Status
Available
Description
The Kingdom of the Wicked is one of Anthony Burgess's most ambitious novels. Its subject, nothing less than the first years of Christianity, recreated in vivid and meticulous detail. Sadoc son of Azor, a retired shipping clerk lying diseased and dying on the outreaches of the Roman Empire, sets down for future generations a tale of epic proportions: he is charged with recounting no less an event than the birth of Christianity. And what an account it is - the son of the god of love was born into the kingdom of the wicked.
User reviews
LibraryThing member somebodyelse
Maybe my expectations were too high, after A Clockwork Orange. Now, don't get me wrong, everything was great, just what I was hoping, except for the plot. The plot was little more than the history of the rise of Christianity. He gave details no historian could possibly know, making up characters
Show More
and conversations all over the place. But he didn't take it anywhere interesting. If you don't know this story, and would like to, this might be a good place to start. (If you don't mind graphically described gore and sexual perversion, when he talks about the Roman side of the story.) As a classicist who has studied this period pretty well, I found it rather dull. Show Less
LibraryThing member simplicimus
The novel covers about 40 years from the resurrection of Jesus Christ to the destruction of Pompeji, recounting the spread of the Christian faith against the backdrop of Roman Imperial history.
In a novel with this scope, one can’t complain that most the characters are somewhat flat, with the
However, there were some issues I had with this novel. It is clearly the account of a sceptic, and though I did appreciate the author’s staying clear of pathos and sugar-coating, a few things were lost as a result. There’s quite a lot of conversion to, and also defection from, Christianity, but it just happened, no inner development of the persons, no plausibility. It might just as well have been the other way round. For all the erudition of the author, I found it strange that part of Paul’s message in this book was the popular misconception that if you live a good life, you will go to heaven when you die, whereas the evildoers are destined for the fires of hell. In fact, if you read Paul’s letters in the New Testament, the essence of his doctrine is sola fide and sola gratia, meaning that good works alone won’t do, but the way to forgiveness is always open.
And ultimately, the Christian faith appeared to be somewhat anaemic and very weak, all but collapsing under the first persecutions. If that had been so, I think Christianity wouldn’t have outlived the Roman Empire.
In a novel with this scope, one can’t complain that most the characters are somewhat flat, with the
Show More
notable exceptions of the apostle Paul, the emperor Nero and few others. Being somewhat familiar with the Acts of the Apostles, for me it was great being told this story by a different voice, with some of the religious and historical background that is not always provided in the original account. It’s done brilliantly, the facts never weigh down the story. Also, the appalling cruelty and sometimes madness of the early Roman emperors is well shown, with the right amount of detail, though the “Roman” part of the story sometimes felt a bit sketchy. However, there were some issues I had with this novel. It is clearly the account of a sceptic, and though I did appreciate the author’s staying clear of pathos and sugar-coating, a few things were lost as a result. There’s quite a lot of conversion to, and also defection from, Christianity, but it just happened, no inner development of the persons, no plausibility. It might just as well have been the other way round. For all the erudition of the author, I found it strange that part of Paul’s message in this book was the popular misconception that if you live a good life, you will go to heaven when you die, whereas the evildoers are destined for the fires of hell. In fact, if you read Paul’s letters in the New Testament, the essence of his doctrine is sola fide and sola gratia, meaning that good works alone won’t do, but the way to forgiveness is always open.
And ultimately, the Christian faith appeared to be somewhat anaemic and very weak, all but collapsing under the first persecutions. If that had been so, I think Christianity wouldn’t have outlived the Roman Empire.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jburlinson
A disappointment after Earthly Powers. Individual scenes, though often vivid, do not cohere. There's a bit too much point making, the primary one being that the birth of Christianity was not attended by angels and happy faces but by gore-spattered midwives with their eyes on the main chance.
LibraryThing member mikedraper
Set in the time after the Cricifiction, the Apostles set out to spread the Gospel. The argue about what is permissible in their activities while facing opposition of the rabbinical court in Jerusalem, a number of mad emperors in Rome and the pagan beliefs throughout the empire.
LibraryThing member baswood
When I reviewed Anthony Burgess's [A Dead Man in Deptford] which was an historical novel about the Elizabethan playwright Christofer Marlowe I said:
“The virtue of a historical novel is its vice - the flat footed affirmation of possibility as fact.” There are few facts known about the late
The Kingdom of the Wicked published some eight years earlier (1985), shows a similar approach to historical novel writing. Burgess has fun with the early Christian movement, from the death of Jesus to the volcanic eruption in Pompeii in AD 79. He has three main strands to his story the rise of the Christian Movement led by the disciples and Saint Paul, the chaos at the heart of the Roman Empire as he follows the career of the Roman emperors and the Jewish nations own internal dissent following the teachings of christianity. Burgess is faithful to the historical outline, but like all good fiction writers he fleshes out the characters adding inventions and characters of his own to ensure nothing gets in the way of good story telling. Unsurprisingly he revels in the murder, mayhem and sexual perversions of the Roman world, which contrasts with the dedication and bravery of the early christian leaders; he provides intriguing characterisations of Saint Paul and Saint Peter.
Burgess starts his story with Sadoc, who is writing this early history. He is suffering from a chronic disease and nearing the end of his life wishes to finish this story before his death. He starts his tale controversially
"Concerning the resurrection of Jesus, everybody must believe what he can. For my part, I will not accept miracles if the rational lies to hand, and have no proof that Jesus died on the cross."
Sadoc's theory is that by all accounts Jesus was a man of immense stature, with enough breath in his lungs and body to survive the crucifixion. He was undoubtedly unconscious when taken down from the cross and his legs were not broken and after three days in the tomb he had recovered enough to roll away the stone. Sadoc then goes on to tell his story of the documented re-appearances of Jesus after the "resurrection". Nearly 400 pages later we come to the end of the story with the deaths of the last of the diciples and Saint Paul. Meanwhile we have taken in the corrupt roman emperors particularly Nero and the infighting of the Jews and their last stand at Masada. It is an enjoyable entertaining account based around the historical facts and paints a lively picture of the struggles of the early christian church. It is of course irreverent and may be offensive to some people, but for me it was both interesting, informative and for the most part entertaining. Sadoc's story is told as though he was writing it today (today being the 1980's) and so there is no attempt to place himself inside the mindset of the people living 2000 years ago.
This was my last unread Anthony Burgess novel and I have come to the conclusion that his irreverent style is suited to some subjects better than others. He had a story to tell with this book and launched himself wholeheartedly in his project to bring this to life for the modern reader. I rate this as 4 stars.
“The virtue of a historical novel is its vice - the flat footed affirmation of possibility as fact.” There are few facts known about the late
Show More
sixteenth century playwright and poet Christopher Marlowe and so Burgess has great fun making up a story that fits with the facts that we do know. It is a rumbustious, roisterous, sacrilegious look at the life of a writer making his living around the playhouses of Elizabethan England and one asks oneself “was it ever thus” - well it just may have been.The Kingdom of the Wicked published some eight years earlier (1985), shows a similar approach to historical novel writing. Burgess has fun with the early Christian movement, from the death of Jesus to the volcanic eruption in Pompeii in AD 79. He has three main strands to his story the rise of the Christian Movement led by the disciples and Saint Paul, the chaos at the heart of the Roman Empire as he follows the career of the Roman emperors and the Jewish nations own internal dissent following the teachings of christianity. Burgess is faithful to the historical outline, but like all good fiction writers he fleshes out the characters adding inventions and characters of his own to ensure nothing gets in the way of good story telling. Unsurprisingly he revels in the murder, mayhem and sexual perversions of the Roman world, which contrasts with the dedication and bravery of the early christian leaders; he provides intriguing characterisations of Saint Paul and Saint Peter.
Burgess starts his story with Sadoc, who is writing this early history. He is suffering from a chronic disease and nearing the end of his life wishes to finish this story before his death. He starts his tale controversially
"Concerning the resurrection of Jesus, everybody must believe what he can. For my part, I will not accept miracles if the rational lies to hand, and have no proof that Jesus died on the cross."
Sadoc's theory is that by all accounts Jesus was a man of immense stature, with enough breath in his lungs and body to survive the crucifixion. He was undoubtedly unconscious when taken down from the cross and his legs were not broken and after three days in the tomb he had recovered enough to roll away the stone. Sadoc then goes on to tell his story of the documented re-appearances of Jesus after the "resurrection". Nearly 400 pages later we come to the end of the story with the deaths of the last of the diciples and Saint Paul. Meanwhile we have taken in the corrupt roman emperors particularly Nero and the infighting of the Jews and their last stand at Masada. It is an enjoyable entertaining account based around the historical facts and paints a lively picture of the struggles of the early christian church. It is of course irreverent and may be offensive to some people, but for me it was both interesting, informative and for the most part entertaining. Sadoc's story is told as though he was writing it today (today being the 1980's) and so there is no attempt to place himself inside the mindset of the people living 2000 years ago.
This was my last unread Anthony Burgess novel and I have come to the conclusion that his irreverent style is suited to some subjects better than others. He had a story to tell with this book and launched himself wholeheartedly in his project to bring this to life for the modern reader. I rate this as 4 stars.
Show Less