Most post-modernist scholars, especially critical scholars, have probably already read The Open Work. It is considered a seminal work. Eco advances the theory that literary works necessarily leave much of the details of a story to the reader. Taking Moby Dick as an example, he notes that the book never mentions that the sailors on the Pequod have two legs. It is the work of the reader to reach such a conclusion based on the context of the novel. While Captain Ahab is mentioned as having only one leg, Melville never says which one, again leaving to the reader to fill in the details. In this sense, literature is "parasitic," according to Eco, because it requires the reader to fill in many of the details of a given story.

This corresponds with other post-modernists who claim that meaning resides in the receiver of a text. However, Eco establishes his own ground in claiming that authors can limit the reader's options for interpretation. For Eco, while much meaning resides in the interpretation of a text, the symbols employed by an author also have some meaning that a reasonable interpreter should understand. The "open work" then, is not an absolute condition. Some works will be more open than others.

While this may sound like a repudiation of many post-modernists (and it is), readers should rember that it was originally published quite some time ago. At the time, it was considered revolutionary. It stands today as a still-important work in the field of semiotics and critical theory. I gave it four stars not because it isn't excellent (it is) or well-written (it is, and far easier to read than, say, Foucault) but because it is no longer cutting edge.

After i read this book i could draw so much paralleles, concise ones, between the artists that i liked that i had never realised before that this was the real appeal to me in reading this book. I could see i line crossing between James Joyce, Bretch, Kubrick and Kafka. And all the modernism movement really took place in my mind. And it's a easy-reading book, beside the parts about semiology, wich are necessary to make some points clear. The two final parts of the book, about the zen mania of the 50's and the other about Marx, don't seem to be at the center of matter but are also good reading. I think anybody interested in arts should look at this book.

As a tipical Eco Book , it has a lot of information but it is stilla good book . It is needed patient and strong focusing . It is no t a typical novel ....

What Calabrese terms as neo-baroque culture or aesthetics is what other authors define as postmodern. This is a labeling problem and it is not important. Calabrese, who belongs to the semiology school of Umberto Eco, and is his fellow colleague at the University of Bologna, goes much further than that. Mostly using theories from the field of semiology, he produces a very clever, interesting and systematic analysis of contemporary culture, based on the study of diverse cultural productions, such as films, novels, TV series, art and scientific theories. He asks, for example: "What do Alien, Bonanza, contemporary design, The Name of the Rose, fractal geometry and chaos theories have in common?". This seems an extremely wide range of subjects to tackle in a single book. But they all have one thing in common: they are cultural products, and Calabrese approaches them with his semiotic tools, reading them all as texts that can be structurally interpreted. His aim is to discover and describe a specific character and the main components underlying those products (that of the neo-baroque), which can be identified, structurally, in any manifestation of culture, be it a film, a book, a video game or a scientific theory. The analysis that results is very well articulated, original and insightful. He provides a very interesting set of reflections on the semiological and sociological characteristics of culture, taste and percepcion in contemporary society. The most valuable chapters of the book, in my opinion, are those wihch deal with the analysis of film (Alien, ET, Blade Runner, Star Wars), TV series (Bonanza, Dallas) and books (The Name of the Rose). Coming from the social sciences, it is evident that mass media and art are what Calabrese is most acquainted with. The chapters in which he studies scientific theories from mathematics, geometry of physics are somewhat weaker. However, emphasis is put in the former subjects and the result is, as I have said, an articulated theory of the neo-baroque, which is original and cleverly justified with Calabrese's skill in semiotic analysis. I would say that this book is a bit complex, so it is easier to read if you have some knowledge of semiology or sociology, or some experience in reading social science or art theory. Calabrese is as good as Frederic Jameson or Paul Virilio in interpreting contemporary culture.

A slim but informative introduction to Umberto Eco's work in philology and semiotics, Gary Radford's "On Eco" belongs to the Wadsworth Philosopher Series. Prefaced by Eco's somewhat ironic quote "I myself like easy books that put me to sleep immediately," the work gets underway with a cheerful introduction of itself as a self-aware text, suggesting to its reader that any notions of authorship or Gary Radford be tossed out the window. All you have in front of you is, well, a text; and one that will hopefully assist in the creation of its own Model Reader.

"On Eco" proceeds in this playful spirit, introducing Eco's work in semiotics, outlining his theories of interpretation, and finally relating these ideas to his first two novels. Intended for the general reader, the book is written in a refreshingly immediate style, virtually twinkling with wry humor and peppered with charmingly eclectic examples. Radford takes an obvious delight in selecting offbeat illustrations for Eco's theories, and his erudition ranges from Monty Python and Elvis Costello to Borges and Schopenhauer. Not above tweaking the nose of his subject, Umberto Eco quickly becomes the primary target of his own theories and obsessions - after finding his name emptied of content and cast as an "expression unit," the Professor is, among other things, deconstructed out of existence, semiotically "blown up," and placed in a hypothetical mystery novel as the killer's next victim.

Happily, amidst the humor and playfulness, Radford stays focused on his topic with admirable dexterity, covering the major elements of Eco's semiotics: expression units and content units, Model Authors and Model Readers, textual topics and inferential walks, closed and open texts, and theories of sign production. Radford is very careful to keep pace with his Model Reader, developing each topic from the previous one, backing theory with concrete examples, and patiently cross-connecting his points from chapter to chapter. While at times one desires more depth, the text provides many original quotes from Eco's works, an implicit invitation to further study the topic at its source.

The penultimate chapter, "Watching the Detectives," touches upon the semiotic nature of detective stories. Focusing on "The Name of the Rose" and "Foucault's Pendulum," Radford discusses the way each novel examines the quest for meaning, the former using semiotics to posit a potentially useful truth, the latter revealing what happens when meaning is consistently deferred and all truths are held equal.

"On Eco" ends as it began, with a brief discussion of itself as a text, one that will inevitably change the very nature of the subject it purports to study, and one that requires a reader to complete its meaning. With this in mind, "On Eco" admits that, like all books, it must be "incomplete and potentially endless."

A concise and often charming book, I recommend "On Eco" to any fan of Umberto Eco the novelist who wants to know more about Umberto Eco the professor.

This was the first book by Eco that I've ever read. I was intrigued by the blurb on the back cover: "Eco argues that tolerance is today's ultimate value...Eco reflects on a question underlying all the essays in the book: What does it mean to be moral or ethical when one doesn't believe in God?"

Each of the five essays in this book deals with a discrete theme: pacifism in the abstract, ethics without God, how the media's choice of news stories is a whole spin in itself, how Americans blur diverse ideologies into a single "Fascism," and how tolerance is needed as Europe becomes increasingly multiracial. Since I had bought the book to learn about Eco's moral theory, I was most interested in the first, second, and fifth essays. The other two seemed misplaced. I had never previously given thought to their themes, and so, while they were eye-opening, I wasn't ready to travel with Eco into the deep details of it (such as the fourteen characteristics of Fascism in the popular consciousness). On the other hand, I wished he had gone further into depth in the essays that dealt with peace, morality, and tolerance.

McEwen's translation is elegant, and every now and then a passage spoke to me enough that I wrote it down or, in one case, emailed the quotation to a friend who I thought would be interested. ....

These are five essays previously written by Eco for various publications. Most of them are of interest to those who study European politics and cultural life. If you are not interested in the Italian press or post WWII Facism in Europe and are not familiar with some of the well known players, parts of these essays will make no sense to you.

However, the first essay, "Reflections on War," is worth the price. This essay was written about the first "gulf" war in Kuwait. Reading in now in a post-Iraq war frame is even more interesting. Eco predicts the neo-conservative view that active imposition of democracy by the developed nations will begin to occur in the middle east and elsewhere and he gives some brillant insight into this thinking.

The other essays have thoughts worth reading even if the topics are not your cup of tea. Like all of Eco's work, this is highly readable and not at all obtuse.

While the book is on the pricey side, it contains some extremely relevant thought pieces for our world today.

The essays are meant to provoke further thinking on the subjects rather than provide any pat answers.

The essays on immigration and intolerance and the characteristics of fascism are particularly worth reading.

People trying to artsy about their memories of Vespa's, it's a non-electric yawn machine...pass it by.

Yes, boring guy is right. If you've never been on a real vespa, or is you've only driven one on the freeway in Houston, this may be boring, but anyone who's ever taken to the road on a proper bike will love the photos alone. It chronicals a lifestyle and trying to advertise for something that everyone's already doing is easy. Indispensibly cool when trying to explain to people what you ride.

I don't know what that other review is all about. If you own a vespa you'll love this. TONS of old ads, calendars, factory shots etc give a great overview of the vespa legend.

OK, let me say here that I have a great deal of regard for Eco's writings - his command of language (kudos goes to his translator as well), his incisive mind, his intricate knowledge and interpretation of history present a fresh focus to all of his writings. Eco is undoubtedly one of the most literate and broadly knowledgable writers alive.

This being said, "The Island of the Day Before" does not present a compelling plot or likeable protagonist, as his other two novels have. Roberto rather reminded me of an admixture of Dickens' Pip and Goethe's Young Werther, and I had difficulty caring too much whether or not he met his objectives.

However, the other aspects of the novel were completely engrossing - Eco's research into the longitude problem, the wealth of mythology surrounding the International Date Line, the views held from the trenches of feudal conflict - Eco is still clearly able to see life through the proper historical lens. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Eco has refined his ability to be playful with his writings - dedicating an entire chapter to myths and legends surrounding the dove, for instance. I eagerly look forward to Eco's next work.

As always, Eco does a great job of walking the reader down the rosy path of dead-ends, near-misses, and finally, enlightenment. Things are never as they seem. At first I thought that some of the tales (for example, wounding animals to tell time!) were far-fetched. However, as usual, Eco tells these tales with a purpose, and indeed, ladens them with truth. The story weaves in and out of thoughts, times and events, in such a way to make one understand the Baroque period, as well as the human mind. This is not just a tale about how to find longitude, or how to put together poetry, or how to love, or of the Baroque period, but all of these things woven into a fine tapestry of tale. For all who have appreciated Eco in _The Name of the Rose_ or _Foucault's Pendulum_, you will find this tale equally intriguing and fulfilling.

This book was wonderful! Eco is a genius; he is a marvelous medievalist, wonderfully knowledgable in historical, philosophical, and theological matters of all kinds, and a brilliant novelist. The only reason I can see for a person to dislike this book (or any others that Eco has written) would be a short attention span or absolute ignorance of history and philosophy. These books are not for those who read Michael Crichton or Danielle Steele -- they are for readers who desire complicated characters, philosophy, beautiful imagery and a sense of a certain time and place over pointless action. I am rather disgusted with reviews that condemn this book for its supposed lack of "plot." Literature is not merely about action and events, and it is sad that many people have missed the point. I would decidedly recommend this book to those who have even a minimal degree of intelligence. It is brilliant.

Do you know what Christopher Columbus was trying to prove with his historic ocean voyage, and why the church elders insisted it couldn't be done? Eco asks this question in the first essay of this book, "The Force of Falsity", and you may be surprised by the answer. Throughout, Eco gives you that delightful taste of history that he's known for, while asking provocative questions about the philosophy of language and even the nature and value of truth itself.

Language is definitely the focus of this book, but each essay is more of an examination than a thesis, and the material is not as heavy as Eco's essays about language often are. On the other hand it is not as light and playful as, for example, "Misreadings" (also a worthy read). It's a casual, engaging read with some substance to it, and well worth reading if you like to think.

Ezra Pound notes in ABC of Reading: "One definition of beauty is aptness to purpose. Whether it is a good definition or not, you can readily see that a good deal of BAD criticism has been written by men who assume that an author is trying to do what he is NOT trying to do."

What an indictment of the many reviews here that rest on big, declarative assumptions about Eco and/or his body of work. The writers of these reviews then use these assumptions to make further assumptions about me, John Q. Averagereader. Dangerous stuff.

I know this may be revolutionary, but, how about a review of the book for what it is?

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

Why not accept this conjecture as an invitation to thought, debate? It seems to be offered as such.

Now, let's think. If you have just been dropped off into a twilight zone of hard sayings and real thought, how much sense does it make to offer damning patronage such as :

"For certain it is well written and charming, after all. But as for any conclusions, well, Eco doesn't draw them".

(As misguided as this comment is, woe to anyone who seeks conclusions in a twilight zone.)

Or, how much sense does it make to take the invitation to thought so lightly with the arrogant suggestion to add Serendipities to your collection only if "you are a big fan of Eco in all his genres, and thus have read and made sense of a good deal of his serious scholarly work "

(Critical thinking be damned??? Long Live Eco???)

Mr. Eco has made a compelling argument on the very real consequences of our belief in and manufacture of folly. There are many polemic examples in the book. Here's one that's not in the book but fits well for illustration: Did not the survival of US slavery depend in large part upon convincing fair-skinned masses of the sub-human status of the Negro? This thought did not seem stupid in its day (or today even??). Drop this topic into the "Force of Falsity" essay and see how a great nation was built -- by real people chained to powerful folly.

In cases like these, Mr. Eco invites us to think with him and reconsider history. I would take that invitation any day from a man whom so many admire as such a great thinker. I imagine that Mr. Eco, too, would prefer your honest debate on the work at hand over your circumscribed ideas on him as a great intellectual. This man seems to need neither your real flowers nor your faint praise. Intellectual integrity would probably be most welcome, though.

Serendipites is a collection of five essays where Eco is debating questions that arose from his preceding text - The search for the Perfect Language. His style here is to debate several intrinsic problems in history that are tied to language and how human reaction to them has shaped our thinking. The essays neither seek to advise or educate, only to debate without answer, other than to nudge the reader towards areas that are yet open to answers and you leave the five with a multitude of thoughts, conjectures.
The first essay - The Force of Falsity - gives rise to that scholarly need to provide polarity. Eco states that if there be a force of Truth, then surely, there must be an opposite force. He acknowledges the danger for understanding of falsity requires a kernel of truth to exist and that the real discourse is, rather, to prove that which claims authenticity, is in reality, that. The essay provides many canonical examples of where a belief which is incorrect - such as Ptolemy, Columbus, the Donation of Constantine and others - has led to a truth. Simply put, experience and thus knowledge, is often only obtained by theorizing and then practical trial and error. The driving force is merely proof of curiosity. Eco proves that serendipity is perhaps a separate force in itself but it is no great surprise because, without absolute knowledge, enlightenment must follow a path of conjecture and proof.
The second essay - Languages in Paradise - of the five has the greatest capacity for disagreement. Eco opens by stating that Adam was the Nomothete yet claims that his use of the name Eve "is evident that we are dealing with names that are not arbitrary". This effectively contradicts the concept that Adam was nomothete, as a name-giver ascribes name first and meaning is a resultant. Either Adam was nomothete or, if he was not, then the names he gave were intrinsically correct. They cannot be both. A further question arose in that perhaps we are newly attempting to reach a primal language rather than return to one - to create, if you wish, a nomothete when we have a single universal language. There is a further problem with Eco's usage of Dante's statement that: "only a man is able to speak". You only have to point to modern studies of Dolphins to realise that speech in whatever form communication may take, is not unique to man. Indeed, communication is not limited to the oral sense, but also encompasses the other four senses, at the very least. The bulk of the essay is given over to Dante's attempt to take the vernacular and compose the perfect language but there is some intense debate over his use of four words and variants thereof which fundamentally alter the meaning of his philosophy. You could argue that if Dante's meaning is so obscure then he can hardly be using a perfect language. Eco proceeds to analyse Dante's search to create the perfect language, to become a linguistic Adam. He comments on Dante's apparent reversal of theory of the perfection of Hebrew by Adam and his potential connections to Abulufia who espoused that each letter already possessed meaning.
The third essay - From Marco Polo to Leibiniz - speaks of the five possiblities resulting from cultural meetings, though the predominant would seem to be acculturation and uses Marco Polo to demonstrate that naming conventions are based on a cognitive understanding. He briefly touches on the development of phonograms (hieroglyphs the example - though there are more detailed books out there on the matter) and proceeds to the reconciliation of the antiquity of Chinese language with that of Hebrew, discussing at length Kirscher's work on such a reconciliation. Liebniz's later efforts on searching for such a utopian language highlights, according to Eco, where understanding attempts to fit the unknown to a pre-guessed condition. It is searching for similarities with the known, rather than researching the differences.
The fourth essay - The Language of the Austral Land - begins by examining how we have tried to find the perfect language and how we have developed our existing. The usual theory was that experience dictated language. Then this was reversed to suggest that language dictated our experiences which does tie in with the concept of Adam as nomothete. Eco spends considerable time contemplating the Foigny Austral land utopia whose communication is designed to provide philosophers as everything is based on the elements. There is a very detailed technical discussion on Foigny and Lull's and Wilkin's additions and development of such a priori philosophical language and commentary on Descartes' criticisms of it. Ultimately, we see that the attempt to create such perfect languages results in an understanding of how linguistic imperfection can create some our greatest literary works.
The fifth essay - The Linguistics of Joseph De Maistre - is concerned with mimologism and achieving a recognition of the decscent of language. Theories that each language is able to rectify its own inconsistences reflects back a primal source. As such Eco shows the four theses of how languages achieve this development and Maistre's conclusion that in order to be able to reason one must accept a linked network of the development of language and its associated ideals.
Serendipities is Eco at his semiotic best and, whilst he espouses it to be a footnote or appendix to 'The Search for the Perfect Language', it is much more than that. Highly recommended.

We purchased this book for our son whose reading material is at the 4 to 8 yrs level.

This is a picture book & the story is about three astronauts (one from USA, one from China & one from Russia) who find themselves together in a situation where they learn to overlook their differences & learn to work together.

Our only disappointment with this book is the symbolic representations (illustrations) used to depict the three astronauts. Our son was expecting to see the astronauts depicted as people. The astronauts are represented by three pieces of paper - the American is a piece of chewing gum paper, the Russian & Chinese are represented by pieces of paper with Russian & Chinese script. While I can see merit in the concept, I really do think this level of comprehension is beyound that of a child.

Having been a staunch Eco fan for quite some time, I stumbled across this book and its companion, "The Bomb and the General" quite by accident in a book search. Of course, I purchased both books, ostensibly for my two children, but secretly they were for me. I would give this book a higher rating if I was reviewing it solely for an adult audience.

The collage artwork is charming, and the text has the universality of a fable. However Eco never indulges in sentimentality when dealing with the serious subject matter of human intolerance and the need for a global consciousness (heavy stuff!) Children will enjoy the tale - perhaps the illustrations are not glitzy enough for today's market, but their simplicity enhances the mythic quality of the writing.

Hopefully, this book will trigger some indepth discussion between children and their carers about human nature. An excellent eco-friendly book for ALL the family!

Obviamente no es un libro para cualquier gente de un humor cualquiera. Sin embargo tampoco es totalmente diseñado para un intelectual consumado. El libro viene a ser una nueva muestra del enorme talento y conocimientos de Eco. Amé el analisis que hace sobre el "comic" y sobre el mito de Superman. Leer a este intelectual me ha motivado a estudiar a traves de la lectura, me ha dado herramientas y me he vuelto mas critico.