The Alchemist debate continued...

Upon attending class this past Wednesday, I had only made it half-way through The Alchemist. The class discussion that ensued was then really interesting to listen to. Having not finished the book, I couldn’t definitively say whether or not I found the book rewarding or annoying in its obvious and repetitive statements. All I knew was that I had enjoyed it so far and was eager to finish it.

While reading that afternoon, I found myself focusing on the redundancy of the over-arching message…”the Soul of the World”…blah blah blah…””Personal Legends”…etc etc…”the Language of the World!”…and I can understand how that could’ve become aggravating and tedious for some readers. I can also understand the complaint of the “low brow” effect, and how one feels as though they are being beaten over the head with such semblances of profundity.

But after finishing the book, this is not the opinion I adopted. Instead, I found the repetitions and allusions necessary and helpful. I realized that this book is low-brow not because it is easy to figure out, and the point is not to solve the ending or predict the events, for that is easily done, and leads to no enjoyment of the story itself. Rather, the merit of the book lies in the journey it takes the reader on. There exists a boy on a path to enlightenment (or Personal Legend) and we are meant to follow right alongside him. Not to jump ahead, nor criticize, but to enjoy the leisurely stroll through connections, coincidences, and epiphanies that are all made for us.
The book is enjoyable. And once you gear down from ‘literary sleuth mode’, it is much easier to appreciate all it has to offer.