Scan barcode
daja57's review against another edition
5.0
A Portuguese priest travels to Japan as a missionary during the Shogunate. But, after an initial period in which missionaries were welcome, now Christianity is forbidden and Christians tortured and killed. Will the priest be captured and if he is what will happen to him? Apostasy or martyrdom? And, crucially, why is God silent?
The book has obvious parallels with Graham Greene's The Power and the Glory, also a story about a priest in a land where priests are forbidden, where to be a priest is a capital crime; and with Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon, a story about the interrogation of an old Communist, both of which I read fifty years ago, at school.
The prose is interesting. In some ways it is a minimalist style, recounting only the facts. There is no great melodramatic over-analysis of emotion (I read it immediately after Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter and the contrast could not have been greater). It is like the difference between a Chinese painting and a Baroque battle scene. Endo achieves his effects using a minimum of perfectly selected images: "Holding the string attached to the kite, they ran up the slope, but there was no wind and the kite fell idly to the ground." (Ch 10) On the other hand, he repeats and repeats and repeats some images and ideas as if he is hammering them into you. I found this combination of deceptive simplicity and ostinato powerful.
The form is also interesting. After a prologue, the first four chapters are told in the form of letters from the priest; from chapter five the story becomes a straightforward first person narrative. There are two epilogues: one in the form of notes made by a Dutch merchant, the other extracts from a Japanese prison log.
This is a lyrical meditation on the difficulties surrounding the idea of a God of love in a hostile environment. Brilliant.
The book has obvious parallels with Graham Greene's The Power and the Glory, also a story about a priest in a land where priests are forbidden, where to be a priest is a capital crime; and with Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon, a story about the interrogation of an old Communist, both of which I read fifty years ago, at school.
The prose is interesting. In some ways it is a minimalist style, recounting only the facts. There is no great melodramatic over-analysis of emotion (I read it immediately after Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter and the contrast could not have been greater). It is like the difference between a Chinese painting and a Baroque battle scene. Endo achieves his effects using a minimum of perfectly selected images: "Holding the string attached to the kite, they ran up the slope, but there was no wind and the kite fell idly to the ground." (Ch 10) On the other hand, he repeats and repeats and repeats some images and ideas as if he is hammering them into you. I found this combination of deceptive simplicity and ostinato powerful.
The form is also interesting. After a prologue, the first four chapters are told in the form of letters from the priest; from chapter five the story becomes a straightforward first person narrative. There are two epilogues: one in the form of notes made by a Dutch merchant, the other extracts from a Japanese prison log.
This is a lyrical meditation on the difficulties surrounding the idea of a God of love in a hostile environment. Brilliant.
oxnard_montalvo's review against another edition
A meditative exploration of maintaining faith in foundation crumbling circumstances. It meanders while staying evenly paced, a sense of ominous reckoning overhanging everything. Also present, the banality of evil, and perhaps the misguided good— how else could you call it— the misintentioned good maybe.
Very multilayered. The outward show of faith vs the inward belief. How religions are malleable in different environments. Thoughtful and nuanced.
Very multilayered. The outward show of faith vs the inward belief. How religions are malleable in different environments. Thoughtful and nuanced.
rr_author's review against another edition
I’m so conflicted about this book! It was certainly very interesting, well written, and brought up some thought-provoking subjects.
Namely:
1. Rodrigues struggling with his motive for martyrdom, after seeing it was not what he had learned. The deaths were painful, and for everyone else, life went on the martyr seemingly forgotten.
“And yet, am I looking for the true, hidden martyrdom or just for a glorious death ? Is it that I want to be honoured,to be prayed to, to be called a saint saint?”
I thought this was an excellently framed question, and a topic that is worth meditating on.
2. Self sufficiency was something Rodrigues struggled with. He thought himself better than everyone else, and held himself to a higher standard. There was a hint of prejudice in his inner monologue. Because the Japanese were poor and foreign to him, he often thought they they were weaker and less able to understand. In the end, many of them had more courage than him.
4. There’s a moment where Rodrigues is being interrogated, and is told that Japan only needs one religion. Rodrigues agrees, and says it should be Catholicism. This really struck me, because that answer made me think there was really not a great difference between the two. If circumstances were switched, would the priests be the persecutors?
5. I am someone who firmly believes that some principles depend on situations. For example, lying is NOT wrong if it is saving a life.
The whole issue of whether they should step on the crucifix, was very thought provoking. This book did a great job of questioning and musing about that.
SPOILERS:
However, that being said, I firmly disagree with Rodrigues final decision. If he had stepped on the crucifix, saved the Christian’s lives, then either made an escape or retracted his act it would have been different.
Rodrigues claims he did not renounce his faith. At the same time in my mind it was left vague as to whether the “apostatized” to save himself or others.
But the fact that he began working with the government, identifying objects, which I assume led to arrests is inexcusable in my opinion. That was to save his own life, not others lives. Although he did plead for mercy for them, it was in vain. Fierra writing a book on why Christianity was bad for Japan was also inexcusable in my mind. For both of them to live the rest of their lives publicly denying Christ was wrong.
Two other points I disagreed with.
1. There was some question as to whether the Japanese could not properly become Christian, because they merged their understanding with their old religion. An interesting point, but I believes even it was true Christ would’ve winked at their ignorance.
2. The emphases on weakness was good. However the idea that some people are just weak, and can’t be changed, I disagree with. Bible martyrs (like Paul) were weak, but in the end, God gave them strength outside of themselves. Similar to how Rodrigues sometimes felt peace that he didn’t understand.
Those are my thoughts! I’m not sure how to rate this book... it was well written, and I couldn’t put it down. Do I take away points for disagreeing with the character’s decision?
Namely:
1. Rodrigues struggling with his motive for martyrdom, after seeing it was not what he had learned. The deaths were painful, and for everyone else, life went on the martyr seemingly forgotten.
“And yet, am I looking for the true, hidden martyrdom or just for a glorious death ? Is it that I want to be honoured,to be prayed to, to be called a saint saint?”
I thought this was an excellently framed question, and a topic that is worth meditating on.
2. Self sufficiency was something Rodrigues struggled with. He thought himself better than everyone else, and held himself to a higher standard. There was a hint of prejudice in his inner monologue. Because the Japanese were poor and foreign to him, he often thought they they were weaker and less able to understand. In the end, many of them had more courage than him.
4. There’s a moment where Rodrigues is being interrogated, and is told that Japan only needs one religion. Rodrigues agrees, and says it should be Catholicism. This really struck me, because that answer made me think there was really not a great difference between the two. If circumstances were switched, would the priests be the persecutors?
5. I am someone who firmly believes that some principles depend on situations. For example, lying is NOT wrong if it is saving a life.
The whole issue of whether they should step on the crucifix, was very thought provoking. This book did a great job of questioning and musing about that.
SPOILERS:
However, that being said, I firmly disagree with Rodrigues final decision. If he had stepped on the crucifix, saved the Christian’s lives, then either made an escape or retracted his act it would have been different.
Rodrigues claims he did not renounce his faith. At the same time in my mind it was left vague as to whether the “apostatized” to save himself or others.
But the fact that he began working with the government, identifying objects, which I assume led to arrests is inexcusable in my opinion. That was to save his own life, not others lives. Although he did plead for mercy for them, it was in vain. Fierra writing a book on why Christianity was bad for Japan was also inexcusable in my mind. For both of them to live the rest of their lives publicly denying Christ was wrong.
Two other points I disagreed with.
1. There was some question as to whether the Japanese could not properly become Christian, because they merged their understanding with their old religion. An interesting point, but I believes even it was true Christ would’ve winked at their ignorance.
2. The emphases on weakness was good. However the idea that some people are just weak, and can’t be changed, I disagree with. Bible martyrs (like Paul) were weak, but in the end, God gave them strength outside of themselves. Similar to how Rodrigues sometimes felt peace that he didn’t understand.
Those are my thoughts! I’m not sure how to rate this book... it was well written, and I couldn’t put it down. Do I take away points for disagreeing with the character’s decision?
emeraldgarnet's review against another edition
4.0
Endō writes in an easy style that takes the reader back to seventeenth century Japan. I was not surprised by the ending.
abhanana's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
mitskacir's review against another edition
3.0
Probably would give this 3.5 stars if possible. Silence is the story of a Portuguese missionary who goes to Japan to support persecuted Japanese Christians, and to learn of the fate of his mentor, who is rumored to have apostatized under the torture he underwent from the Japanese government. Not very much happens in this book - it is really a story of the priest's internal conflict of faith. He grapples with what it means to be a martyr, whether Christianity is a universal truth that can transcend nationality and culture, and whether cowardly, ugly, suffering Christians could have been devout and beautiful in more privileged circumstances. ~~Very minor spoilers ~~ At the end of the book, the priest is faced with an ultimatum - prove his faith by staying true to his religious convictions and refusing to apostatize, or exemplify the compassion of Jesus by trampling on the image of Jesus in order to save Japanese Christians from torture and death. Overall, an interesting topic that I knew little about, but I did not sympathize much with the priest and his mission until he reached his final ultimatum and it's consequences, which was more a condemnation of the Church as an institution than of the Christian religion and one's faith in God.
rickyribas's review against another edition
4.25
An unexpected retelling of the Passion of Christ, and a deep commentary on the true meaning of faith. Not much else to say. There’s a reason Endō is considered one of Japan’s greatest novelists.
hanyaya's review against another edition
challenging
dark
reflective
medium-paced
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder
Moderate: Torture
amblygon_writes's review
3.0
I probably need to re-read this. I bought this on my first trip to Japan (because I was looking for something a bit like James Clavell's Shogun and this reminded me of it), but I struggled to understand it. It's quite simple on the surface, but probably needs more time and thought to tackle properly.
_nijinska's review against another edition
3.0
Intensa e densa leitura que permite muitos questionamentos até aos que não são cristãos ou religiosos. O que é ser forte ou fraco? Felizmente muitos de nós não tivemos que ser colocados à prova...
Achei interessante as constantes referências ao rosto, tanto de Jesus como dos companheiros do protagonista. Rostos (masculinos) que sofrem, que se resignar, que são alterados... Quase sensuais. O rosto de um homem que levou este missionário tão longe.
Apostatizar através do mero calque do 'fumie' será uma mera formalidade? Se a fé está no coração, Deus deve poder vê-la e não ligar às questões formais a que os seus fiéis foram levados por tortura. Mas se um crê com muita força em algo fundamental para a sua existência, seja uma crença religiosa ou não, e só a manter no coração não agindo de acordo com ela nos momentos cruciais, será que é uma verdadeira crença? Será que há diferença entre crenças religiosas e outros tipos de crença?
Achei interessante as constantes referências ao rosto, tanto de Jesus como dos companheiros do protagonista. Rostos (masculinos) que sofrem, que se resignar, que são alterados... Quase sensuais. O rosto de um homem que levou este missionário tão longe.
Apostatizar através do mero calque do 'fumie' será uma mera formalidade? Se a fé está no coração, Deus deve poder vê-la e não ligar às questões formais a que os seus fiéis foram levados por tortura. Mas se um crê com muita força em algo fundamental para a sua existência, seja uma crença religiosa ou não, e só a manter no coração não agindo de acordo com ela nos momentos cruciais, será que é uma verdadeira crença? Será que há diferença entre crenças religiosas e outros tipos de crença?