The Name of the Rose

Jean-Jacques Annaud paints the portrait of a Middle Ages steeped in the stereotypical (but not terribly authentic) gloom and filth that remain prevalent in our collective imagination of that dark era to this day.

That aside, as a purely entertaining mystery-thriller, Annaud’s film is a rousing success, both from a visual perspective (Tonino Delli Colli’s magnificent cinematography rich in warm tones, Dante Ferretti’s painstakingly accurate production design, the atmospheric interiors of Eberbach Abbey, etc.) as well as on the narrative front. A story filled with shadowy foreboding and horrific crimes pulls the spectator in almost from the very first frame, thanks to skillful pacing and a healthy dose of suspense.

In this atmosphere laden with superstition and metaphysical angst, William of Baskerville’s reassuring rationalism is the sole beacon of light. The superb Sean Connery plays the part with the right mix of acumen and irony: half philosopher and half scientist (following in the footsteps of Roger Bacon, and, generally, the Oxford Franciscan school), thirsty for knowledge and a noble connoisseur of the intellect (“We must not allow ourselves to be influenced by irrational rumors of the Antichrist. Let us instead exercise our brains and try to solve this tantalizing conundrum“). A sort of medieval Sherlock Holmes, he “enjoys” unraveling the tangled mystery through methodical work (systematically gathering clues, sifting through hypotheses, coming to measured conclusions) and putting his faith in the solidity of Aristotelian logic.

Bringing a story flowing from Umberto Eco’s pen to the big screen is certainly an ambitious endeavor. There’s always a strong urge to compare a film to its literary source, and in this case, it’s evident from the outset that the cultured philosophical and cultural framework that represented the heart and soul (as well as the most interesting aspect) of the over 500-page novel was inevitably stripped away. The resulting two-hour film represents an unavoidable impoverishment of the historical-conceptual dimension. First, numerous passages from the book were omitted or barely touched on (one example is the scant time devoted to the debate between the Franciscans and papal delegates regarding Christ’s poverty, a matter which, as a matter of historical record, culminated in a clash between the Avignon Pope John XXII and Michael of Cesena).

Beyond that, a series of distortions were introduced that are particularly hard to digest. Without a doubt, the biggest offender in this regard is the blatantly crowd-pleasing expedient of saving the peasant girl from being burned at the stake, and then turning her into the “raison d’être” for the film’s title (“She was the only earthly love of my life, yet I never knew nor ever learned her name“). In fact, although the rose was often used to symbolize female sexuality in allegorical Medieval literature (the well-known “Le Roman de la Rose”, circa 1230-80, for example), Eco tends to imbue the rose with much more subtle meanings (see the “trivia” section).

Honestly, all things considered, these choices are completely understandable, geared as they are towards making the finished product palatable to a mainstream public. Even so, in light of the overall quality of that finished product, we’re left with some regret for what could have been if only the creative minds had been a bit more daring when it came to the subject matter.