Introduction

[John]

Winner of the 1961 Hugo Award for Best Novel and widely considered one of the most accomplished, powerful, and enduring classics of modern speculative fiction, Walter M. Miller, Jr.'s A Canticle for Leibowitz is a true landmark of twentieth-century literature—a chilling and still provocative look at a post-apocalyptic future.

In a nightmarish ruined world slowly awakening to the light after sleeping in darkness, the infant rediscoveries of science are secretly nourished by cloistered monks dedicated to the study and preservation of the relics and writings of the blessed Saint Isaac Leibowitz. From here the story spans centuries of ignorance, violence, and barbarism, viewing through a sharp, satirical eye the relentless progression of a human race damned by its inherent humanness to recelebrate its grand foibles and repeat its grievous mistakes. Seriously funny, stunning, and tragic, eternally fresh, imaginative, and altogether remarkable, A Canticle for Leibowitz retains its ability to enthrall and amaze. It is now, as it always has been, a masterpiece.

Discussion questions are from LitLovers.

As mentioned elsewhere, I won't be able to read this until later in the month, but will join the discussion as soon as possible.

Enjoy, and God Bless

[Manuel]

I am not reading the book now, I have read it six times before (five in English, one in its Spanish translation) and don't need to recall it :-) In fact, this is, for me, the best science fiction novel I have ever read.

[Manuel]

By the way, John, there is a typo in the title of the book in this discussion, it is no "Liebowitz," but "Leibowitz."

[Fonch]

But have you started with the book :-(?. II will have to cancel my reading of "Wadzek" and i start to read "Canticle for Leibowitz".

[John]

Manuel wrote: "By the way, John, there is a typo in the title of the book in this discussion, it is no "Liebowitz," but "Leibowitz.""

Thank you - fixed.

[Jill]

Finally finished the book. Some random comments/questions that don't fit into any of the questions given. (Usually we have one with space to record things that come up as we're reading.)

End of Fiat Lux, curious that the cavalry officer still bent on killing wants a priest.

There are many humorous tidbits, like the deity of daily shaving, the abbot frustrated with the computer/translating device, a priest who doesn't do what you want becoming an "occasion of sin."

I'm curious whether the Order's archives are only the old documents or whether they've continued to add writings about newer discoveries.

Joshua's dream with the phrases that sort themselves out into the Immaculate Conception was probably a lot like what St. Bernadette experienced, not understanding the Virgin's words.

Once there's war, it doesn't matter at all who started it! As I say to quarreling children, what matters is who's going to end it.

I wondered why Joshua prayed about his vocation in the hall instead of before the Blessed Sacrament.

Who is "Rachel"? Should she be baptized? We baptize Siamese twins as two different individuals, but when does something become too monstrous/inhuman. Later, she assumes a different identity as an innocent Eve ministering to the abbot. I find it all very strange.

But I think Mrs. Grales is right that sometimes we have to forgive God or at least what we perceive God to have done or permitted.

Is "Old Bone" the skull? Brother Francis? A nice way to pull the three parts of the novel together.

[Manuel]

Jill wrote: "Finally finished the book. Some random comments/questions that don't fit into any of the questions given...

End of Fiat Lux, curious that the cavalry officer still bent on killing wants a priest"

Fiat Lux corresponds to our 16th century. At that time, war was considered a lawful human activity, most soldiers were good Christians and they would have wanted priest assistance at the point of death.

Who is "Rachel"? Should she be baptized? We baptize Siamese twins as two different individuals, but when does something become too monstrous/inhuman. Later, she assumes a different identity as an innocent Eve ministering to the abbot. I find it all very strange.

In fact, this is the point in the novel I liked less. As to your point about baptism, two heads should clearly be considered as two different individuals, whatever the amount of body shared by the two heads. The reason why Rachel's head was not baptised before, was that she appeared to be dead (or at least totally unconscious). But I think she should have been baptised at least conditionally.

[Fonch]

Manuel wrote: "Jill wrote: "Finally finished the book. Some random comments/questions that don't fit into any of the questions given...

End of Fiat Lux, curious that the cavalry officer still bent on killing wa..."
Even Jesus Christ was baptised. If Jesus Christ that he has a divine nature (he has a human nature also) follows this traditation with more reason should follow the other head :-).

[Manuel]

Jill wrote: "Is "Old Bone" the skull? Brother Francis? A nice way to pull the three parts of the novel together."

Yes, "Old Bone" is supposed to be the skull of Brother Francis, whose skeleton had been transferred to his own abbey, but his identity had been forgotten with the centuries. It even has a piece of the arrow protruding from the wound.

[Manuel]

In the context of our discussion of this book by Walter M. Miller Jr., I'd like to recommend his novella "Dark benediction", which is also very good (and Catholic). I commented it in a post in my popular science blog:
http://populscience.blogspot.com/2015...

[Fonch]

Manuel wrote: "In the context of our discussion of this book by Walter M. Miller Jr., I'd like to recommend his novella "Dark benediction", which is also very good (and Catholic). I commented it in a post in my p..."

It will cost to get it. But i look a very good idea.