Talk:Umberto Eco

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Old post[edit]

The article's current reference to "hypertextuality" links to the article on hypertext, which does not mention the postmodern literary concept of "hypertextuality".

Seems strange, yes. I linked to hypertextuality instead. I don't know the concept though, but if you do, please create the article and explain! Thanks. ✏ Sverdrup 13:50, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I suggest removing that bit. IMO this article should be about his life, works, etc, but should refrain from detailed literary criticism. The paragraph referring to 'hypertextuality' means nothing to anyone but a specialist. johnsemlak 8:35 28 Febrary 2006 (UTC)


I read in some Italian site comments on his political articles (on 9/11?). The commenters thought him a pedant showing off his culture but giving no solutions. Is that an extended opinion?

Yes, it definitely is. Fleurbutterfly 20:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

"Showing off" is a subjective phrase that reflects a personal judgment that may have no relation to fact or reality.Lestrade (talk) 18:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

Eco has read many books. His thoughts, most likely, involve the thoughts of the many authors that he has read. If he quotes those authors, then he is merely expressing his thoughts. Only people who are less well-read would think of him as being showy or pedantic. They are envious because they have spent their time doing other things instead of reading. That is common in today’s culture. (talk) 03:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)Lestrade

Opening sentence[edit]

Eco is a "novelist and philosopher, best known for his novels and essays." That's like saying he's a piano player known for playing the piano, it's ridiculous. Shouldn't the opening be a paragraph, including brief highlights of his life, work (Name of the Rose and Foucault's Pendulum pop to mind) and such, instead of saying he's a novelist who (gasp) writes novels? LeoDV 21:30, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Eco a freemason? Even if he is (sources?), it definitely shouldn't come before medievalist, philosopher and novelist, or University professor, for that matter.

If you keep the reference to "his novels and essays" I would also replace "best known" with "most widely known" for. Then add something about his intellectual authority as a philosopher and his influence on European culture as the basis for his stature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Influenced by ?[edit]

Having admired Eco's works for many years, I have recently stumbled upon J.L Borges. Its worth seeing the wickipedia pages on Borges, in particular the part one Eco and his work "The Name of The Rose". I found both share a love of the philosophical meander, pardoxes, taught narrative and academic parody. However, given the amount of other authors they both reference, where do we end on the matter ... under a large heap of musty books.

I don't know if Jorge Luis Borges should be mentioned since he can be mentioned as an influence for almost every 20th century author. Indeed, many authors do point to him as an inspiration, even when the styles and motifs are of a totally different nature. It would sort of be like saying a philosopher is somewhat influenced by Aristotle or Plato.--Rousseau

pretentiousness + lack of biography[edit]

The fact that Eco's writings are sometimes occasionally pretentious doesn't mean this page has to be as well. It would be more beneficial for the readers if the author of it was more interested in writing a dictionary entry than a school paper.

More important, however, is the fact that the "Biography and opus" part is all opus and no biography. I'd like to write the biography myself, but don't know enough about Eco's personal life to be capable of it.

What happened to the rule that we have to sign our every post on WP? Fleurbutterfly 20:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

/* Pedant */[edit]

No, this is by no means the popular view over here in Italy at any rate!! He has a weekly series in the extremely presitigious and extremely popular magazine L'Espresso which is widely read. I, personally , think that he is often prententious and offers no solutions, etc.. But that does not seem to be a widely shared view OVER HERE. Perhaps his political and social commentary should be mentioned in the Main text??


you said "I, personally" right? You answered your own delimma. That's your own point of view, and clearly, Umberto Eco is widely respected. Most of us just don't share your sentiments. Fleurbutterfly 20:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Homepage, publisher[edit]

Does anybody know if Eco has an official homepage maintained endorsed either by him or his publisher? I'm not finding much with Google.

Also no mention is made in the article of his publisher in Italy, Bompiani in Milan. — Hippietrail 19:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


What does doctarate mean? It could not be a "dottorato", the equivalent of the English PhD., since it was introduced in Italy only in the late 1980s. I suppose that degree to be more appropriate. AnyFile 22:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm also unsure, but my Italian teacher once told me that the "normal" Italian doctorate equals a MA. February, 21st, User:prorokini

Anyfile is right. That's a BA. Cf the French version: "diplomé" USER:FOKWH

This page has been edited by Eco himself[edit]

In a recent article by Eco on Wikipedia, he mentions disagreeing with a description of one of his books, and says that he personally corrected the text

According to the article he corrected an interpretation that can't be found on this article, but on Kant and the Platypus: Essays on Language and Cognition. Shouldn't that paragraph be moved to that article? SncBlue 14:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Eco wrote also that he corrected something about his biography that was not correct (on this page, I presume) --Ggonnell 10:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Was he talking about Italian WP?--Shtove 22:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


Missing works[edit]

Has anybody here yet seen Have a look at Umberto Eco's page there and you'll see there are a few works missing from the bibliography here. The page includes works in many languages and many collection, which don't always map 1:1 with collections in other languages:

Hippietrail 16:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

a question[edit]

The study of Eco's works - ecology?

sorry - bad joke

andreas_td 17:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC+2)

Here's another bad joke:
The study of Andreas' works - andrology?
Geir Gundersen 13:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

hahaha! breather...Fleurbutterfly 20:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Quote on christianity[edit]

I came across a reflection of his in the intro to a book of studies c.2000. It ran something like this: If christianity is not the truth, then the beauty of its concept is at least strong evidence for the existence of god. Does anyone know the citation for this?--Shtove 21:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Umberto Eco is agnostic and he has lost his faith long time ago, so I doubt he said that. Ciacchi 15:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
A cynical, optimistic agnostic. Sounds like Eco to me. Phyte (talk) 00:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
But he writes better than Dan Brown. He makes you think.Fleurbutterfly 20:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

People like complicated stories with arcane figures[edit]

I changed "Although his novels often include references to arcane historical figures and texts and his dense, intricate plots tend to take dizzying turns, he has enjoyed a wide audience around the world, with good sales and many translations." into "Because his novels often include references to arcane historical figures and texts and his dense, intricate plots tend to take dizzying turns, he has enjoyed a wide audience around the world, with good sales and many translations." I don't think people really prefer novels with only references to TV figures and sparse, simple plots which are straightforward. Geir Gundersen 13:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


He's listed in the Italian atheists category - is this accurate? My impression is that he's an agnostic.--Shtove 16:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You are correct. Eco is an agnostic, and actually states that "one should not have the arrogance to declare that God does not exist." (See [1]) --Banderman11 06:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I don’t know what his position is. But the wikiquote reference is unfortunately worthless: the article claims he said that, but gives absolutely no indication of where or when. —Ian Spackman 15:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. Richard Dawkins has never claimed that god definitely does not exist, and I'm sure it's agreed that he is Athiest rather than Agnostic. Think you need to understand what the term Athiest means (Wikipedia essentially gives two views, one of which I don't buy into). 22:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Eco is an Atheist!

Interviewed by journalist Francesco Merlo (italian magazine “Il venerdì di repubblica” #1019 -september 28 2007-) Umberto Eco, answering the question «Do you are a believer?» says «At the moment, cautiously, i’m not» [«Per il momento, prudentemente, no». ] (page 27). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


Don't know if I'm doing this right - never edited Wikipedia before. But... Currently reading Foucault's Pendulum and decided to check the author. Although I could be wrong as I haven't finished it yet the paragraph about it seems to be a minor spoiler. Can we get a spoiler warning in there or possibly jst reomve the spoiler? "The game turns dangerous when outsiders learn of The Plan, and believe that the men have really discovered the secret to regaining the lost treasure of the Templars." - THats the particular sentence

Meh. We know this from the first few pages when the narrator is hiding in the museum: a group of nastymen are out to get Hero Protagonist. The entire story is told in flashback. The "spoiler" is no worse, and probably less culpable in wrecking the plot development, than any good movie trailer. You ask a valid question, but it's probably not a real problem.

I think the sentence "We know this from the first few pages when the narrator is hiding in the museum: a group of nastymen are out to get Hero Protagonist." is an oversimplified and unjustified statement. It obviously IS a GIANT spoiler. If you knew it beforehand, how could you complete reading the book and enjoy it? It is obviously one of that "oh! That ending was obvious" statements, which are, 99% of the time, a plain fabrication on the part of the concerned person. I think we need to remove this spoiler or insert a spoiler warning. It certainly ruined any suspense for me. Ntveem 11:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


I know Eco "has been labelled" a postmodernist author. However, much like with categories like "gay people", I doubt is sufficient to categorize him as such. We would ideally need evidence that he self-identfies as a postmodernist, or at least evidence that the classification is undisputed. He is certainly (very much) aware of postmodernism, but that's irrelevant. dab (𒁳) 18:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Questionable start and source[edit]

I don't agree with (almost) starting the article with the sentence

Recently his 1988 novel Foucault's Pendulum has been described as a "thinking person's Da Vinci Code,"

since Focault's pendulum is much superior to Da Vinci Code. Citing a source is alright, but the sources must be of some quality, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Much superior, well written, well planned, than Da Vinci Code. Fleurbutterfly 21:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
And may i add that The Name of the Rose is also superior. Fleurbutterfly 21:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I can't say that I'm a big fan of this sentence in the article either. The comparison doesn't seem important or relevant enough to be in the lead paragraph, and the linked article only mentions Eco in passing. Perhaps something more interesting could be pulled from a better source, e.g. [2]? Ziggurat 09:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


Hello all, I created a Bibliography of Umberto Eco page. Please feel free to make it better.

TuckerResearch (talk) 04:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Where are the References?[edit]

What happened to references? There are barely any anywhere - just lots of POV and 'original research'. I suggest we either strip out the whole lot and start again or start digging up some verifiable facts. Spanglej (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The Name of the Rose[edit]

In this book Mr Eco uses a very unusual mechanism for a murder.

Can anybody, including Mr Eco, explain how the item is a direct copy of the method described in the Arabian Nights in The Story of the Clever Minister?

There probably does not exist any third occuerrence in world literature of this particular method of murder!

Samarendra Narayan Roy, India —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roy.samarendra (talkcontribs) 06:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Ur-Fascism essay[edit]

Reference number 7 leads one to an advertisement website, rather than to Eco's Ur-Fascism essay, as it used to and was intended to do.

I'm unfamiliar with the editing history review and editing processes of Wikipedia, but I thought for the time being I could at least raise mention of the problem. Presumably it was changed recently, as I was led from the reference to the essay's correct page less than six months ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem[edit]


This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 14:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

English title for his latest novel[edit]

Amazon has The Prague Cemetery, rather than The Cemetery of Prague for this unreleased book. TuckerResearch (talk) 10:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Eco is a medievalist?[edit]

I read the article twice. 1.) I didn't read anywhere that he studied history, only that he studied medieval philosophy. 2.) I didn't find any sources that he published scientific works about history of Middle Ages - only aesthetics, anthropology and other philosophical problems.

Medievalist is a historian, as far as I know. For example, professor Anthony Kenny studied Thomas Aquinas, scholasticism and medieval philosophy, but no one considers him a medievalist, only a philosopher.

"Eco, Umberto." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2010. :

"Italian literary critic, novelist, and semiotician"

Same in this link:

Not a word about medievalist. I edited the article accordingly.
Philosopher12 (talk) 14:53, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

"The Name of the Rose" by Umberto Eco in "light" version[edit]

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Italian newspaper La Voce del Popolo from Rijeka, Croatia, announced that Umberto Eco wrote a new "light" version of his novel "The Name of the Rose", one of the capital works of 20th century, it would be more interesting and popular to the readers in the 21 century. (talk) 15:28, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Umberto Eco. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Wrong Moussa Sow[edit]

This article was conflating anthropologist Moussa Sow with a senegalese footballer identically named. So, I fixed that. Eliécer Guillén. (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Tnx.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The Prague Cemetery[edit]

The description of this is a trifle strange: by most accounts, the Dreyfus Affair and the Protocols were symptoms, not causes of antisemitism, which was firmly in place before either of these occurred.

Paul Magnussen (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Umberto Eco/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The Italian version begins with: 'Laureatosi in filosofia' means 'a BA in Philosophy'.FOKWH 10:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)FOKWH

Substituted at 09:30, 30 April 2016 (UTC)