Para mi gusto el estilo de Saramago en esta obra en particular es un tanto profuso, pero también con una buena dosis de reflexión místico-poética. Lo copioso de su prosa hace que en ocasiones parezca un tanto recargada y la lectura se haga pesada, en especial durante la primera parte del libro. Tal vez esta percepción se deba a que escribe páginas y páginas enteras sin interlineado, sin puntos; párrafos enormes que ocupan páginas completas, frases extensísimas que mezclan ideas y explicaciones con disertaciones sobre un punto en particular, por lo que parece que la narración no avanza en cuanto a la acción. Los diálogos no están separados por líneas, sino sólo por comas y a veces no se distingue qué personaje está hablando, o si la voz corresponde a la del narrador. En cambio es muy meticuloso en la introspección y en detalles que al parecer no tienen importancia pero el autor los hace importantes con su capacidad de reflexión.
Como mencioné por momentos la narración parece no avanzar en cuanto a hechos o acciones, ya que todo tiene que explicarse o reflexionarse, casi cada idea, en especial durante la primera parte del libro en donde los personajes principales son José y María.
Pero todo esto se compensa con la estupenda prosa elaborada por un gran orfebre de la palabra que nos habla serenamente de hechos no conocidos acerca de la vida de ese hombre que emergió de un milenario desierto para la humanidad entera llamado Jesucristo; nos habla de su concepción, de su niñez, de su adolescencia y de su conversión en el hombre destinado a salvar a la humanidad. El autor realiza todo esto con gran delicadeza y las reflexiones que él vierte en estas páginas por momentos parecen poner a prueba nuestro intelecto.
En realidad toca pocos hechos de la vida de Jesucristo pero de manera muy profunda que nos permiten hacernos una idea de aquel mundo de Oriente de hace más de dos mil años.
Es por demás interesante que una pluma como la de José Saramago nos desvele a un Jesucristo más humano de lo que la idea generalizada conceptualiza, así como su entorno, sus pensamientos, su concepción del mundo, sus dudas, sus creencias, sus culpas, su espíritu de justicia y sus razones para vivir como lo hizo.
En la segunda parte la acción transcurre de manera más dinámica, ahora la pluma de Saramago cobra poder y prestancia y fluye, fluye, fluye… En esta parte se nos relatan los hechos que hemos conocido ya a través de los Evangelios, en especial nos habla de sus grandes hazañas con los enfermos, con los hambrientos, el encuentro con sus Apóstoles, su relación con María Magdalena y otros más.
La última cuarta parte del libro transcurre de manera extraordinaria aunque me parece con algunos detalles a los que les falta lógica o consistencia, lo cual se explica ya que estamos entrando en cuestiones Divinas, a las que la razón no suele satisfacer. En esta parte es cuando Dios le explica a Jesucristo ampliamente su misión en la Tierra, tanto los objetivos de ésta como todas las consecuencias que traerá: el derramamiento de sangre, los gritos de dolor, los estertores de agonía y todas las luchas que han implicado el establecimiento y desarrollo de esta religión tanto a nivel individual como las colectivas como por ejemplo Las Cruzadas y la Inquisición que trajeron, a gran escala, desolación, dolor, muertes, torturas terribles, odios enconados y rivalidades extremas, y por si fuera poco con la promesa puntual de que algún día sonarán, a través del aire de este planeta, los terribles y estridentes metales que anuncien un implacable Juicio Final a toda la humanidad.
Me incliné a leer este libro por dos razones: la primera por tratarse de una obra de José Saramago (1922-2010), Premio Nobel de Literatura en 1998 y a quien tenía ganas de leer desde hacía tiempo; y la segunda, porque el libro trata como tema central la vida de una de las presencias capitales en este planeta, cuya vida y obra marcaron un antes y un después en el desarrollo de la humanidad.
Siempre me he cuestionado muchas cosas acerca de la vida y de la obra de Jesús de Nazaret, me ha intrigado su personalidad y su vida y aquí en este libro he encontrado una versión alternativa de su vida.
Me imagino que Saramago habrá estudiado e investigado ampliamente el material que se tiene sobre Jesucristo y sobre sus pesquisas y conclusiones, sin olvidar el recurso de la imaginación de todo novelista, habrá tejido la interesante narración que aquí nos presenta, plasmando episodios de su vida en los que no me había puesto a pensar, como por ejemplo si tuvo o no tuvo hermanos.
Para mi gusto el estilo de Saramago en esta obra en particular es un tanto profuso, pero también con una buena dosis de reflexión místico-poética. Lo copioso de su prosa hace que en ocasiones parezca un tanto recargada y la lectura se haga pesada, en especial durante la primera parte del libro. Tal vez esta percepción se deba a que escribe páginas y páginas enteras sin interlineado, sin puntos; párrafos enormes que ocupan páginas completas, frases extensísimas que mezclan ideas y explicaciones con disertaciones sobre un punto en particular, por lo que parece que la narración no avanza en cuanto a la acción. Los diálogos no están separados por líneas, sino sólo por comas y a veces no se distingue qué personaje está hablando, o si la voz corresponde a la del narrador. En cambio es muy meticuloso en la introspección y en detalles que al parecer no tienen importancia pero el autor los hace importantes con su capacidad de reflexión.
Como mencioné por momentos la narración parece no avanzar en cuanto a hechos o acciones, ya que todo tiene que explicarse o reflexionarse, casi cada idea, en especial durante la primera parte del libro en donde los personajes principales son José y María.
Pero todo esto se compensa con la estupenda prosa elaborada por un gran orfebre de la palabra que nos habla serenamente de hechos no conocidos acerca de la vida de ese hombre que emergió de un milenario desierto para la humanidad entera llamado Jesucristo; nos habla de su concepción, de su niñez, de su adolescencia y de su conversión en el hombre destinado a salvar a la humanidad. El autor realiza todo esto con gran delicadeza y las reflexiones que él vierte en estas páginas por momentos parecen poner a prueba nuestro intelecto.
En realidad toca pocos hechos de la vida de Jesucristo pero de manera muy profunda que nos permiten hacernos una idea de aquel mundo de Oriente de hace más de dos mil años.
Es por demás interesante que una pluma como la de José Saramago nos desvele a un Jesucristo más humano de lo que la idea generalizada conceptualiza, así como su entorno, sus pensamientos, su concepción del mundo, sus dudas, sus creencias, sus culpas, su espíritu de justicia y sus razones para vivir como lo hizo.
En la segunda parte la acción transcurre de manera más dinámica, ahora la pluma de Saramago cobra poder y prestancia y fluye, fluye, fluye… En esta parte se nos relatan los hechos que hemos conocido ya a través de los Evangelios, en especial nos habla de sus grandes hazañas con los enfermos, con los hambrientos, el encuentro con sus Apóstoles, su relación con María Magdalena y otros más.
La última cuarta parte del libro transcurre de manera extraordinaria aunque me parece con algunos detalles a los que les falta lógica o consistencia, lo cual se explica ya que estamos entrando en cuestiones Divinas, a las que la razón no suele satisfacer. En esta parte es cuando Dios le explica a Jesucristo ampliamente su misión en la Tierra, tanto los objetivos de ésta como todas las consecuencias que traerá: el derramamiento de sangre, los gritos de dolor, los estertores de agonía y todas las luchas que han implicado el establecimiento y desarrollo de esta religión tanto a nivel individual como las colectivas como por ejemplo Las Cruzadas y la Inquisición que trajeron, a gran escala, desolación, dolor, muertes, torturas terribles, odios enconados y rivalidades extremas, y por si fuera poco con la promesa puntual de que algún día sonarán, a través del aire de este planeta, los terribles y estridentes metales que anuncien un implacable Juicio Final a toda la humanidad.
December 28, 2019
What I like the most about this day, 8 of March, in case GR posts a different date on this text, which is a great day as any other day to live, is that from early morning following my daily path on the strolling alleys (that is on the ground) but also under-ground (that is by metro) I have been hit by groups and groups of men, each carrying in their arms a big bucket of flowers (thin flowers but very beautiful with lots of colours). Most of them displayed wide smiles while maybe feeling themselves a bit different than yesterday because of this very soft, delicate but wondrous burden they were delivering to their places of work. I have enjoyed more than the other days of the week my morning journey to work. But the nicest surprise was when I entered the office building where was this bodyguard who handed over to me a beautiful yellow rose with a wish of happy woman’s day. He made my day! Happy to see and be a witness of such lovely gestures and, wishing that the message and the intentions behind this int’l celebration should not fade away without producing any positive change within our hearts and minds.
This was supposed to be a review but as usual I am sliding on a different track and I reach nowhere 😉 which is a good direction still because I can further multiply my searches to other nowhere.
With each new book of Saramago I feel myself enriched with a direct geometrical progression of my admiration towards his innate genius, very much alive and kicking its way to the endless limits. This writer is just simply Great. First and foremost, I am highly subjective towards him and will continue to be so. Hence, I am at a loss at establishing a hierarchy regarding which novel I loved most of the ones I read so far. Each one of his novels is a stand-alone masterpiece.
The Gospel according to Jesus Christ is truly a shining brilliant jewel, maybe a bit more because it brought back to my mind memories long time put to sleep. Through quick mind flashes, I got back my childhood years spent together with my favorite maternal grandfather who used to keep my imagination at work by telling me about the Bible works. He got me so interested that I eventually took the Bible and read it, wholly. I was far too small of age back then and I cannot assert I did understand what may be of high relevance but I did enjoy it more because of the stories put in a more interpretative light by my grandfather. He did study four years of theology but he didn’t practice not even one day as a priest. His main passion was to be an automation engineer which is what he practiced his whole professional life. He was my first guide through this immense chapter in human life and I feel fortunate that he had enough of an open developed mind not to corrupt my own innocent undeveloped at that time mind with any preconceptions about religion. He always let me wander through the land of ideas without forcing any definitive answer on any questions that were posed. That is why now I cannot even say what is I am of, if I do belong to any group, of the few main known ones. I guess I take a bit from all of them, but just the part that feels integrative and positively affecting my whole being, mind, heart and soul.
It was enchanting and challenging to read this novel. Once you overcome the ethical and theological confrontations, even before opening the first page of this gospel, though impossible not to recur from time to time, letting your eyes linger through the pages of this book proves to be an entirely awesome and pleasant reading. And not because it is about Jesus’s life, as obviously Jesus is the main hero of this gospel, but because it seems the book does not have (it never had, maybe) the irreverent purpose of contradicting what others have written in those long past times, and therefore does not dare to say that it did not happen what happened, putting instead a YES a NO, being Jesus this hero and his adventures well known from official religious books.
Yes, it's easy to get close to him and to know his future, the good and miraculous things that have existed in his life, miracles such that some will give food, others will restore health, one that will defeat death.
Yes, it's easy to change your ideas when you encounter unexpected, miraculous situations, lacking the power of an explanation by reason, but it's just as easy to keep intact your robust skepticism, sometimes characteristic to the golden age of youth, sometimes due to a closed mind.
One of the very best parts from this jewel of book is the three-party interview between the God, the Devil and Jesus, on a boat, in the unknown middle of the sea, surrounded by a thick obscure fog, and which lasted for, more or less, just about 40 days, although for Jesus was just a matter of a couple of hours as for his own perception, especially that returned back on the shore the people waiting for him anxiously started to assault him with questions of what has happened there out in the sea. Although this meeting was highly interesting – definite one of the finest brushes of Saramago narrative genius – for these poor people (fishermen by profession) was a kind of no-work period, not that they went on strike purposely but more because they just couldn’t practice their daily job because the heavy tick wall of fog that made sailing a meeting with death, just in case of trying though… I think in a corner of my mind I also linked this with something I have been affected by recently. I did under-go the work assessment for previous year and I chose the attribute to qualify my performance as outstanding, top of top on the ladder. Upon final discussion with my boss, I was told that in order to deserve this I should be capable of walking on water, to which my sudden lament came uncontrollably: But I am not Jesus Christ‼ He was only One.
My Saramago reading adventure continues with high gusto and I am already so very certain that it will bring further personal rewards that are not helped by words to be expressed. So happy he did have, even limited like all of us, existence on this Earth for some of us to feel overjoyed for reading his novels.
≪ Multa vreme vor ramane aici acesti copaci, si va sosi ziua cand se va fi pierdut memoria a ceea ce s-a intamplat, si atunci, cum oamenii vor pentru orice cate o explicatie, falsa sau adevarata, se vor inventa cateva istorii si legende, la inceput mai pastrand inca o oarecare relatie cu faptele, apoi din ce in ce mai slaba, pana cand totul se va transforma in pura fabula. Si va sosi alta zi cand copacii vor muri de batranete si vor fi taiati, si alta cand, din pricina unei autostrazi, sau a unei scoli, sau a unei case de locuit, sau a unui centru comercial, sau a unui fort militar, excavatoarele vor rascoli terenul si vor scoate la lumina zilei, pentru o noua nastere, scheletele care au zacut acolo vreme de doua mii de ani. Vor veni atunci antropologii si un profesor de anatomie va examina resturile, pentru ca, mai tarziu, sa anunte lumii scandalizate ca, de fapt, pe vremea aceea, oamenii erau rastigniti cu genunchii indoiti. Si cum lumea nu-l putea dezavua in numele stiintei, l-a detestat in numele esteticii. ≫
This was supposed to be a review but as usual I am sliding on a different track and I reach nowhere 😉 which is a good direction still because I can further multiply my searches to other nowhere.
With each new book of Saramago I feel myself enriched with a direct geometrical progression of my admiration towards his innate genius, very much alive and kicking its way to the endless limits. This writer is just simply Great. First and foremost, I am highly subjective towards him and will continue to be so. Hence, I am at a loss at establishing a hierarchy regarding which novel I loved most of the ones I read so far. Each one of his novels is a stand-alone masterpiece.
The Gospel according to Jesus Christ is truly a shining brilliant jewel, maybe a bit more because it brought back to my mind memories long time put to sleep. Through quick mind flashes, I got back my childhood years spent together with my favorite maternal grandfather who used to keep my imagination at work by telling me about the Bible works. He got me so interested that I eventually took the Bible and read it, wholly. I was far too small of age back then and I cannot assert I did understand what may be of high relevance but I did enjoy it more because of the stories put in a more interpretative light by my grandfather. He did study four years of theology but he didn’t practice not even one day as a priest. His main passion was to be an automation engineer which is what he practiced his whole professional life. He was my first guide through this immense chapter in human life and I feel fortunate that he had enough of an open developed mind not to corrupt my own innocent undeveloped at that time mind with any preconceptions about religion. He always let me wander through the land of ideas without forcing any definitive answer on any questions that were posed. That is why now I cannot even say what is I am of, if I do belong to any group, of the few main known ones. I guess I take a bit from all of them, but just the part that feels integrative and positively affecting my whole being, mind, heart and soul.
It was enchanting and challenging to read this novel. Once you overcome the ethical and theological confrontations, even before opening the first page of this gospel, though impossible not to recur from time to time, letting your eyes linger through the pages of this book proves to be an entirely awesome and pleasant reading. And not because it is about Jesus’s life, as obviously Jesus is the main hero of this gospel, but because it seems the book does not have (it never had, maybe) the irreverent purpose of contradicting what others have written in those long past times, and therefore does not dare to say that it did not happen what happened, putting instead a YES a NO, being Jesus this hero and his adventures well known from official religious books.
Yes, it's easy to get close to him and to know his future, the good and miraculous things that have existed in his life, miracles such that some will give food, others will restore health, one that will defeat death.
Yes, it's easy to change your ideas when you encounter unexpected, miraculous situations, lacking the power of an explanation by reason, but it's just as easy to keep intact your robust skepticism, sometimes characteristic to the golden age of youth, sometimes due to a closed mind.
One of the very best parts from this jewel of book is the three-party interview between the God, the Devil and Jesus, on a boat, in the unknown middle of the sea, surrounded by a thick obscure fog, and which lasted for, more or less, just about 40 days, although for Jesus was just a matter of a couple of hours as for his own perception, especially that returned back on the shore the people waiting for him anxiously started to assault him with questions of what has happened there out in the sea. Although this meeting was highly interesting – definite one of the finest brushes of Saramago narrative genius – for these poor people (fishermen by profession) was a kind of no-work period, not that they went on strike purposely but more because they just couldn’t practice their daily job because the heavy tick wall of fog that made sailing a meeting with death, just in case of trying though… I think in a corner of my mind I also linked this with something I have been affected by recently. I did under-go the work assessment for previous year and I chose the attribute to qualify my performance as outstanding, top of top on the ladder. Upon final discussion with my boss, I was told that in order to deserve this I should be capable of walking on water, to which my sudden lament came uncontrollably: But I am not Jesus Christ‼ He was only One.
My Saramago reading adventure continues with high gusto and I am already so very certain that it will bring further personal rewards that are not helped by words to be expressed. So happy he did have, even limited like all of us, existence on this Earth for some of us to feel overjoyed for reading his novels.
≪ Multa vreme vor ramane aici acesti copaci, si va sosi ziua cand se va fi pierdut memoria a ceea ce s-a intamplat, si atunci, cum oamenii vor pentru orice cate o explicatie, falsa sau adevarata, se vor inventa cateva istorii si legende, la inceput mai pastrand inca o oarecare relatie cu faptele, apoi din ce in ce mai slaba, pana cand totul se va transforma in pura fabula. Si va sosi alta zi cand copacii vor muri de batranete si vor fi taiati, si alta cand, din pricina unei autostrazi, sau a unei scoli, sau a unei case de locuit, sau a unui centru comercial, sau a unui fort militar, excavatoarele vor rascoli terenul si vor scoate la lumina zilei, pentru o noua nastere, scheletele care au zacut acolo vreme de doua mii de ani. Vor veni atunci antropologii si un profesor de anatomie va examina resturile, pentru ca, mai tarziu, sa anunte lumii scandalizate ca, de fapt, pe vremea aceea, oamenii erau rastigniti cu genunchii indoiti. Si cum lumea nu-l putea dezavua in numele stiintei, l-a detestat in numele esteticii. ≫
April 3, 2020
This sad and familiar story makes for a challenging read. The relationship with Mary Magdalene is a nice addition. The conversation in the boat in the mist between God and Jesus and the devil is very bold. The devil gets the best line:
“ ... I myself can see things in the future, but I’m not always certain if what I see there is true or false, in others words I can see my lies for what they are, my truths, but I don’t know to what extent the truths of others are their lies.”
“ ... I myself can see things in the future, but I’m not always certain if what I see there is true or false, in others words I can see my lies for what they are, my truths, but I don’t know to what extent the truths of others are their lies.”
August 7, 2016
Συγκλονιστικός Saramago
July 27, 2022
One day when I was ten years old sitting in the school library it occurred to me that Jesus Christ was just a big confidence trick. I shared my theological insight with my neighbor, a girl who instantly stood up and ran to the teacher’s desk shouting “Maru Kun thinks Jesus is a confidence trick, Maru Kun thinks Jesus is a confidence trick”. My New Testament exegesis hadn’t been entirely thought out when the teacher came over to ask exactly what I had in mind, but fortunately she didn’t press me for details and instead focused on calming down the young zealot, which I recall she did quite effectively.
Unfortunately I didn’t take my insight any further, which is a shame because if I had I might have written ‘The Gospel According to Jesus Christ” and won the Nobel Prize for Literature instead of Jose Saramago.
At the risk of simplifying what is a very powerful, thoughtful and entertaining book the main premise of ‘The Gospel According to Jesus Christ” is that God created Jesus to help spread His Church, and hence His power, by scripting a very dramatic human-interest story, the Life of Christ, that will hold enormous appeal to its audience, humanity. The devil is in on the deal, as he prospers from an expanding Christian church just as much as God does. In this respect God is a lot like a reality TV producer trying to bring out a world-beating TV series starring a reluctant Jesus Christ (a charismatic rebel who won’t stick to the script, destined for a tragic end) with support from a sexy older woman with a past (Mary of Magdalene) and featuring plenty of family conflict, money worries, political revolution and a few miracles thrown in to justify the special effects budget.
This is a deeply subversive book; it succeeds in turning Christ’s last message from the cross into a cry for human dignity against the war and suffering caused by religion:
I have been an atheist ever that first encounter with religious extremism in the school library. Since then I have become a not-very-good-Buddhist (a sect that allows drinking, getting angry and an inability to remember the Four Noble Truths while acknowledging that Buddhism would be a good idea if more people could actually understand it, one of the fastest growing Buddhist sects in the West) and am happy to leave the Christians alone as long as they don’t interfere with me. As the Dali Llama once wisely said, you are better off sticking with the religion of your parents and trying not to do any bad stuff rather than change your religion unless you ready to put up with a lot of trouble. Being a not-very-good-Buddhist is decent compromise between the advice of the Dali Llama and my Church of England upbringing.
Sadly Christians these days, in particular some (not all) Christians in the US, are showing every sign of wanting to interfere with me, and my friends and pretty much anyone else on the planet that doesn’t fit in with their ideal of the high-earning, gun-toting, liberal-smoting American Jesus who is happy to start WWIII if it would bring on the Rapture and His Kingdom that much quicker.
So I would recommend this book to any un-godly atheist destined for the deepest pit in hell who wants to renew his religious non-belief but who would appreciate a break from Hitchens/Dawkins/Harris and the like. Refreshingly, the Jesus it depicts is quite the opposite to the American Jesus as he has much more in common with the Jesus of the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John - a figure one can admire in many respects but who seems pretty much forgotten about these days.
Unfortunately I didn’t take my insight any further, which is a shame because if I had I might have written ‘The Gospel According to Jesus Christ” and won the Nobel Prize for Literature instead of Jose Saramago.
At the risk of simplifying what is a very powerful, thoughtful and entertaining book the main premise of ‘The Gospel According to Jesus Christ” is that God created Jesus to help spread His Church, and hence His power, by scripting a very dramatic human-interest story, the Life of Christ, that will hold enormous appeal to its audience, humanity. The devil is in on the deal, as he prospers from an expanding Christian church just as much as God does. In this respect God is a lot like a reality TV producer trying to bring out a world-beating TV series starring a reluctant Jesus Christ (a charismatic rebel who won’t stick to the script, destined for a tragic end) with support from a sexy older woman with a past (Mary of Magdalene) and featuring plenty of family conflict, money worries, political revolution and a few miracles thrown in to justify the special effects budget.
This is a deeply subversive book; it succeeds in turning Christ’s last message from the cross into a cry for human dignity against the war and suffering caused by religion:
Jesus realized then that he had been tricked, as the lamb led to sacrifice is tricked, and that his life had been planned for death from the very beginning. Remembering the river of blood and suffering that would flow from his side and flood the globe, he called out to the open sky, where God could be seen smiling, Men, forgive Him, for He knows not what He has done.If the book had been written before 1826, the year of the last execution under the Spanish Inquisition, Jose Saramago would undoubtedly have been burnt at the stake. (The last person to die on the Spanish Inquisition, Cayetano Ripoll, was hung by the civil authorities, much to the annoyance of the Church who buried him in a barrel painted in flames to compensate for this unwarranted act of secular generosity). It is no surprise that the Catholic Church tried to get the book banned, not just because it is subversive but also because it is pretty entertaining.
I have been an atheist ever that first encounter with religious extremism in the school library. Since then I have become a not-very-good-Buddhist (a sect that allows drinking, getting angry and an inability to remember the Four Noble Truths while acknowledging that Buddhism would be a good idea if more people could actually understand it, one of the fastest growing Buddhist sects in the West) and am happy to leave the Christians alone as long as they don’t interfere with me. As the Dali Llama once wisely said, you are better off sticking with the religion of your parents and trying not to do any bad stuff rather than change your religion unless you ready to put up with a lot of trouble. Being a not-very-good-Buddhist is decent compromise between the advice of the Dali Llama and my Church of England upbringing.
Sadly Christians these days, in particular some (not all) Christians in the US, are showing every sign of wanting to interfere with me, and my friends and pretty much anyone else on the planet that doesn’t fit in with their ideal of the high-earning, gun-toting, liberal-smoting American Jesus who is happy to start WWIII if it would bring on the Rapture and His Kingdom that much quicker.
So I would recommend this book to any un-godly atheist destined for the deepest pit in hell who wants to renew his religious non-belief but who would appreciate a break from Hitchens/Dawkins/Harris and the like. Refreshingly, the Jesus it depicts is quite the opposite to the American Jesus as he has much more in common with the Jesus of the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John - a figure one can admire in many respects but who seems pretty much forgotten about these days.
November 24, 2016
(Λίγες σκέψεις και όχι ακριβώς κριτική)
Δύσκολα τα πράγματα…
Αναμφίβολα πρόκειται για αριστούργημα. Θα είναι άδικο και εντελώς αδικαιολόγητο να το βάλω κάτω από 5 αστέρια.
Απαιτείται τεράστια ποσότητα ταλέντου και φαντασίας για να καταφέ��εις να μετατρέψεις μια τόσο γνωστή ιστορία σε κάτι «άλλο». Κάτι το οποίο αφηγείται γνωστά/αποδεχτά γεγονότα με τόσο διαφορετικό τρόπο. Να καταφέρεις να κρατήσεις τον αναγνώστη προσηλωμένο ασχέτως αν γνωρίζει τι θα γίνει στην τελευταία σελίδα. Να του συστήσεις από την αρχή ήρωες που μαθαίνει από τις νεαρές τάξεις του δημοτικού(και πιο νωρίς), παρουσιάζοντάς τους με διαφορετικό χαρακτήρα. Ίσως πιο ανθρώπινο από αυτόν που ήδη γν��ρίζει. Και όλα αυτά με έναν απολύτως αληθοφανή τρόπο.
Με εξαιρετική γραφή και ΤΡΟΜΕΡΗ ακρίβεια στα σημεία στίξης ο Ζοζ�� Σαραμάγκου σε μαγεύει. Είτε είσαι ορθόδοξος, είτε είσαι καθολικός, είτε είσαι σκεπτικιστής, είτε άθεος ο συγγραφέας σε ταξιδεύει. Ανεξάρτητα αν συμφωνείς ή όχι με αυτά που γράφει δεν μπορείς να αφήσεις το βιβλίο του.
Γιατί το βιβλίο αυτό δεν έχει θεολογικό χαρακτήρα. Ο Σαραμάγκου δεν επιδιώκει την έναρξη μιας νέας αίρεσης η οποία θα έχει ως ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟ τον παρόν βιβλίο. Ο Σαραμάγκου απλώς αλλάζει τα δεδομένα. Σκοπός του είναι να σκεφτείς μόνος σου ποιο ήταν το νόημα αυτού του βιβλίου. Ή ακόμα καλύτερα… Αν αυτό το βιβλίο έχει κάποιο νόημα.
Και εδώ αρχίζουν τα δύσκολα…
Αν θεωρήσουμε ότι ισχύει το δεύτερο και ότι ο Σαραμάγκου έγραψε το βιβλίο αυτό χωρίς κάποιο ιδιαίτερο σκοπό και νόημα, χωρίς να θέλει να προκαλέσει ή να εναντιωθεί στις θρησκείες, τότε δεν έκανε τίποτα περισσότερο από τους Monty Python στο Monty Python's Life of Brian. Ή μήπως όχι?
Και αν θεωρήσουμε ότι έχει κάποιο νόημα και σκοπό και δεδομένου ο Σαραμάγκου δεν έχει την καλύτερη σχέση με τις θρησκείες...(Για την ακρίβεια είναι ανοιχτά εναντίων τους.) Τότε η τακτική «επίθεση στο ήθος του αντιπάλου» και η παρουσίαση ενός κακού/αντιπαθητικού Θεού είναι ο καλύτερος τρόπος για να σε πείσει?
Ανεξάρτητα με το τι θα πιστέψει/σκεφτεί/καταλήξει κάποιος, ο Σαραμάγκου παραμένει ΣΥΓΚΛΟΝΙΣΤΙΚΟΣ. Σίγουρα δεν θα είναι το μοναδικό βιβλίο του συγγραφέα που θα διαβάσω… :)
Δύσκολα τα πράγματα…
Αναμφίβολα πρόκειται για αριστούργημα. Θα είναι άδικο και εντελώς αδικαιολόγητο να το βάλω κάτω από 5 αστέρια.
Απαιτείται τεράστια ποσότητα ταλέντου και φαντασίας για να καταφέ��εις να μετατρέψεις μια τόσο γνωστή ιστορία σε κάτι «άλλο». Κάτι το οποίο αφηγείται γνωστά/αποδεχτά γεγονότα με τόσο διαφορετικό τρόπο. Να καταφέρεις να κρατήσεις τον αναγνώστη προσηλωμένο ασχέτως αν γνωρίζει τι θα γίνει στην τελευταία σελίδα. Να του συστήσεις από την αρχή ήρωες που μαθαίνει από τις νεαρές τάξεις του δημοτικού(και πιο νωρίς), παρουσιάζοντάς τους με διαφορετικό χαρακτήρα. Ίσως πιο ανθρώπινο από αυτόν που ήδη γν��ρίζει. Και όλα αυτά με έναν απολύτως αληθοφανή τρόπο.
Με εξαιρετική γραφή και ΤΡΟΜΕΡΗ ακρίβεια στα σημεία στίξης ο Ζοζ�� Σαραμάγκου σε μαγεύει. Είτε είσαι ορθόδοξος, είτε είσαι καθολικός, είτε είσαι σκεπτικιστής, είτε άθεος ο συγγραφέας σε ταξιδεύει. Ανεξάρτητα αν συμφωνείς ή όχι με αυτά που γράφει δεν μπορείς να αφήσεις το βιβλίο του.
Γιατί το βιβλίο αυτό δεν έχει θεολογικό χαρακτήρα. Ο Σαραμάγκου δεν επιδιώκει την έναρξη μιας νέας αίρεσης η οποία θα έχει ως ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟ τον παρόν βιβλίο. Ο Σαραμάγκου απλώς αλλάζει τα δεδομένα. Σκοπός του είναι να σκεφτείς μόνος σου ποιο ήταν το νόημα αυτού του βιβλίου. Ή ακόμα καλύτερα… Αν αυτό το βιβλίο έχει κάποιο νόημα.
Και εδώ αρχίζουν τα δύσκολα…
Αν θεωρήσουμε ότι ισχύει το δεύτερο και ότι ο Σαραμάγκου έγραψε το βιβλίο αυτό χωρίς κάποιο ιδιαίτερο σκοπό και νόημα, χωρίς να θέλει να προκαλέσει ή να εναντιωθεί στις θρησκείες, τότε δεν έκανε τίποτα περισσότερο από τους Monty Python στο Monty Python's Life of Brian. Ή μήπως όχι?
Και αν θεωρήσουμε ότι έχει κάποιο νόημα και σκοπό και δεδομένου ο Σαραμάγκου δεν έχει την καλύτερη σχέση με τις θρησκείες...(Για την ακρίβεια είναι ανοιχτά εναντίων τους.) Τότε η τακτική «επίθεση στο ήθος του αντιπάλου» και η παρουσίαση ενός κακού/αντιπαθητικού Θεού είναι ο καλύτερος τρόπος για να σε πείσει?
Ανεξάρτητα με το τι θα πιστέψει/σκεφτεί/καταλήξει κάποιος, ο Σαραμάγκου παραμένει ΣΥΓΚΛΟΝΙΣΤΙΚΟΣ. Σίγουρα δεν θα είναι το μοναδικό βιβλίο του συγγραφέα που θα διαβάσω… :)
Read
August 2, 2019Η παρακάτω κριτική περιέχει σπόιλερς, που δεν τινάζουν στον αέρα την απόλαυση της ανάγνωσης ετούτου του βιβλίου αλλά είναι σπόιλερς για όποιον θέλει να διαβάσει και να απολαύσει το βιβλίο παρθενικά.
Ο αφηγητής/ευαγγελιστής αυτού του Βιβλίου/Ευαγγελίου ξεκινά με ένα κεφάλαιο που είναι ουσιαστικά η περιγραφή μιας ξυλογραφίας του Άλμπρεχτ Ντύρερ Σταύρωση. Το αμέσως επόμενο ξεκινά με μια σκηνή στο σπίτι του Ιωσήφ του ξυλουργού και της Μαρίας, όπου ο Ιησούς είναι ακόμη αγέννητος, και απ' εδώ θα ξεκινήσει ένα ταξίδι μέχρι το τελευταίο κεφάλαιο που κλείνει ξανά με τη σκηνή της Σταύρωσης, κλείνοντας έτσι τον κύκλο της ιστορίας οριστικά.
Πέρσι το Πάσχα αποφάσισα να διαβάσω την Η Καινή Διαθήκη ταυτοχρόνως με τον Τελευταίο Πειρασμό του Χριστού του Ν. Καζαντζάκη. Έτσι φέτος αποφάσισα να κρατήσω αυτό το 'έθιμο' και να συνεχίσω με άλλο ένα βιβλίο που έχει ως κύριο χαραχτήρα τον Χριστό, παρόλο που πουθενά στο βιβλίο (αν θυμάμαι καλά) δεν αναφέρεται ως Χριστός. Αναμφίβολα υπήρξαν συγκρίσεις.
Ο Ιησούς της Καινής Διαθήκης ήταν θεάνθρωπος.
Ο Ιησούς του Καζαντζάκη ήταν άνθρωπος.
Ο Ιησούς του Σαραμάγκου ήταν ανθρώπινος
Ο Σαραμάγκου, Πορτογάλος που βραβεύτηκε με το Νόμπελ Λογοτεχνίας (σε αντίθεση με τον Καζαντζάκη) ήταν άθεος και αυτό το βιβλίο είναι ύμνος προς τον άνθρωπο και οτιδήποτε μη-ανθρώπινο κατακρίνεται (Θεός, Άγγελοι, Δαίμονες).
Από το πρώτο κεφάλαιο ο Σαραμάγκου ξεκινά να αθωώνει ανθρώπους που στην Καινή Διαθήκη περιγράφονται σχεδόν πάντα ως κακοί
[...] ένας άντρας απομακρύνεται, [...] Κρατά στο αριστερό του χέρι ένα κανάτι και στο δεξί ένα καλάμι.
Στην άκρη του καλαμιού πρέπει να υπάρχει ένα σφουγγάρι, [...] και το κανάτι, [...] περιέχει νερό με ξίδι.
Αυτός ο άνθρωπος, [...] θα πέσει θύμα συκοφαντίας, ότι, από μοχθηρία ή χλευασμό έδωσε ξίδι στον Ιησού όταν εκείνος ζήτησε νερό, ενώ το σίγουρο είναι ότι του έδωσε από το μείγμα, ξίδι και νερό, που είναι ένα από τα καλύτερα δροσιστικά για να σβήνει τη δίψα, όπως τότε ήταν γνωστό και συνηθιζόταν. σελ. 15
Ευτυχώς, ένας Φαρισαίος που περνούσε και πρόσεξε τον ξεψυχισμένο μικρό τον λυπήθηκε, το μέλλον,
άδικο, θα επιφορτιστεί με τη δημιουργία μιας χείριστης φήμης για το λαό αυτόν, στο βάθος όμως ήταν καλοί άνθρωποι, όπως αποδείχτηκε σ' αυτή την περίπτωση. σελ. 179
Ξεκινάς την ανάγνωση του βιβλίου και λες, αυτό δεν ήταν μέσα στην Καινή Διαθήκη, αυτό ήταν, αυτό δεν ήταν, σαν να μαδάς μαργαρίτα. Στο τέλος αποφασίζεις ότι πρέπει να αναμένεις λιγότερες ομοιότητες σε σχέση με αυτές που είχε η Καινή Διαθήκη με το βιβλίο του Καζαντζάκη. Πολλά στιγμιότυπα που ξέρουμε από την Κ.Δ. απουσιάζουν ή είναι αλλαγμένα εδώ. Ο Ιησούς στην έρημο δεν συναντά τον διάβολο αλλά τον Θεό, ο Θεός δεν αναφωνεί Αυτός είναι ο αγαπημένος μου Υιός, αυτός είναι ο εκλεκτός μου.
κατά τη διάρκεια της Βάπτισης του Ιησού αλλά κατά τη διάρκεια της Σταύρωσής του, κάτι που περιέχει νότα χλευασμού. Δεν υπάρχουν αναστάσεις, δεν υπάρχει μεταμόρφωση, ούτε ανάληψη, ούτε μυστικός δείπνος, ούτε όρος των ελαιών. Είναι ένα βιβλίο θα έλεγα ιστορικό με νύξεις μαγικού ρεαλισμού, όσο το δυνατό λιγότερες.
Στην αρχή νιώθεις ότι ο αφηγητής/ευαγγελιστής αυτού του βιβλίου/ευαγγελίου είναι σύγχρονος του Ιησού αλλά σε ανύποπτο χρόνο σχολιάζει με μοντέρνες φράσεις και λέξεις όπως εμπορικό κέντρο, Βολταίρος, Φρόυντ, αυτοκίνητα, Κρο-μανιόν κλπ και συνειδητοποιείς ότι είναι σύγχρονος δικός σου. Δεν τον ενδιαφέρει να δείξει μια θετική άποψη της θρησκείας αλλά με επιχειρήματα και διαλόγους φιλοσοφικούς προσπαθεί να δώσει απάντηση στα αναπάντητα ερωτήματα της θρησκείας.
Αυτό ήταν το πρώτο μου βιβλίο από τον Σαραμάγκου και σίγουρα δε θα είναι το τελευταίο. Σειρά παίρνει πιθανότατα ο Κάιν, άλλο ένα βιβλίο που καταπιάνεται με θρησκευτικό θέμα. Αυτά είχα προς το παρόν να πω, καληνύχτα, Καλό Πάσχα, και καλές αναγνώσεις!
Ο αφηγητής/ευαγγελιστής αυτού του Βιβλίου/Ευαγγελίου ξεκινά με ένα κεφάλαιο που είναι ουσιαστικά η περιγραφή μιας ξυλογραφίας του Άλμπρεχτ Ντύρερ Σταύρωση. Το αμέσως επόμενο ξεκινά με μια σκηνή στο σπίτι του Ιωσήφ του ξυλουργού και της Μαρίας, όπου ο Ιησούς είναι ακόμη αγέννητος, και απ' εδώ θα ξεκινήσει ένα ταξίδι μέχρι το τελευταίο κεφάλαιο που κλείνει ξανά με τη σκηνή της Σταύρωσης, κλείνοντας έτσι τον κύκλο της ιστορίας οριστικά.
Χριστός Παντοκράτωρ, τοιχογραφία 12ου αιώνα,
Παναγία του Άρακα, Λαγουδερά, Τρόοδος, Κύπρος
Πέρσι το Πάσχα αποφάσισα να διαβάσω την Η Καινή Διαθήκη ταυτοχρόνως με τον Τελευταίο Πειρασμό του Χριστού του Ν. Καζαντζάκη. Έτσι φέτος αποφάσισα να κρατήσω αυτό το 'έθιμο' και να συνεχίσω με άλλο ένα βιβλίο που έχει ως κύριο χαραχτήρα τον Χριστό, παρόλο που πουθενά στο βιβλίο (αν θυμάμαι καλά) δεν αναφέρεται ως Χριστός. Αναμφίβολα υπήρξαν συγκρίσεις.
Ο Ιησούς της Καινής Διαθήκης ήταν θεάνθρωπος.
Ο Ιησούς του Καζαντζάκη ήταν άνθρωπος.
Ο Ιησούς του Σαραμάγκου ήταν ανθρώπινος
Ο Σαραμάγκου, Πορτογάλος που βραβεύτηκε με το Νόμπελ Λογοτεχνίας (σε αντίθεση με τον Καζαντζάκη) ήταν άθεος και αυτό το βιβλίο είναι ύμνος προς τον άνθρωπο και οτιδήποτε μη-ανθρώπινο κατακρίνεται (Θεός, Άγγελοι, Δαίμονες).
Xριστός Παντοκράτωρ, ψηφιδωτό 13ου αιώνα, Αγία Σοφία,
Κωνσταντινούπολη, Τουρκία
Από το πρώτο κεφάλαιο ο Σαραμάγκου ξεκινά να αθωώνει ανθρώπους που στην Καινή Διαθήκη περιγράφονται σχεδόν πάντα ως κακοί
[...] ένας άντρας απομακρύνεται, [...] Κρατά στο αριστερό του χέρι ένα κανάτι και στο δεξί ένα καλάμι.
Στην άκρη του καλαμιού πρέπει να υπάρχει ένα σφουγγάρι, [...] και το κανάτι, [...] περιέχει νερό με ξίδι.
Αυτός ο άνθρωπος, [...] θα πέσει θύμα συκοφαντίας, ότι, από μοχθηρία ή χλευασμό έδωσε ξίδι στον Ιησού όταν εκείνος ζήτησε νερό, ενώ το σίγουρο είναι ότι του έδωσε από το μείγμα, ξίδι και νερό, που είναι ένα από τα καλύτερα δροσιστικά για να σβήνει τη δίψα, όπως τότε ήταν γνωστό και συνηθιζόταν. σελ. 15
Ευτυχώς, ένας Φαρισαίος που περνούσε και πρόσεξε τον ξεψυχισμένο μικρό τον λυπήθηκε, το μέλλον,
άδικο, θα επιφορτιστεί με τη δημιουργία μιας χείριστης φήμης για το λαό αυτόν, στο βάθος όμως ήταν καλοί άνθρωποι, όπως αποδείχτηκε σ' αυτή την περίπτωση. σελ. 179
Xριστός Παντοκράτωρ, ψηφιδωτό 11ου αιώνα,
Μονή Δαφνίου, Χαϊδάρι, Ελλάδα
Ξεκινάς την ανάγνωση του βιβλίου και λες, αυτό δεν ήταν μέσα στην Καινή Διαθήκη, αυτό ήταν, αυτό δεν ήταν, σαν να μαδάς μαργαρίτα. Στο τέλος αποφασίζεις ότι πρέπει να αναμένεις λιγότερες ομοιότητες σε σχέση με αυτές που είχε η Καινή Διαθήκη με το βιβλίο του Καζαντζάκη. Πολλά στιγμιότυπα που ξέρουμε από την Κ.Δ. απουσιάζουν ή είναι αλλαγμένα εδώ. Ο Ιησούς στην έρημο δεν συναντά τον διάβολο αλλά τον Θεό, ο Θεός δεν αναφωνεί Αυτός είναι ο αγαπημένος μου Υιός, αυτός είναι ο εκλεκτός μου.
κατά τη διάρκεια της Βάπτισης του Ιησού αλλά κατά τη διάρκεια της Σταύρωσής του, κάτι που περιέχει νότα χλευασμού. Δεν υπάρχουν αναστάσεις, δεν υπάρχει μεταμόρφωση, ούτε ανάληψη, ούτε μυστικός δείπνος, ούτε όρος των ελαιών. Είναι ένα βιβλίο θα έλεγα ιστορικό με νύξεις μαγικού ρεαλισμού, όσο το δυνατό λιγότερες.
Xριστός Παντοκράτωρ, ψηφιδωτό 12ου αιώνα,
Καπέλα Παλάτινα, Παλέρμο, Σικελία, Ιταλία
Στην αρχή νιώθεις ότι ο αφηγητής/ευαγγελιστής αυτού του βιβλίου/ευαγγελίου είναι σύγχρονος του Ιησού αλλά σε ανύποπτο χρόνο σχολιάζει με μοντέρνες φράσεις και λέξεις όπως εμπορικό κέντρο, Βολταίρος, Φρόυντ, αυτοκίνητα, Κρο-μανιόν κλπ και συνειδητοποιείς ότι είναι σύγχρονος δικός σου. Δεν τον ενδιαφέρει να δείξει μια θετική άποψη της θρησκείας αλλά με επιχειρήματα και διαλόγους φιλοσοφικούς προσπαθεί να δώσει απάντηση στα αναπάντητα ερωτήματα της θρησκείας.
Xριστός Παντοκράτωρ, Αγιογραφία 6ου αιώνα,
Μονή Αγίας Αικατερίνης, Όρος Σινά, Αίγυπτος
Αυτό ήταν το πρώτο μου βιβλίο από τον Σαραμάγκου και σίγουρα δε θα είναι το τελευταίο. Σειρά παίρνει πιθανότατα ο Κάιν, άλλο ένα βιβλίο που καταπιάνεται με θρησκευτικό θέμα. Αυτά είχα προς το παρόν να πω, καληνύχτα, Καλό Πάσχα, και καλές αναγνώσεις!
May 10, 2019
Philosophical question 1
If you knew that someone was going to kill all the children under three, would you tell others to save their children? Or just save your own child?
Philosophical question 2
How do you feel knowing that so many others died but you survived?
Philosophical question 3
What do you think of your father who saved you but not others?
Those are some deep questions. And if you are Jesus and your father was Joseph, you would be into some serious head scratching. Or maybe you find out that you are the son of god and all of this was foretold. Planned. The will of god.
Then you meet God and the Devil. They tell you the future. What is planned. What you need to do. What kind of deal you are getting into. What will be will always be. We just need to get the ball rolling.
Perhaps it’s all about balance? Good and bad. Life and death. Power and glory. Romans and Jews. Men and women. Dios y diablo. John the Baptist and Jesus the anointed one. Mary the virgin and Mary Magdalene la puta.
Consequences. Joseph was accidentally crucified. Jesus was purposely crucified. Jesus the shepherd; Jesus the fisher. Gather the crowds and scorned by the people.
The art of the deal. The sacrificial lamb. What’s in it for me? Two thousand years of endless people dying in the name of religion. The martyrs, the religious wars, the Inquisition (yeah, don’t forget about this?).
An awful lot to ponder. Seriously reflect. What did I just read? In the words of José Saramago, an absolutely wild read. Amen.
If you knew that someone was going to kill all the children under three, would you tell others to save their children? Or just save your own child?
Philosophical question 2
How do you feel knowing that so many others died but you survived?
Philosophical question 3
What do you think of your father who saved you but not others?
Those are some deep questions. And if you are Jesus and your father was Joseph, you would be into some serious head scratching. Or maybe you find out that you are the son of god and all of this was foretold. Planned. The will of god.
Then you meet God and the Devil. They tell you the future. What is planned. What you need to do. What kind of deal you are getting into. What will be will always be. We just need to get the ball rolling.
Perhaps it’s all about balance? Good and bad. Life and death. Power and glory. Romans and Jews. Men and women. Dios y diablo. John the Baptist and Jesus the anointed one. Mary the virgin and Mary Magdalene la puta.
Consequences. Joseph was accidentally crucified. Jesus was purposely crucified. Jesus the shepherd; Jesus the fisher. Gather the crowds and scorned by the people.
The art of the deal. The sacrificial lamb. What’s in it for me? Two thousand years of endless people dying in the name of religion. The martyrs, the religious wars, the Inquisition (yeah, don’t forget about this?).
An awful lot to ponder. Seriously reflect. What did I just read? In the words of José Saramago, an absolutely wild read. Amen.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,405 reviews