[ Home | Contents | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: O'Connor D
Date: 11/2/99
Time: 12:33:18 AM
Remote Name: 152.163.205.71
I understand when you are saying that there are two sides to this story. It seems that one thinks that it is okay to have possessions while the other does not. If this book was written in order to come to a conclusion of who is wrong or right it would be hard to come up with a legitimate answer. Eco seems to take the side of the Franciscans view on the issue though. Whether this is because the hero of the novel takes this side or this is how he actually feels, who is to say? I still don't know if this is a question that Eco was posing to the writer. Could it be that he is expressing that the church as a whole is corrupt in one way or another?