1998's Nobel Prize winner for Literature, José Saramoga, has, with his astonishing and superb story Blindness, written one of the finest European novels of the last 20 or 30 years. Portugal's best-known writer--but like many Nobel winners hardly a household name in the UK--Saramoga has created a formidable and beautiful body of work deserving (and receiving) the very highest recognition. From the sublime, humanistic The Gospel According to Jesus Christ to the intelligent, metaphysical The Cave, Saramoga challenges, warns, argues but also entertains and enlivens through the truth of his transcendent and highly cultured fictions.

Suddenly, while stopped at a red light in his car, a man goes blind. A "white evil" obliterates his vision plunging him into light as fathomless and impenetrable as the darkest night. A crowd gathers and one man is kind enough to see him home. It is not long, however, before an epidemic of the new blindness causes the government to act in the most authoritarian and fearful of ways, throwing many of the recently disabled into a mental asylum, guarded by scared, trigger-happy soldiers, left to fend for themselves.

While Lord of the Flies might seem an immediately similar reference, Saramaga's work has both more craft and more acuity than William Golding's tale. Blindness is a luminous piece and a wonderful starting point for readers seeking a scrupulous and wise guide to these injudicious and myopic times. --Mark ThwaiteIn an unnamed city in an unnamed country, a man sitting in his car waiting for a traffic light to change is suddenly struck blind. But instead of being plunged into darkness, this man sees everything white, as if he "were caught in a mist or had fallen into a milky sea." A Good Samaritan offers to drive him home (and later steals his car); his wife takes him by taxi to a nearby eye clinic where they are ushered past other patients into the doctor's office. Within a day the man's wife, the taxi driver, the doctor and his patients, and the car thief have all succumbed to blindness. As the epidemic spreads, the government panics and begins quarantining victims in an abandoned mental asylum--guarded by soldiers with orders to shoot anyone who tries to escape. So begins Portuguese author José Saramago's gripping story of humanity under siege, written with a dearth of paragraphs, limited punctuation, and embedded dialogue minus either quotation marks or attribution. At first this may seem challenging, but the style actually contributes to the narrative's building tension, and to the reader's involvement.

In this community of blind people there is still one set of functioning eyes: the doctor's wife has affected blindness in order to accompany her husband to the asylum. As the number of victims grows and the asylum becomes overcrowded, systems begin to break down: toilets back up, food deliveries become sporadic; there is no medical treatment for the sick and no proper way to bury the dead. Inevitably, social conventions begin to crumble as well, with one group of blind inmates taking control of the dwindling food supply and using it to exploit the others. Through it all, the doctor's wife does her best to protect her little band of blind charges, eventually leading them out of the hospital and back into the horribly changed landscape of the city.

Blindness is in many ways a horrific novel, detailing as it does the total breakdown in society that follows upon this most unnatural disaster. Saramago takes his characters to the very edge of humanity and then pushes them over the precipice. His people learn to live in inexpressible filth, they commit acts of both unspeakable violence and amazing generosity that would have been unimaginable to them before the tragedy. The very structure of society itself alters to suit the circumstances as once-civilized, urban dwellers become ragged nomads traveling by touch from building to building in search of food. The devil is in the details, and Saramago has imagined for us in all its devastation a hell where those who went blind in the streets can never find their homes again, where people are reduced to eating chickens raw and packs of dogs roam the excrement-covered sidewalks scavenging from corpses.

And yet in the midst of all this horror Saramago has written passages of unsurpassed beauty. Upon being told she is beautiful by three of her charges, women who have never seen her, "the doctor's wife is reduced to tears because of a personal pronoun, an adverb, a verb, an adjective, mere grammatical categories, mere labels, just like the two women, the others, indefinite pronouns, they too are crying, they embrace the woman of the whole sentence, three graces beneath the falling rain." In this one woman Saramago has created an enduring, fully developed character who serves both as the eyes and ears of the reader and as the conscience of the race. And in Blindness he has written a profound, ultimately transcendent meditation on what it means to be human. --Alix Wilber

Survival can turn us all into barbarians, 18 Nov 2008
What a book! When an epidemic of sudden blindness happens, the blind and those contaminated by them are quarantined in an old asylum where they are left to fend for themselves. This situation rapidly changes from quarantine into imprisonment and squalor as the blind fumble about - they befoul the corridors as they can't find the toilets, people get injured and die from infection. The army don't deliver enough food and everyone gets gaunt and hungry. When an armed gang of blind men take over the food distribution demanding first valuables and then women in payment, you are truly horrified where before you were revolted by the conditions. I can honestly say it makes you feel dirty.

But there is one person in the asylum who can see - the eye doctor's wife - rather than leave her husband she pretends to be blind, and secretly and subtly tries to help the others around her without giving her secret away. It is through her eyes that we see everything that is going on - and it is a huge burden for her which she bears with grace and dignity.

Eventually the armed gang is overcome, and the internees realise the army outside is gone too and they escape to find a world which has rapidly become a barbarian place as the entire population is now blind. Bodies litter the streets, everyone is searching for food, there is no clean water, dogs and rats scavenge everywhere.

Later there are some marvellous scenes which relieve you temporarily from this grim vision - the cleansing powers of a shower of rain and the friendly dog who licks the tears away. An astonishing and powerful book and powerful commentary on the denial and removal of basic human rights. It was easy to read, although Saramago's largely punctuationless style takes a while to get used to. It is one that will stay with me for a long time.

thought provoking and original , 30 Oct 2008
I was blown away by this book. The whole thing seems like a religious allegory for the selfish modern age. Equally the plot devise of mass population blindness can also be read as the imposing of martial law on a capitalist free state. What really kept me reading though was the writing. The story deals with blindness in a frank way that doesn't shy away from exposing the worst aspects of human nature when it comes to survival in a lawless environment. The character of the doctors wife in intriguing and the symbolism inherent in her characters actions becomes increasingly apparent towards the end of the book. Read it now before the less successful film comes out,

I just don't see it., 04 Oct 2008
This a good book, I just don't think it's as good as other people do. The title and the subject matter suggest a profound work and this really isn't.

The story is fairly engrossing, the characters well executed, but any intelligent insight is vague and suggestive but never conclusive. This 'blindness' doesn't work as the metaphor I suspect it is being intended as, and as such this is simply a 300 page novel about people being unable to see. Which is fairly interesting I suppose, but it say's little new about humanity facing certain challanges and drags on in the middle.

I've not read any of his other works, and I will at somepoint, but this doesn't justify the hype - I just don't see it.

Frightening, but compelling..., 22 Aug 2008
Now on the cusp of a forthcoming film adaptation, which should hopefully bring it some much deserved extra attention, Jose Saramago's extremely provoking book "Blindness" is a wonderfully evocative, frequently disturbing read.

The premise is straight forward; an unexplained disease of sudden blindness plagues a (purposefully) unnamed city. The consequences are predictably devastating.

The key to your final interpretation of this book rests with how you adapt to Saramago's unusual style. This is a book built almost of a series of long paragraphs, practically uninterrupted by normal punctuation. Characters have whole conversations without quotation marks - and it's occasionally quite easy to get lost as to who is speaking to who. The overall effect is dizzying, complex, but quite brilliant. It's an immediate jolt that tells you this is something quite unique. Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but it's akin to when I read my first Cormac McCarthy novel. Something about how it's written just doesn't feel quite right at first.

Stick with it though and you're richly rewarded by a brutal story and frightening imagery that fully deserve your attention. This is a very impressive book.

5 stars is not enough, 27 Jul 2008
This book is amazing, incredible, breathtaking. It was recommended to me and once I started it 2 days ago I have barely been able to put it down. This book has just earned a place in my top 5 ever books and deservedly so.

The story starts with a man in his car at traffic lights who goes suddenly blind. He is helped home by a stranger, who a few hours later also goes blind. Within a few days the blindness has spread round half the city and also those afflicted are herded up by the government into a disused mental assylum and left alone. The wards quickly become overrun with filth and chaos ensues. In the middle of this, though, we get to know a handful of characters very well and it is really their story that we follow through the neverending days, lack of food and riots. The whole story is told through long paragraphs of uunbroken text. There are no quotation marks, hardly any punctuation and none of the characters are given names.

I admit to being concerned that I would find it difficult to overcome the lack of punctuation, but for commas and fullstops, and the lack of names (characters are referred to in such ways as the girl with dark glasses, the boy with the squint etc) but not only was it very easy to get used to this it actually added to the story. Also, although the characters don't have names, I found myself identifying with and caring about these characters far more than I have done in other books as Saramago writing drags you in and you find yourself unable to let go. It's as though I was "there". Genius!

If you read nothing else this year, make it this. It is astounding and I only wish I could award more than 5 stars.

Survival can turn us all into barbarians, 18 Nov 2008
What a book! When an epidemic of sudden blindness happens, the blind and those contaminated by them are quarantined in an old asylum where they are left to fend for themselves. This situation rapidly changes from quarantine into imprisonment and squalor as the blind fumble about - they befoul the corridors as they can't find the toilets, people get injured and die from infection. The army don't deliver enough food and everyone gets gaunt and hungry. When an armed gang of blind men take over the food distribution demanding first valuables and then women in payment, you are truly horrified where before you were revolted by the conditions. I can honestly say it makes you feel dirty.

But there is one person in the asylum who can see - the eye doctor's wife - rather than leave her husband she pretends to be blind, and secretly and subtly tries to help the others around her without giving her secret away. It is through her eyes that we see everything that is going on - and it is a huge burden for her which she bears with grace and dignity.

Eventually the armed gang is overcome, and the internees realise the army outside is gone too and they escape to find a world which has rapidly become a barbarian place as the entire population is now blind. Bodies litter the streets, everyone is searching for food, there is no clean water, dogs and rats scavenge everywhere.

Later there are some marvellous scenes which relieve you temporarily from this grim vision - the cleansing powers of a shower of rain and the friendly dog who licks the tears away. An astonishing and powerful book and powerful commentary on the denial and removal of basic human rights. It was easy to read, although Saramago's largely punctuationless style takes a while to get used to. It is one that will stay with me for a long time.

thought provoking and original , 30 Oct 2008
I was blown away by this book. The whole thing seems like a religious allegory for the selfish modern age. Equally the plot devise of mass population blindness can also be read as the imposing of martial law on a capitalist free state. What really kept me reading though was the writing. The story deals with blindness in a frank way that doesn't shy away from exposing the worst aspects of human nature when it comes to survival in a lawless environment. The character of the doctors wife in intriguing and the symbolism inherent in her characters actions becomes increasingly apparent towards the end of the book. Read it now before the less successful film comes out,

I just don't see it., 04 Oct 2008
This a good book, I just don't think it's as good as other people do. The title and the subject matter suggest a profound work and this really isn't.

The story is fairly engrossing, the characters well executed, but any intelligent insight is vague and suggestive but never conclusive. This 'blindness' doesn't work as the metaphor I suspect it is being intended as, and as such this is simply a 300 page novel about people being unable to see. Which is fairly interesting I suppose, but it say's little new about humanity facing certain challanges and drags on in the middle.

I've not read any of his other works, and I will at somepoint, but this doesn't justify the hype - I just don't see it.

Frightening, but compelling..., 22 Aug 2008
Now on the cusp of a forthcoming film adaptation, which should hopefully bring it some much deserved extra attention, Jose Saramago's extremely provoking book "Blindness" is a wonderfully evocative, frequently disturbing read.

The premise is straight forward; an unexplained disease of sudden blindness plagues a (purposefully) unnamed city. The consequences are predictably devastating.

The key to your final interpretation of this book rests with how you adapt to Saramago's unusual style. This is a book built almost of a series of long paragraphs, practically uninterrupted by normal punctuation. Characters have whole conversations without quotation marks - and it's occasionally quite easy to get lost as to who is speaking to who. The overall effect is dizzying, complex, but quite brilliant. It's an immediate jolt that tells you this is something quite unique. Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but it's akin to when I read my first Cormac McCarthy novel. Something about how it's written just doesn't feel quite right at first.

Stick with it though and you're richly rewarded by a brutal story and frightening imagery that fully deserve your attention. This is a very impressive book.

5 stars is not enough, 27 Jul 2008
This book is amazing, incredible, breathtaking. It was recommended to me and once I started it 2 days ago I have barely been able to put it down. This book has just earned a place in my top 5 ever books and deservedly so.

The story starts with a man in his car at traffic lights who goes suddenly blind. He is helped home by a stranger, who a few hours later also goes blind. Within a few days the blindness has spread round half the city and also those afflicted are herded up by the government into a disused mental assylum and left alone. The wards quickly become overrun with filth and chaos ensues. In the middle of this, though, we get to know a handful of characters very well and it is really their story that we follow through the neverending days, lack of food and riots. The whole story is told through long paragraphs of uunbroken text. There are no quotation marks, hardly any punctuation and none of the characters are given names.

I admit to being concerned that I would find it difficult to overcome the lack of punctuation, but for commas and fullstops, and the lack of names (characters are referred to in such ways as the girl with dark glasses, the boy with the squint etc) but not only was it very easy to get used to this it actually added to the story. Also, although the characters don't have names, I found myself identifying with and caring about these characters far more than I have done in other books as Saramago writing drags you in and you find yourself unable to let go. It's as though I was "there". Genius!

If you read nothing else this year, make it this. It is astounding and I only wish I could award more than 5 stars.


Jesus of ... Magdala?, 29 Dec 2006
Rather like Kazantzakis' "Last Temptation of Christ", Saramago's humanist reinterpretation of the Gospels arguably has a problem of audience: it's likely to offend orthodox Christians while possibly not being quite "hardline" enough for dyed-in-the-wool atheists. It has been less discussed (and has won fewer literary prizes and the like) than Saramago's less controversial novels ("Ricardo Reis", "Balthazar & Blimunda" etc.). This is a pity, since it is Saramago at his very finest - it's my personal favourite of all his novels.

While sticking surprisingly close to its biblical sources, Saramago's novel essentially does what it says on the tin: it re-tells the familiar story from the point of view of a Jesus who is very much human rather than divine. Jehovah may or may not be his biological parent, but Joseph is unquestionably his dad. Mary receives the annunciation not from Gabriel, but from the devil - a mysterious and surprisingly gentle figure who is certainly not all bad. Mary Magdalene is quite categorically Jesus' lover rather than his disciple (indeed, in some ways, he is her disciple). Although blessed or cursed with miracle-working powers by a thoroughly unpleasant Old Testament God the Father, he views himself as human rather than divine, and his eventual crucifixion more as an act of solidarity with his father Joseph (crucified by the Roman army early in the narrative) than an expiation of human sins.

That being said, Jesus himself (despite occasional unexpected Angry Young Man features) remains in essence the familiar gentle altruist of the New Testament. Saramago's Jesus is a fascinatingly complex character, angry with God while full of compassion for suffering humanity, and having a rather troubled relationship with his mother. His meeting with the considerably older Mary Magdalene is one of Saramago's familiarly luminous love stories (indeed, Jesus subsequently describes himself as "Jesus of Magdala" since that is where they met).

Saramago's overall viewpoint is just as complex, and ultimately leaves the reader to make up his or her own mind on the big questions. As well as the obvious atheist-humanist slant, it would be quite possible to take a liberal-Christian view on the book as being very much "about" the transition from Old Testament judgemental God the Father to New Testament God of Love. Is Jesus ultimately just a victim, or does he actually succeed in escaping or subverting the fate wished on him by Jehovah? Or indeed are both viewpoints true at the same time?

A gospel for human beings, 25 Jul 2006
`TGATJC' is Saramago's retelling of the story of Jesus. It is broadly based on the gospels of the New Testament of the Christian bible, but Saramago invents new scenes and re-interprets existing ones. In the book, the characters of the New Testament are presented as being ordinary human beings caught in extraordinary events. Christian tradition teaches that Joseph, Jesus and Mary were all people, but they are usually portrayed as having the aspects of saints and saviours. `TGATJC' asks the question: what would the events of the gospels look like if told by, and about, human beings. The book concentrates largely on Jesus' relationship with his family, and his parents in particular.
Saramago doesn't set out to shock, and despite the opportunity for contraversialism, actually paints a relatively respectful picture of Jesus' family. Their human aspects are emphasised though, and the book begins with an earthy description of Joseph urinating before having sex with Mary, and her birth pains are graphically described. Jesus too is portrayed as having a very human nature: fallible, often confused and sexually active. I didn't find it remotely shocking, and actually thought it to be a touching and realistic portrait of a family. What may be more controversial is Saramago's portrait of God, who is portrayed very much as he appears in the Old Testament (i.e. how people of Jesus' time would have conceived of God). Saramago's God is jealous and power hungry. His battle isn't with the Devil, but with other Gods over the belief of mankind. Jesus' death is part of his quest for power and the devil, rather than an enemy, is an uneasy ally, because one cannot exist without the other. This God is very much the pre-Christian conceptualisation of God, one which the people of Jesus' era would have recognised. Again Saramago asks the question: if Jesus was a man, what would God have looked like to him?
`TGATJC' made a story that I have heard a thousand times seem utterly new. It will undoubtedly upset many people, but if you are prepared to accept the central point, (that of its protagonists' humanity) then it will make you look at the bible story in an entirely new way. It is a skilful piece of writing and, despite the large blocks of unbroken text, easy to read. `TGATJC' is thought-provoking and eye-opening, and anyone wanting a different perspective on the stories in the gospels should read it.


What a wonderful read!, 15 Oct 2003
Despite being slightly put off by the title, I was pleasantly surprised with Saramago's fascinating twist on the life of Jesus Christ. Not only is the book written in a poetic and graceful style which makes the reader glued to each page, but his interpretation of Jesus' life forces one to think and rethink their own values.

Whether or not you are religious is irrelevant when reading this book as it is a wonderful read - due to Saramago's excellence in story telling and painting a picture through words.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would recommend it to readers looking for a wonderfully written book about a subject that may not have previously interested readers.

wonderful, 01 Dec 2002
I started to read "baltasar and blimunda" when I was at school (here in portugal is a book we learn about at school) and I found it to be totally boring. Seven years later I decided to give saramago another chance and I decided to read "the gospel"... and it has become one the best books I've read in years! It changed me a lot and because of it I've read more 3 books of him (neither was "baltasar and blimunda", though).

Two years after reading this book, he won the Nobel... and I wasn't surprised at all. In fact Saramago made me feel very proud for beeing portuguese.

This book is magnificent; if you don't have it yet, you should run and read it.

Masterpiece, 14 Sep 2001
This is a magnificent novel, worthy of comparison with that other great Jesus novel, Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation". Saramago's theme is fairly common, one that has worried theologians for centuries: how can a loving god permit so much evil and suffering to exist in the world? The real villain of the book is not the devil, who seems almost sympathetic, a reluctant accomplice in the divine scheme, but the old testament Jehovah, a tyrant willing to sacrifice no end of martyrs, beginning with his own son, to achieve his ends. Saramago has faith in the goodness of people, perhaps indicative of his communist sympathies; there are several instances in the narrative where strangers come to the aid of the young Jesus as he goes in search of his ancestry and his destiny; he is sympathetic too with Joseph, whose guilt about not warning the parents of the murdered innocents results in an untimely death. All but the most liberal Christians will be offended by this book, and many will dismiss it as a communist indictment of religion. If, however, you can accept the book's didactic purpose, its passionate disavowal of the idea that there is any kind of divine grace or love, you will be enchanted by Saramago's wordy, often unpunctuated style, his wry, ironical tone, and his brilliant weaving of realist and mythical elements, complete with lengthy "evangelical" glosses. The best novel I have read since "One Hundred Years Of Solitude".

Survival can turn us all into barbarians, 18 Nov 2008
What a book! When an epidemic of sudden blindness happens, the blind and those contaminated by them are quarantined in an old asylum where they are left to fend for themselves. This situation rapidly changes from quarantine into imprisonment and squalor as the blind fumble about - they befoul the corridors as they can't find the toilets, people get injured and die from infection. The army don't deliver enough food and everyone gets gaunt and hungry. When an armed gang of blind men take over the food distribution demanding first valuables and then women in payment, you are truly horrified where before you were revolted by the conditions. I can honestly say it makes you feel dirty.

But there is one person in the asylum who can see - the eye doctor's wife - rather than leave her husband she pretends to be blind, and secretly and subtly tries to help the others around her without giving her secret away. It is through her eyes that we see everything that is going on - and it is a huge burden for her which she bears with grace and dignity.

Eventually the armed gang is overcome, and the internees realise the army outside is gone too and they escape to find a world which has rapidly become a barbarian place as the entire population is now blind. Bodies litter the streets, everyone is searching for food, there is no clean water, dogs and rats scavenge everywhere.

Later there are some marvellous scenes which relieve you temporarily from this grim vision - the cleansing powers of a shower of rain and the friendly dog who licks the tears away. An astonishing and powerful book and powerful commentary on the denial and removal of basic human rights. It was easy to read, although Saramago's largely punctuationless style takes a while to get used to. It is one that will stay with me for a long time.

thought provoking and original , 30 Oct 2008
I was blown away by this book. The whole thing seems like a religious allegory for the selfish modern age. Equally the plot devise of mass population blindness can also be read as the imposing of martial law on a capitalist free state. What really kept me reading though was the writing. The story deals with blindness in a frank way that doesn't shy away from exposing the worst aspects of human nature when it comes to survival in a lawless environment. The character of the doctors wife in intriguing and the symbolism inherent in her characters actions becomes increasingly apparent towards the end of the book. Read it now before the less successful film comes out,

I just don't see it., 04 Oct 2008
This a good book, I just don't think it's as good as other people do. The title and the subject matter suggest a profound work and this really isn't.

The story is fairly engrossing, the characters well executed, but any intelligent insight is vague and suggestive but never conclusive. This 'blindness' doesn't work as the metaphor I suspect it is being intended as, and as such this is simply a 300 page novel about people being unable to see. Which is fairly interesting I suppose, but it say's little new about humanity facing certain challanges and drags on in the middle.

I've not read any of his other works, and I will at somepoint, but this doesn't justify the hype - I just don't see it.

Frightening, but compelling..., 22 Aug 2008
Now on the cusp of a forthcoming film adaptation, which should hopefully bring it some much deserved extra attention, Jose Saramago's extremely provoking book "Blindness" is a wonderfully evocative, frequently disturbing read.

The premise is straight forward; an unexplained disease of sudden blindness plagues a (purposefully) unnamed city. The consequences are predictably devastating.

The key to your final interpretation of this book rests with how you adapt to Saramago's unusual style. This is a book built almost of a series of long paragraphs, practically uninterrupted by normal punctuation. Characters have whole conversations without quotation marks - and it's occasionally quite easy to get lost as to who is speaking to who. The overall effect is dizzying, complex, but quite brilliant. It's an immediate jolt that tells you this is something quite unique. Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but it's akin to when I read my first Cormac McCarthy novel. Something about how it's written just doesn't feel quite right at first.

Stick with it though and you're richly rewarded by a brutal story and frightening imagery that fully deserve your attention. This is a very impressive book.

5 stars is not enough, 27 Jul 2008
This book is amazing, incredible, breathtaking. It was recommended to me and once I started it 2 days ago I have barely been able to put it down. This book has just earned a place in my top 5 ever books and deservedly so.

The story starts with a man in his car at traffic lights who goes suddenly blind. He is helped home by a stranger, who a few hours later also goes blind. Within a few days the blindness has spread round half the city and also those afflicted are herded up by the government into a disused mental assylum and left alone. The wards quickly become overrun with filth and chaos ensues. In the middle of this, though, we get to know a handful of characters very well and it is really their story that we follow through the neverending days, lack of food and riots. The whole story is told through long paragraphs of uunbroken text. There are no quotation marks, hardly any punctuation and none of the characters are given names.

I admit to being concerned that I would find it difficult to overcome the lack of punctuation, but for commas and fullstops, and the lack of names (characters are referred to in such ways as the girl with dark glasses, the boy with the squint etc) but not only was it very easy to get used to this it actually added to the story. Also, although the characters don't have names, I found myself identifying with and caring about these characters far more than I have done in other books as Saramago writing drags you in and you find yourself unable to let go. It's as though I was "there". Genius!

If you read nothing else this year, make it this. It is astounding and I only wish I could award more than 5 stars.


Jesus of ... Magdala?, 29 Dec 2006
Rather like Kazantzakis' "Last Temptation of Christ", Saramago's humanist reinterpretation of the Gospels arguably has a problem of audience: it's likely to offend orthodox Christians while possibly not being quite "hardline" enough for dyed-in-the-wool atheists. It has been less discussed (and has won fewer literary prizes and the like) than Saramago's less controversial novels ("Ricardo Reis", "Balthazar & Blimunda" etc.). This is a pity, since it is Saramago at his very finest - it's my personal favourite of all his novels.

While sticking surprisingly close to its biblical sources, Saramago's novel essentially does what it says on the tin: it re-tells the familiar story from the point of view of a Jesus who is very much human rather than divine. Jehovah may or may not be his biological parent, but Joseph is unquestionably his dad. Mary receives the annunciation not from Gabriel, but from the devil - a mysterious and surprisingly gentle figure who is certainly not all bad. Mary Magdalene is quite categorically Jesus' lover rather than his disciple (indeed, in some ways, he is her disciple). Although blessed or cursed with miracle-working powers by a thoroughly unpleasant Old Testament God the Father, he views himself as human rather than divine, and his eventual crucifixion more as an act of solidarity with his father Joseph (crucified by the Roman army early in the narrative) than an expiation of human sins.

That being said, Jesus himself (despite occasional unexpected Angry Young Man features) remains in essence the familiar gentle altruist of the New Testament. Saramago's Jesus is a fascinatingly complex character, angry with God while full of compassion for suffering humanity, and having a rather troubled relationship with his mother. His meeting with the considerably older Mary Magdalene is one of Saramago's familiarly luminous love stories (indeed, Jesus subsequently describes himself as "Jesus of Magdala" since that is where they met).

Saramago's overall viewpoint is just as complex, and ultimately leaves the reader to make up his or her own mind on the big questions. As well as the obvious atheist-humanist slant, it would be quite possible to take a liberal-Christian view on the book as being very much "about" the transition from Old Testament judgemental God the Father to New Testament God of Love. Is Jesus ultimately just a victim, or does he actually succeed in escaping or subverting the fate wished on him by Jehovah? Or indeed are both viewpoints true at the same time?

A gospel for human beings, 25 Jul 2006
`TGATJC' is Saramago's retelling of the story of Jesus. It is broadly based on the gospels of the New Testament of the Christian bible, but Saramago invents new scenes and re-interprets existing ones. In the book, the characters of the New Testament are presented as being ordinary human beings caught in extraordinary events. Christian tradition teaches that Joseph, Jesus and Mary were all people, but they are usually portrayed as having the aspects of saints and saviours. `TGATJC' asks the question: what would the events of the gospels look like if told by, and about, human beings. The book concentrates largely on Jesus' relationship with his family, and his parents in particular.
Saramago doesn't set out to shock, and despite the opportunity for contraversialism, actually paints a relatively respectful picture of Jesus' family. Their human aspects are emphasised though, and the book begins with an earthy description of Joseph urinating before having sex with Mary, and her birth pains are graphically described. Jesus too is portrayed as having a very human nature: fallible, often confused and sexually active. I didn't find it remotely shocking, and actually thought it to be a touching and realistic portrait of a family. What may be more controversial is Saramago's portrait of God, who is portrayed very much as he appears in the Old Testament (i.e. how people of Jesus' time would have conceived of God). Saramago's God is jealous and power hungry. His battle isn't with the Devil, but with other Gods over the belief of mankind. Jesus' death is part of his quest for power and the devil, rather than an enemy, is an uneasy ally, because one cannot exist without the other. This God is very much the pre-Christian conceptualisation of God, one which the people of Jesus' era would have recognised. Again Saramago asks the question: if Jesus was a man, what would God have looked like to him?
`TGATJC' made a story that I have heard a thousand times seem utterly new. It will undoubtedly upset many people, but if you are prepared to accept the central point, (that of its protagonists' humanity) then it will make you look at the bible story in an entirely new way. It is a skilful piece of writing and, despite the large blocks of unbroken text, easy to read. `TGATJC' is thought-provoking and eye-opening, and anyone wanting a different perspective on the stories in the gospels should read it.


What a wonderful read!, 15 Oct 2003
Despite being slightly put off by the title, I was pleasantly surprised with Saramago's fascinating twist on the life of Jesus Christ. Not only is the book written in a poetic and graceful style which makes the reader glued to each page, but his interpretation of Jesus' life forces one to think and rethink their own values.

Whether or not you are religious is irrelevant when reading this book as it is a wonderful read - due to Saramago's excellence in story telling and painting a picture through words.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would recommend it to readers looking for a wonderfully written book about a subject that may not have previously interested readers.

wonderful, 01 Dec 2002
I started to read "baltasar and blimunda" when I was at school (here in portugal is a book we learn about at school) and I found it to be totally boring. Seven years later I decided to give saramago another chance and I decided to read "the gospel"... and it has become one the best books I've read in years! It changed me a lot and because of it I've read more 3 books of him (neither was "baltasar and blimunda", though).

Two years after reading this book, he won the Nobel... and I wasn't surprised at all. In fact Saramago made me feel very proud for beeing portuguese.

This book is magnificent; if you don't have it yet, you should run and read it.

Masterpiece, 14 Sep 2001
This is a magnificent novel, worthy of comparison with that other great Jesus novel, Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation". Saramago's theme is fairly common, one that has worried theologians for centuries: how can a loving god permit so much evil and suffering to exist in the world? The real villain of the book is not the devil, who seems almost sympathetic, a reluctant accomplice in the divine scheme, but the old testament Jehovah, a tyrant willing to sacrifice no end of martyrs, beginning with his own son, to achieve his ends. Saramago has faith in the goodness of people, perhaps indicative of his communist sympathies; there are several instances in the narrative where strangers come to the aid of the young Jesus as he goes in search of his ancestry and his destiny; he is sympathetic too with Joseph, whose guilt about not warning the parents of the murdered innocents results in an untimely death. All but the most liberal Christians will be offended by this book, and many will dismiss it as a communist indictment of religion. If, however, you can accept the book's didactic purpose, its passionate disavowal of the idea that there is any kind of divine grace or love, you will be enchanted by Saramago's wordy, often unpunctuated style, his wry, ironical tone, and his brilliant weaving of realist and mythical elements, complete with lengthy "evangelical" glosses. The best novel I have read since "One Hundred Years Of Solitude".

Entertaining and thought provoking, 19 Mar 2008
Another book of lunacy (I say that affectionately)from Saramago. I love the stream of consciousness and the jets of non-sequiturs and thought provoking asides as follows:

"The silence that followed these words demonstrated once more that time has nothing to do with the time told by clocks, those small machines made of wheels that do not think and springs that do not feel, devoid of a spirit that would allow them to inagine that five insignificant seconds counted off, one, two, three, four, five, could be an agonising torment for the person at one end of the phone and a pool of sublime pleasure for the other" (page 136) And on the next page: "There was another silence, shorter this time, barely three seconds, during which it was clear that the sublime pleaseure and the agonising torment had changed places". The book is full of such reflections.

But, leaving aside the craziness for a minute, this is a serious book about loss of faith in the political process, not unlike the loss of political "faith" in our own land. However, and this is where I part company with Saramago: his thesis in this book is that man is a noble savage, who, if left to his own devises, will go about his life in a benevolent, orderly and peaceful manner. But, I am afraid, history shows the opposite, that man can indeed be brutal and savage. And, thus unloosening the shackles of Government so that we can all go back to our natural state is, to be blunt, utterly fallacious. But, maybe Saramago is just playing with us as surely the message of "Blindness" was just the opposite of "Seeing". Perhaps, I have simply no idea what he is on about! Does he?

Good read though!



Another classic with a sharp satirical edge, 27 Nov 2007
Saramago created one of the classics of the 20th century in Blindness, and with Seeing he's done it again - almost.

The premise - that 80% of the population cast a blank vote - is inspired. How Saramago follows that up with the reactions of the government is disturbingly believable, while his dry style works impeccably as a counterpoint to the drama taking place. The first 180 pages of this book are an incredibly powerful experience - akin to Blindness - but then Saramago seems to admit that he doesn't know how to end the book, and the final 100 pages gets somewhat diverted from the satirical edge that came before. The ending lacks closure and some readers may be disappointed by that.

That apart, this is still an incredible read - thought-provoking, stimulating, and wonderfully written - Saramago is brave enough not to use names and not to rely on important characters, but the story still stands up. Thoroughly recommended.

Seeing for yourself, 18 Oct 2007
A follow up of sorts to Blindness, Seeing sees (NPI) Saramago return to the same unnamed country where a new bunch of nameless cyphers attempt to fix a minimal-participation election. Whereas the prequel had a strong narrative underlying Saramago's distinctive prose style, this one, with its description of political confusion arising from a power vacuum, uses its author's tricks to satarise the kind of silly talk politicans engage in to create a sense of stability atop of an abyss. It is successful in doing this, whether it is enjoyable or enriching is another matter.

Such a tedious read I just couldn't get into the story, and eventually gave up, 05 Oct 2007
I feel that one star is possibly a little harsh, but the score is based on the (lack of) enjoyment I got from the book, and the sheer pain reading it caused me.

I can't actually remember giving up on any other book in anger, not after I'd got some way into it, and especially not through sheer frustration at the effort necessary to simply read the book. I've read other books I've not enjoyed, but never before has the lack of enjoyment been enough to overpower my desire to see how a story unfolds. And this book had a potentially very interesting story; however, as much as I wanted to be pulled into the story, the writing style just kept fighting back, and prevented me from being drawn in.

I was wondering how to put into words the problems I found with the style, but luckily another reviewer did it for me, so I'll quote them:

"Saramago is a challenging writer; his insistence upon endless prose with little to no puntuation, and a refusal to give names to characters, let alone use the conventions of paragraphs and speech marks for dialogues, all add up to a slower, more arduous read"

This highlights almost all the problems I found with the book. Conversations between people (which just about all the speech in the book, and a lot of the text, consisted of) were almost impossible to follow, and half the time I found myself having to re-read them to follow who had said what, and the other half thinking it just actually wasn't relevant, and was just waffle anyway. Which is the second problem, I'm not surprised the city and country in the book has such problems, everyone there, absolutely everyone (including the narrator), just waffles on and on and on so much when they are talking, veering off on one aside after another aside after another aside to tedious extremes, making me very glad I didn't live in this fictional place.

I was actually mildly tempted at one point to rewrite the book without all the waffle, just out of interest to see how short the book would be without all the - as it seemed to me - verbal padding. Of course, this would have meant having to spend far far too much time with the book than I could possibly stand, but at a rough estimate, I'd have thought it wouldn't be much more than 50 pages long.

The quote above also highlights what I think is part of another issue I had with the book. Im a big fan of character based books, I find most of my favourite books (and films for that matter) tend to have lots of different distinct characters in them. Often the characters don't even need to do much, they just need to be there. This book had characters, but they didn't have names, their personalities didn't seem all that distinct from each other (possibly due to the fact it was always hard to know who was saying what in a conversation), and I just didn't care about or for any of them.

I did really try to like the book, I really did think the idea had potential, and I was keen to find out how it all ended. Again and again I was tempted just to give up, actually tempted to tear the book up, infuriated by the snails pace at which I was progressing through the book. I'd actually got about two thirds through, before I eventually gave in. I just couldn't take it any more, and threw the book into the recycling box.

I hadn't read the sort-of-prequel, but I don't think that was the issue, and there's no way I'm going to find out, as I'm afraid I'm never touching a book by this author again.

Still think your vote is meaningless? Read this and think again!, 16 May 2007
Four years ago a City was hit by a plague of blindness. It was contagious and there was no cure. Before long the entire population was blind and the City descended into savagery. But one woman retained her sight, leading her friends to survival. Through it all she had to watch as the savage and horrific events unfolded. But then, as quickly as it started, the blindness began to ease, people regained their sight and everything returned to normal.

This was the plot of the startlingly original and thoroughly terrifying novel from Portuguese Nobel Prize winning author Jose Saramago. `Blindness' was a pleasure to read, as is `Seeing'.

We are now four years later and it is election day. But when the results are announced the government is devastated to discover that over 70% of the votes cast are blank. Not spoiled, not abstained, just blank. They hastily call a new election but the results only get worse, now over 83% have cast blank votes. The Government panics, indignantly struggling to contain what they see as a strike at the very heart of democracy. But there is no sign of where this conspiracy has come from, no sign of what criminal mastermind is behind it all. They declare a state of emergency and blockade the City, to teach the people a lesson about democratic responsibility.

Just as in `Blindness' the premise behind this novel is absolutely fantastic. There are few books which are as timely or whose satire is as incisive and funny. The portrayal of a pseudo-dictatorial democratic government dogmatically using every dirty trick in the book to dissuade the populace from dissent is disturbingly believable. It is impossible not to be inspired by the opportunity for political dissent that such a mass tactic would provide, is impossible not to dream of such unity of hearts and minds. The subtlety of the author allows him to write the entire book from the perspective of the authorities whist, at the same time, lambasting their all too believable policies.

The prose style is dense and Saramago's archetypal style makes for an often difficult read. This is a book to read feverishly in a couple of days because it can be difficult to pick up and put down. Also the narrative distance that Saramago affords his characters means they are difficult to connect with and there is little emotional centre to associate with. Instead this is a fearsomely intelligent tour de force in which Saramago questions how we can live so passively in a world like ours.

And the question remains: what or who has led the populace to act in this divisive way? Or could it be that the City is suffering once more from an infectious plague, this time making people see more than any disparate group ever could. Perhaps I read too much into the ending of this book, but if not then `Seeing' has one of the most brilliantly conceived plots of any book I have ever read.

Survival can turn us all into barbarians, 18 Nov 2008
What a book! When an epidemic of sudden blindness happens, the blind and those contaminated by them are quarantined in an old asylum where they are left to fend for themselves. This situation rapidly changes from quarantine into imprisonment and squalor as the blind fumble about - they befoul the corridors as they can't find the toilets, people get injured and die from infection. The army don't deliver enough food and everyone gets gaunt and hungry. When an armed gang of blind men take over the food distribution demanding first valuables and then women in payment, you are truly horrified where before you were revolted by the conditions. I can honestly say it makes you feel dirty.

But there is one person in the asylum who can see - the eye doctor's wife - rather than leave her husband she pretends to be blind, and secretly and subtly tries to help the others around her without giving her secret away. It is through her eyes that we see everything that is going on - and it is a huge burden for her which she bears with grace and dignity.

Eventually the armed gang is overcome, and the internees realise the army outside is gone too and they escape to find a world which has rapidly become a barbarian place as the entire population is now blind. Bodies litter the streets, everyone is searching for food, there is no clean water, dogs and rats scavenge everywhere.

Later there are some marvellous scenes which relieve you temporarily from this grim vision - the cleansing powers of a shower of rain and the friendly dog who licks the tears away. An astonishing and powerful book and powerful commentary on the denial and removal of basic human rights. It was easy to read, although Saramago's largely punctuationless style takes a while to get used to. It is one that will stay with me for a long time.

thought provoking and original , 30 Oct 2008
I was blown away by this book. The whole thing seems like a religious allegory for the selfish modern age. Equally the plot devise of mass population blindness can also be read as the imposing of martial law on a capitalist free state. What really kept me reading though was the writing. The story deals with blindness in a frank way that doesn't shy away from exposing the worst aspects of human nature when it comes to survival in a lawless environment. The character of the doctors wife in intriguing and the symbolism inherent in her characters actions becomes increasingly apparent towards the end of the book. Read it now before the less successful film comes out,

I just don't see it., 04 Oct 2008
This a good book, I just don't think it's as good as other people do. The title and the subject matter suggest a profound work and this really isn't.

The story is fairly engrossing, the characters well executed, but any intelligent insight is vague and suggestive but never conclusive. This 'blindness' doesn't work as the metaphor I suspect it is being intended as, and as such this is simply a 300 page novel about people being unable to see. Which is fairly interesting I suppose, but it say's little new about humanity facing certain challanges and drags on in the middle.

I've not read any of his other works, and I will at somepoint, but this doesn't justify the hype - I just don't see it.

Frightening, but compelling..., 22 Aug 2008
Now on the cusp of a forthcoming film adaptation, which should hopefully bring it some much deserved extra attention, Jose Saramago's extremely provoking book "Blindness" is a wonderfully evocative, frequently disturbing read.

The premise is straight forward; an unexplained disease of sudden blindness plagues a (purposefully) unnamed city. The consequences are predictably devastating.

The key to your final interpretation of this book rests with how you adapt to Saramago's unusual style. This is a book built almost of a series of long paragraphs, practically uninterrupted by normal punctuation. Characters have whole conversations without quotation marks - and it's occasionally quite easy to get lost as to who is speaking to who. The overall effect is dizzying, complex, but quite brilliant. It's an immediate jolt that tells you this is something quite unique. Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but it's akin to when I read my first Cormac McCarthy novel. Something about how it's written just doesn't feel quite right at first.

Stick with it though and you're richly rewarded by a brutal story and frightening imagery that fully deserve your attention. This is a very impressive book.

5 stars is not enough, 27 Jul 2008
This book is amazing, incredible, breathtaking. It was recommended to me and once I started it 2 days ago I have barely been able to put it down. This book has just earned a place in my top 5 ever books and deservedly so.

The story starts with a man in his car at traffic lights who goes suddenly blind. He is helped home by a stranger, who a few hours later also goes blind. Within a few days the blindness has spread round half the city and also those afflicted are herded up by the government into a disused mental assylum and left alone. The wards quickly become overrun with filth and chaos ensues. In the middle of this, though, we get to know a handful of characters very well and it is really their story that we follow through the neverending days, lack of food and riots. The whole story is told through long paragraphs of uunbroken text. There are no quotation marks, hardly any punctuation and none of the characters are given names.

I admit to being concerned that I would find it difficult to overcome the lack of punctuation, but for commas and fullstops, and the lack of names (characters are referred to in such ways as the girl with dark glasses, the boy with the squint etc) but not only was it very easy to get used to this it actually added to the story. Also, although the characters don't have names, I found myself identifying with and caring about these characters far more than I have done in other books as Saramago writing drags you in and you find yourself unable to let go. It's as though I was "there". Genius!

If you read nothing else this year, make it this. It is astounding and I only wish I could award more than 5 stars.


Jesus of ... Magdala?, 29 Dec 2006
Rather like Kazantzakis' "Last Temptation of Christ", Saramago's humanist reinterpretation of the Gospels arguably has a problem of audience: it's likely to offend orthodox Christians while possibly not being quite "hardline" enough for dyed-in-the-wool atheists. It has been less discussed (and has won fewer literary prizes and the like) than Saramago's less controversial novels ("Ricardo Reis", "Balthazar & Blimunda" etc.). This is a pity, since it is Saramago at his very finest - it's my personal favourite of all his novels.

While sticking surprisingly close to its biblical sources, Saramago's novel essentially does what it says on the tin: it re-tells the familiar story from the point of view of a Jesus who is very much human rather than divine. Jehovah may or may not be his biological parent, but Joseph is unquestionably his dad. Mary receives the annunciation not from Gabriel, but from the devil - a mysterious and surprisingly gentle figure who is certainly not all bad. Mary Magdalene is quite categorically Jesus' lover rather than his disciple (indeed, in some ways, he is her disciple). Although blessed or cursed with miracle-working powers by a thoroughly unpleasant Old Testament God the Father, he views himself as human rather than divine, and his eventual crucifixion more as an act of solidarity with his father Joseph (crucified by the Roman army early in the narrative) than an expiation of human sins.

That being said, Jesus himself (despite occasional unexpected Angry Young Man features) remains in essence the familiar gentle altruist of the New Testament. Saramago's Jesus is a fascinatingly complex character, angry with God while full of compassion for suffering humanity, and having a rather troubled relationship with his mother. His meeting with the considerably older Mary Magdalene is one of Saramago's familiarly luminous love stories (indeed, Jesus subsequently describes himself as "Jesus of Magdala" since that is where they met).

Saramago's overall viewpoint is just as complex, and ultimately leaves the reader to make up his or her own mind on the big questions. As well as the obvious atheist-humanist slant, it would be quite possible to take a liberal-Christian view on the book as being very much "about" the transition from Old Testament judgemental God the Father to New Testament God of Love. Is Jesus ultimately just a victim, or does he actually succeed in escaping or subverting the fate wished on him by Jehovah? Or indeed are both viewpoints true at the same time?

A gospel for human beings, 25 Jul 2006
`TGATJC' is Saramago's retelling of the story of Jesus. It is broadly based on the gospels of the New Testament of the Christian bible, but Saramago invents new scenes and re-interprets existing ones. In the book, the characters of the New Testament are presented as being ordinary human beings caught in extraordinary events. Christian tradition teaches that Joseph, Jesus and Mary were all people, but they are usually portrayed as having the aspects of saints and saviours. `TGATJC' asks the question: what would the events of the gospels look like if told by, and about, human beings. The book concentrates largely on Jesus' relationship with his family, and his parents in particular.
Saramago doesn't set out to shock, and despite the opportunity for contraversialism, actually paints a relatively respectful picture of Jesus' family. Their human aspects are emphasised though, and the book begins with an earthy description of Joseph urinating before having sex with Mary, and her birth pains are graphically described. Jesus too is portrayed as having a very human nature: fallible, often confused and sexually active. I didn't find it remotely shocking, and actually thought it to be a touching and realistic portrait of a family. What may be more controversial is Saramago's portrait of God, who is portrayed very much as he appears in the Old Testament (i.e. how people of Jesus' time would have conceived of God). Saramago's God is jealous and power hungry. His battle isn't with the Devil, but with other Gods over the belief of mankind. Jesus' death is part of his quest for power and the devil, rather than an enemy, is an uneasy ally, because one cannot exist without the other. This God is very much the pre-Christian conceptualisation of God, one which the people of Jesus' era would have recognised. Again Saramago asks the question: if Jesus was a man, what would God have looked like to him?
`TGATJC' made a story that I have heard a thousand times seem utterly new. It will undoubtedly upset many people, but if you are prepared to accept the central point, (that of its protagonists' humanity) then it will make you look at the bible story in an entirely new way. It is a skilful piece of writing and, despite the large blocks of unbroken text, easy to read. `TGATJC' is thought-provoking and eye-opening, and anyone wanting a different perspective on the stories in the gospels should read it.


What a wonderful read!, 15 Oct 2003
Despite being slightly put off by the title, I was pleasantly surprised with Saramago's fascinating twist on the life of Jesus Christ. Not only is the book written in a poetic and graceful style which makes the reader glued to each page, but his interpretation of Jesus' life forces one to think and rethink their own values.

Whether or not you are religious is irrelevant when reading this book as it is a wonderful read - due to Saramago's excellence in story telling and painting a picture through words.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would recommend it to readers looking for a wonderfully written book about a subject that may not have previously interested readers.

wonderful, 01 Dec 2002
I started to read "baltasar and blimunda" when I was at school (here in portugal is a book we learn about at school) and I found it to be totally boring. Seven years later I decided to give saramago another chance and I decided to read "the gospel"... and it has become one the best books I've read in years! It changed me a lot and because of it I've read more 3 books of him (neither was "baltasar and blimunda", though).

Two years after reading this book, he won the Nobel... and I wasn't surprised at all. In fact Saramago made me feel very proud for beeing portuguese.

This book is magnificent; if you don't have it yet, you should run and read it.

Masterpiece, 14 Sep 2001
This is a magnificent novel, worthy of comparison with that other great Jesus novel, Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation". Saramago's theme is fairly common, one that has worried theologians for centuries: how can a loving god permit so much evil and suffering to exist in the world? The real villain of the book is not the devil, who seems almost sympathetic, a reluctant accomplice in the divine scheme, but the old testament Jehovah, a tyrant willing to sacrifice no end of martyrs, beginning with his own son, to achieve his ends. Saramago has faith in the goodness of people, perhaps indicative of his communist sympathies; there are several instances in the narrative where strangers come to the aid of the young Jesus as he goes in search of his ancestry and his destiny; he is sympathetic too with Joseph, whose guilt about not warning the parents of the murdered innocents results in an untimely death. All but the most liberal Christians will be offended by this book, and many will dismiss it as a communist indictment of religion. If, however, you can accept the book's didactic purpose, its passionate disavowal of the idea that there is any kind of divine grace or love, you will be enchanted by Saramago's wordy, often unpunctuated style, his wry, ironical tone, and his brilliant weaving of realist and mythical elements, complete with lengthy "evangelical" glosses. The best novel I have read since "One Hundred Years Of Solitude".

Entertaining and thought provoking, 19 Mar 2008
Another book of lunacy (I say that affectionately)from Saramago. I love the stream of consciousness and the jets of non-sequiturs and thought provoking asides as follows:

"The silence that followed these words demonstrated once more that time has nothing to do with the time told by clocks, those small machines made of wheels that do not think and springs that do not feel, devoid of a spirit that would allow them to inagine that five insignificant seconds counted off, one, two, three, four, five, could be an agonising torment for the person at one end of the phone and a pool of sublime pleasure for the other" (page 136) And on the next page: "There was another silence, shorter this time, barely three seconds, during which it was clear that the sublime pleaseure and the agonising torment had changed places". The book is full of such reflections.

But, leaving aside the craziness for a minute, this is a serious book about loss of faith in the political process, not unlike the loss of political "faith" in our own land. However, and this is where I part company with Saramago: his thesis in this book is that man is a noble savage, who, if left to his own devises, will go about his life in a benevolent, orderly and peaceful manner. But, I am afraid, history shows the opposite, that man can indeed be brutal and savage. And, thus unloosening the shackles of Government so that we can all go back to our natural state is, to be blunt, utterly fallacious. But, maybe Saramago is just playing with us as surely the message of "Blindness" was just the opposite of "Seeing". Perhaps, I have simply no idea what he is on about! Does he?

Good read though!



Another classic with a sharp satirical edge, 27 Nov 2007
Saramago created one of the classics of the 20th century in Blindness, and with Seeing he's done it again - almost.

The premise - that 80% of the population cast a blank vote - is inspired. How Saramago follows that up with the reactions of the government is disturbingly believable, while his dry style works impeccably as a counterpoint to the drama taking place. The first 180 pages of this book are an incredibly powerful experience - akin to Blindness - but then Saramago seems to admit that he doesn't know how to end the book, and the final 100 pages gets somewhat diverted from the satirical edge that came before. The ending lacks closure and some readers may be disappointed by that.

That apart, this is still an incredible read - thought-provoking, stimulating, and wonderfully written - Saramago is brave enough not to use names and not to rely on important characters, but the story still stands up. Thoroughly recommended.

Seeing for yourself, 18 Oct 2007
A follow up of sorts to Blindness, Seeing sees (NPI) Saramago return to the same unnamed country where a new bunch of nameless cyphers attempt to fix a minimal-participation election. Whereas the prequel had a strong narrative underlying Saramago's distinctive prose style, this one, with its description of political confusion arising from a power vacuum, uses its author's tricks to satarise the kind of silly talk politicans engage in to create a sense of stability atop of an abyss. It is successful in doing this, whether it is enjoyable or enriching is another matter.

Such a tedious read I just couldn't get into the story, and eventually gave up, 05 Oct 2007
I feel that one star is possibly a little harsh, but the score is based on the (lack of) enjoyment I got from the book, and the sheer pain reading it caused me.

I can't actually remember giving up on any other book in anger, not after I'd got some way into it, and especially not through sheer frustration at the effort necessary to simply read the book. I've read other books I've not enjoyed, but never before has the lack of enjoyment been enough to overpower my desire to see how a story unfolds. And this book had a potentially very interesting story; however, as much as I wanted to be pulled into the story, the writing style just kept fighting back, and prevented me from being drawn in.

I was wondering how to put into words the problems I found with the style, but luckily another reviewer did it for me, so I'll quote them:

"Saramago is a challenging writer; his insistence upon endless prose with little to no puntuation, and a refusal to give names to characters, let alone use the conventions of paragraphs and speech marks for dialogues, all add up to a slower, more arduous read"

This highlights almost all the problems I found with the book. Conversations between people (which just about all the speech in the book, and a lot of the text, consisted of) were almost impossible to follow, and half the time I found myself having to re-read them to follow who had said what, and the other half thinking it just actually wasn't relevant, and was just waffle anyway. Which is the second problem, I'm not surprised the city and country in the book has such problems, everyone there, absolutely everyone (including the narrator), just waffles on and on and on so much when they are talking, veering off on one aside after another aside after another aside to tedious extremes, making me very glad I didn't live in this fictional place.

I was actually mildly tempted at one point to rewrite the book without all the waffle, just out of interest to see how short the book would be without all the - as it seemed to me - verbal padding. Of course, this would have meant having to spend far far too much time with the book than I could possibly stand, but at a rough estimate, I'd have thought it wouldn't be much more than 50 pages long.

The quote above also highlights what I think is part of another issue I had with the book. Im a big fan of character based books, I find most of my favourite books (and films for that matter) tend to have lots of different distinct characters in them. Often the characters don't even need to do much, they just need to be there. This book had characters, but they didn't have names, their personalities didn't seem all that distinct from each other (possibly due to the fact it was always hard to know who was saying what in a conversation), and I just didn't care about or for any of them.

I did really try to like the book, I really did think the idea had potential, and I was keen to find out how it all ended. Again and again I was tempted just to give up, actually tempted to tear the book up, infuriated by the snails pace at which I was progressing through the book. I'd actually got about two thirds through, before I eventually gave in. I just couldn't take it any more, and threw the book into the recycling box.

I hadn't read the sort-of-prequel, but I don't think that was the issue, and there's no way I'm going to find out, as I'm afraid I'm never touching a book by this author again.

Still think your vote is meaningless? Read this and think again!, 16 May 2007
Four years ago a City was hit by a plague of blindness. It was contagious and there was no cure. Before long the entire population was blind and the City descended into savagery. But one woman retained her sight, leading her friends to survival. Through it all she had to watch as the savage and horrific events unfolded. But then, as quickly as it started, the blindness began to ease, people regained their sight and everything returned to normal.

This was the plot of the startlingly original and thoroughly terrifying novel from Portuguese Nobel Prize winning author Jose Saramago. `Blindness' was a pleasure to read, as is `Seeing'.

We are now four years later and it is election day. But when the results are announced the government is devastated to discover that over 70% of the votes cast are blank. Not spoiled, not abstained, just blank. They hastily call a new election but the results only get worse, now over 83% have cast blank votes. The Government panics, indignantly struggling to contain what they see as a strike at the very heart of democracy. But there is no sign of where this conspiracy has come from, no sign of what criminal mastermind is behind it all. They declare a state of emergency and blockade the City, to teach the people a lesson about democratic responsibility.

Just as in `Blindness' the premise behind this novel is absolutely fantastic. There are few books which are as timely or whose satire is as incisive and funny. The portrayal of a pseudo-dictatorial democratic government dogmatically using every dirty trick in the book to dissuade the populace from dissent is disturbingly believable. It is impossible not to be inspired by the opportunity for political dissent that such a mass tactic would provide, is impossible not to dream of such unity of hearts and minds. The subtlety of the author allows him to write the entire book from the perspective of the authorities whist, at the same time, lambasting their all too believable policies.

The prose style is dense and Saramago's archetypal style makes for an often difficult read. This is a book to read feverishly in a couple of days because it can be difficult to pick up and put down. Also the narrative distance that Saramago affords his characters means they are difficult to connect with and there is little emotional centre to associate with. Instead this is a fearsomely intelligent tour de force in which Saramago questions how we can live so passively in a world like ours.

And the question remains: what or who has led the populace to act in this divisive way? Or could it be that the City is suffering once more from an infectious plague, this time making people see more than any disparate group ever could. Perhaps I read too much into the ending of this book, but if not then `Seeing' has one of the most brilliantly conceived plots of any book I have ever read.


superb, 21 Apr 2008
Saramago has to be the greatest living writer today. His new book is a strange fable which draws the reader into the bizarre in a way which appears almost believable. Highly recommended.

death, where is thy sting?, 24 Mar 2008
There are several reasons why this is not Jose Saramago's best book. The first is that it is, if anything, two books rather awkwardly spliced together. The first is a satirical piece about a country reacting to the withdrawal and, later, return of Death - or rather "death" herself. Whereas in earlier novels such as "Blindness" or "The Cave", Saramago revealed the world to us through the eyes of his characters, slowly unveiling their confusion and disturbance, here he chooses the omniscient narratorial view traditionally favoured by satirists. I must say, it did not work for me. Saramago's steady and measured (at least in this translation) prose lacks both the necessary lightness and bite, and as a consequence his satirical observations can seem somewhat banal: politicians try to talk their way out of problems and do dodgy deals, the Church tries to cover things up, the mafia (or rather "maphia") make money, people muddle through. So what?

The second - more successful - novel is the story of death herself, a death worn down - unknowingly - by millennia of dutifully and flawlessly performing her allotted task. When one of her "victims" fails to die, she chooses to investigate matters in person, finding her own outlook changed in the process. This section finds Saramago on much better form. He has a real empathy with the victim, whether that victim be an old potter, a seeing woman among the blind, or even Christ and his family. Here he shows us the vulnerability of a figure usually seen as the ultimate victor. Unfortunately for the author, however, he has pitted himself against another satirist, who has specialised for a long time in showing us the humanity of death: Terry Pratchett. Pratchett's Death, like Saramago's "death", is weighed down by years of service and, like Saramago's version, decides to take a leave of absence. Unlike Saramago's death, Death also has a sense of humour and is given to popping to the takeaway for a curry. He also seems to have a more sophisticated take on his own destiny and that of humanity than Saramago's death, whose decision at the end of the novel seems inevitable and rather trite long before death herself decides to make it.

Overall, if you want to read a brilliant book by Jose Saramago, read "The Cave" or "Blindness" or any of his other marvellous works. If you want to read a brilliant book about Death and its vital role in our lives, read "Mort" or "Reaper Man" by Terry Pratchett.

Better and better, 19 Mar 2008
This appears to be the third of a series of books in which Saramago's fictional city comes to terms with the effects of some implausible but brilliant affliction. In the first - blindness - we see the city struck down with an inability to see; The second - seeing - sees the city's inhabitants unanimously cast blank votes in th general election, and here, the city is now in the grip of death's abscence, literally unable to die.

Saramago's gift is the way in which he uses these events to explore the consequences in a society set up to deal only with the inevitable. In this latest, the abscence of death holds huge problems for the church's theologising, the government's ability to govern (for what of endless pension payments?!), the hospitals' intake and the funeral homes' sudden insolvency. The book is riddled with small snapshots of the effects on ordinary people, nicely juxaposed with the government's reaction on a larger scale.

Saramago commands his prose beautifully, and his ability to constantly both engage and involve the reader (we are reminded throughout that this is all taking place on the page) is credit to his ability; if you haven't read any Saramago yet, begin with The Double (still his best) and then if not this series, then this particular book. Wonderful.

Survival can turn us all into barbarians, 18 Nov 2008
What a book! When an epidemic of sudden blindness happens, the blind and those contaminated by them are quarantined in an old asylum where they are left to fend for themselves. This situation rapidly changes from quarantine into imprisonment and squalor as the blind fumble about - they befoul the corridors as they can't find the toilets, people get injured and die from infection. The army don't deliver enough food and everyone gets gaunt and hungry. When an armed gang of blind men take over the food distribution demanding first valuables and then women in payment, you are truly horrified where before you were revolted by the conditions. I can honestly say it makes you feel dirty.

But there is one person in the asylum who can see - the eye doctor's wife - rather than leave her husband she pretends to be blind, and secretly and subtly tries to help the others around her without giving her secret away. It is through her eyes that we see everything that is going on - and it is a huge burden for her which she bears with grace and dignity.

Eventually the armed gang is overcome, and the internees realise the army outside is gone too and they escape to find a world which has rapidly become a barbarian place as the entire population is now blind. Bodies litter the streets, everyone is searching for food, there is no clean water, dogs and rats scavenge everywhere.

Later there are some marvellous scenes which relieve you temporarily from this grim vision - the cleansing powers of a shower of rain and the friendly dog who licks the tears away. An astonishing and powerful book and powerful commentary on the denial and removal of basic human rights. It was easy to read, although Saramago's largely punctuationless style takes a while to get used to. It is one that will stay with me for a long time.

thought provoking and original , 30 Oct 2008
I was blown away by this book. The whole thing seems like a religious allegory for the selfish modern age. Equally the plot devise of mass population blindness can also be read as the imposing of martial law on a capitalist free state. What really kept me reading though was the writing. The story deals with blindness in a frank way that doesn't shy away from exposing the worst aspects of human nature when it comes to survival in a lawless environment. The character of the doctors wife in intriguing and the symbolism inherent in her characters actions becomes increasingly apparent towards the end of the book. Read it now before the less successful film comes out,

I just don't see it., 04 Oct 2008
This a good book, I just don't think it's as good as other people do. The title and the subject matter suggest a profound work and this really isn't.

The story is fairly engrossing, the characters well executed, but any intelligent insight is vague and suggestive but never conclusive. This 'blindness' doesn't work as the metaphor I suspect it is being intended as, and as such this is simply a 300 page novel about people being unable to see. Which is fairly interesting I suppose, but it say's little new about humanity facing certain challanges and drags on in the middle.

I've not read any of his other works, and I will at somepoint, but this doesn't justify the hype - I just don't see it.

Frightening, but compelling..., 22 Aug 2008
Now on the cusp of a forthcoming film adaptation, which should hopefully bring it some much deserved extra attention, Jose Saramago's extremely provoking book "Blindness" is a wonderfully evocative, frequently disturbing read.

The premise is straight forward; an unexplained disease of sudden blindness plagues a (purposefully) unnamed city. The consequences are predictably devastating.

The key to your final interpretation of this book rests with how you adapt to Saramago's unusual style. This is a book built almost of a series of long paragraphs, practically uninterrupted by normal punctuation. Characters have whole conversations without quotation marks - and it's occasionally quite easy to get lost as to who is speaking to who. The overall effect is dizzying, complex, but quite brilliant. It's an immediate jolt that tells you this is something quite unique. Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but it's akin to when I read my first Cormac McCarthy novel. Something about how it's written just doesn't feel quite right at first.

Stick with it though and you're richly rewarded by a brutal story and frightening imagery that fully deserve your attention. This is a very impressive book.

5 stars is not enough, 27 Jul 2008
This book is amazing, incredible, breathtaking. It was recommended to me and once I started it 2 days ago I have barely been able to put it down. This book has just earned a place in my top 5 ever books and deservedly so.

The story starts with a man in his car at traffic lights who goes suddenly blind. He is helped home by a stranger, who a few hours later also goes blind. Within a few days the blindness has spread round half the city and also those afflicted are herded up by the government into a disused mental assylum and left alone. The wards quickly become overrun with filth and chaos ensues. In the middle of this, though, we get to know a handful of characters very well and it is really their story that we follow through the neverending days, lack of food and riots. The whole story is told through long paragraphs of uunbroken text. There are no quotation marks, hardly any punctuation and none of the characters are given names.

I admit to being concerned that I would find it difficult to overcome the lack of punctuation, but for commas and fullstops, and the lack of names (characters are referred to in such ways as the girl with dark glasses, the boy with the squint etc) but not only was it very easy to get used to this it actually added to the story. Also, although the characters don't have names, I found myself identifying with and caring about these characters far more than I have done in other books as Saramago writing drags you in and you find yourself unable to let go. It's as though I was "there". Genius!

If you read nothing else this year, make it this. It is astounding and I only wish I could award more than 5 stars.


Jesus of ... Magdala?, 29 Dec 2006
Rather like Kazantzakis' "Last Temptation of Christ", Saramago's humanist reinterpretation of the Gospels arguably has a problem of audience: it's likely to offend orthodox Christians while possibly not being quite "hardline" enough for dyed-in-the-wool atheists. It has been less discussed (and has won fewer literary prizes and the like) than Saramago's less controversial novels ("Ricardo Reis", "Balthazar & Blimunda" etc.). This is a pity, since it is Saramago at his very finest - it's my personal favourite of all his novels.

While sticking surprisingly close to its biblical sources, Saramago's novel essentially does what it says on the tin: it re-tells the familiar story from the point of view of a Jesus who is very much human rather than divine. Jehovah may or may not be his biological parent, but Joseph is unquestionably his dad. Mary receives the annunciation not from Gabriel, but from the devil - a mysterious and surprisingly gentle figure who is certainly not all bad. Mary Magdalene is quite categorically Jesus' lover rather than his disciple (indeed, in some ways, he is her disciple). Although blessed or cursed with miracle-working powers by a thoroughly unpleasant Old Testament God the Father, he views himself as human rather than divine, and his eventual crucifixion more as an act of solidarity with his father Joseph (crucified by the Roman army early in the narrative) than an expiation of human sins.

That being said, Jesus himself (despite occasional unexpected Angry Young Man features) remains in essence the familiar gentle altruist of the New Testament. Saramago's Jesus is a fascinatingly complex character, angry with God while full of compassion for suffering humanity, and having a rather troubled relationship with his mother. His meeting with the considerably older Mary Magdalene is one of Saramago's familiarly luminous love stories (indeed, Jesus subsequently describes himself as "Jesus of Magdala" since that is where they met).

Saramago's overall viewpoint is just as complex, and ultimately leaves the reader to make up his or her own mind on the big questions. As well as the obvious atheist-humanist slant, it would be quite possible to take a liberal-Christian view on the book as being very much "about" the transition from Old Testament judgemental God the Father to New Testament God of Love. Is Jesus ultimately just a victim, or does he actually succeed in escaping or subverting the fate wished on him by Jehovah? Or indeed are both viewpoints true at the same time?

A gospel for human beings, 25 Jul 2006
`TGATJC' is Saramago's retelling of the story of Jesus. It is broadly based on the gospels of the New Testament of the Christian bible, but Saramago invents new scenes and re-interprets existing ones. In the book, the characters of the New Testament are presented as being ordinary human beings caught in extraordinary events. Christian tradition teaches that Joseph, Jesus and Mary were all people, but they are usually portrayed as having the aspects of saints and saviours. `TGATJC' asks the question: what would the events of the gospels look like if told by, and about, human beings. The book concentrates largely on Jesus' relationship with his family, and his parents in particular.
Saramago doesn't set out to shock, and despite the opportunity for contraversialism, actually paints a relatively respectful picture of Jesus' family. Their human aspects are emphasised though, and the book begins with an earthy description of Joseph urinating before having sex with Mary, and her birth pains are graphically described. Jesus too is portrayed as having a very human nature: fallible, often confused and sexually active. I didn't find it remotely shocking, and actually thought it to be a touching and realistic portrait of a family. What may be more controversial is Saramago's portrait of God, who is portrayed very much as he appears in the Old Testament (i.e. how people of Jesus' time would have conceived of God). Saramago's God is jealous and power hungry. His battle isn't with the Devil, but with other Gods over the belief of mankind. Jesus' death is part of his quest for power and the devil, rather than an enemy, is an uneasy ally, because one cannot exist without the other. This God is very much the pre-Christian conceptualisation of God, one which the people of Jesus' era would have recognised. Again Saramago asks the question: if Jesus was a man, what would God have looked like to him?
`TGATJC' made a story that I have heard a thousand times seem utterly new. It will undoubtedly upset many people, but if you are prepared to accept the central point, (that of its protagonists' humanity) then it will make you look at the bible story in an entirely new way. It is a skilful piece of writing and, despite the large blocks of unbroken text, easy to read. `TGATJC' is thought-provoking and eye-opening, and anyone wanting a different perspective on the stories in the gospels should read it.


What a wonderful read!, 15 Oct 2003
Despite being slightly put off by the title, I was pleasantly surprised with Saramago's fascinating twist on the life of Jesus Christ. Not only is the book written in a poetic and graceful style which makes the reader glued to each page, but his interpretation of Jesus' life forces one to think and rethink their own values.

Whether or not you are religious is irrelevant when reading this book as it is a wonderful read - due to Saramago's excellence in story telling and painting a picture through words.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would recommend it to readers looking for a wonderfully written book about a subject that may not have previously interested readers.

wonderful, 01 Dec 2002
I started to read "baltasar and blimunda" when I was at school (here in portugal is a book we learn about at school) and I found it to be totally boring. Seven years later I decided to give saramago another chance and I decided to read "the gospel"... and it has become one the best books I've read in years! It changed me a lot and because of it I've read more 3 books of him (neither was "baltasar and blimunda", though).

Two years after reading this book, he won the Nobel... and I wasn't surprised at all. In fact Saramago made me feel very proud for beeing portuguese.

This book is magnificent; if you don't have it yet, you should run and read it.

Masterpiece, 14 Sep 2001
This is a magnificent novel, worthy of comparison with that other great Jesus novel, Kazantzakis' "The Last Temptation". Saramago's theme is fairly common, one that has worried theologians for centuries: how can a loving god permit so much evil and suffering to exist in the world? The real villain of the book is not the devil, who seems almost sympathetic, a reluctant accomplice in the divine scheme, but the old testament Jehovah, a tyrant willing to sacrifice no end of martyrs, beginning with his own son, to achieve his ends. Saramago has faith in the goodness of people, perhaps indicative of his communist sympathies; there are several instances in the narrative where strangers come to the aid of the young Jesus as he goes in search of his ancestry and his destiny; he is sympathetic too with Joseph, whose guilt about not warning the parents of the murdered innocents results in an untimely death. All but the most liberal Christians will be offended by this book, and many will dismiss it as a communist indictment of religion. If, however, you can accept the book's didactic purpose, its passionate disavowal of the idea that there is any kind of divine grace or love, you will be enchanted by Saramago's wordy, often unpunctuated style, his wry, ironical tone, and his brilliant weaving of realist and mythical elements, complete with lengthy "evangelical" glosses. The best novel I have read since "One Hundred Years Of Solitude".

Entertaining and thought provoking, 19 Mar 2008
Another book of lunacy (I say that affectionately)from Saramago. I love the stream of consciousness and the jets of non-sequiturs and thought provoking asides as follows:

"The silence that followed these words demonstrated once more that time has nothing to do with the time told by clocks, those small machines made of wheels that do not think and springs that do not feel, devoid of a spirit that would allow them to inagine that five insignificant seconds counted off, one, two, three, four, five, could be an agonising torment for the person at one end of the phone and a pool of sublime pleasure for the other" (page 136) And on the next page: "There was another silence, shorter this time, barely three seconds, during which it was clear that the sublime pleaseure and the agonising torment had changed places". The book is full of such reflections.

But, leaving aside the craziness for a minute, this is a serious book about loss of faith in the political process, not unlike the loss of political "faith" in our own land. However, and this is where I part company with Saramago: his thesis in this book is that man is a noble savage, who, if left to his own devises, will go about his life in a benevolent, orderly and peaceful manner. But, I am afraid, history shows the opposite, that man can indeed be brutal and savage. And, thus unloosening the shackles of Government so that we can all go back to our natural state is, to be blunt, utterly fallacious. But, maybe Saramago is just playing with us as surely the message of "Blindness" was just the opposite of "Seeing". Perhaps, I have simply no idea what he is on about! Does he?

Good read though!



Another classic with a sharp satirical edge, 27 Nov 2007
Saramago created one of the classics of the 20th century in Blindness, and with Seeing he's done it again - almost.

The premise - that 80% of the population cast a blank vote - is inspired. How Saramago follows that up with the reactions of the government is disturbingly believable, while his dry style works impeccably as a counterpoint to the drama taking place. The first 180 pages of this book are an incredibly powerful experience - akin to Blindness - but then Saramago seems to admit that he doesn't know how to end the book, and the final 100 pages gets somewhat diverted from the satirical edge that came before. The ending lacks closure and some readers may be disappointed by that.

That apart, this is still an incredible read - thought-provoking, stimulating, and wonderfully written - Saramago is brave enough not to use names and not to rely on important characters, but the story still stands up. Thoroughly recommended.

Seeing for yourself, 18 Oct 2007
A follow up of sorts to Blindness, Seeing sees (NPI) Saramago return to the same unnamed country where a new bunch of nameless cyphers attempt to fix a minimal-participation election. Whereas the prequel had a strong narrative underlying Saramago's distinctive prose style, this one, with its description of political confusion arising from a power vacuum, uses its author's tricks to satarise the kind of silly talk politicans engage in to create a sense of stability atop of an abyss. It is successful in doing this, whether it is enjoyable or enriching is another matter.

Such a tedious read I just couldn't get into the story, and eventually gave up, 05 Oct 2007
I feel that one star is possibly a little harsh, but the score is based on the (lack of) enjoyment I got from the book, and the sheer pain reading it caused me.

I can't actually remember giving up on any other book in anger, not after I'd got some way into it, and especially not through sheer frustration at the effort necessary to simply read the book. I've read other books I've not enjoyed, but never before has the lack of enjoyment been enough to overpower my desire to see how a story unfolds. And this book had a potentially very interesting story; however, as much as I wanted to be pulled into the story, the writing style just kept fighting back, and prevented me from being drawn in.

I was wondering how to put into words the problems I found with the style, but luckily another reviewer did it for me, so I'll quote them:

"Saramago is a challenging writer; his insistence upon endless prose with little to no puntuation, and a refusal to give names to characters, let alone use the conventions of paragraphs and speech marks for dialogues, all add up to a slower, more arduous read"

This highlights almost all the problems I found with the book. Conversations between people (which just about all the speech in the book, and a lot of the text, consisted of) were almost impossible to follow, and half the time I found myself having to re-read them to follow who had said what, and the other half thinking it just actually wasn't relevant, and was just waffle anyway. Which is the second problem, I'm not surprised the city and country in the book has such problems, everyone there, absolutely everyone (including the narrator), just waffles on and on and on so much when they are talking, veering off on one aside after another aside after another aside to tedious extremes, making me very glad I didn't live in this fictional place.

I was actually mildly tempted at one point to rewrite the book without all the waffle, just out of interest to see how short the book would be without all the - as it seemed to me - verbal padding. Of course, this would have meant having to spend far far too much time with the book than I could possibly stand, but at a rough estimate, I'd have thought it wouldn't be much more than 50 pages long.

The quote above also highlights what I think is part of another issue I had with the book. Im a big fan of character based books, I find most of my favourite books (and films for that matter) tend to have lots of different distinct characters in them. Often the characters don't even need to do much, they just need to be there. This book had characters, but they didn't have names, their personalities didn't seem all that distinct from each other (possibly due to the fact it was always hard to know who was saying what in a conversation), and I just didn't care about or for any of them.

I did really try to like the book, I really did think the idea had potential, and I was keen to find out how it all ended. Again and again I was tempted just to give up, actually tempted to tear the book up, infuriated by the snails pace at which I was progressing through the book. I'd actually got about two thirds through, before I eventually gave in. I just couldn't take it any more, and threw the book into the recycling box.

I hadn't read the sort-of-prequel, but I don't think that was the issue, and there's no way I'm going to find out, as I'm afraid I'm never touching a book by this author again.

Still think your vote is meaningless? Read this and think again!, 16 May 2007
Four years ago a City was hit by a plague of blindness. It was contagious and there was no cure. Before long the entire population was blind and the City descended into savagery. But one woman retained her sight, leading her friends to survival. Through it all she had to watch as the savage and horrific events unfolded. But then, as quickly as it started, the blindness began to ease, people regained their sight and everything returned to normal.

This was the plot of the startlingly original and thoroughly terrifying novel from Portuguese Nobel Prize winning author Jose Saramago. `Blindness' was a pleasure to read, as is `Seeing'.

We are now four years later and it is election day. But when the results are announced the government is devastated to discover that over 70% of the votes cast are blank. Not spoiled, not abstained, just blank. They hastily call a new election but the results only get worse, now over 83% have cast blank votes. The Government panics, indignantly struggling to contain what they see as a strike at the very heart of democracy. But there is no sign of where this conspiracy has come from, no sign of what criminal mastermind is behind it all. They declare a state of emergency and blockade the City, to teach the people a lesson about democratic responsibility.

Just as in `Blindness' the premise behind this novel is absolutely fantastic. There are few books which are as timely or whose satire is as incisive and funny. The portrayal of a pseudo-dictatorial democratic government dogmatically using every dirty trick in the book to dissuade the populace from dissent is disturbingly believable. It is impossible not to be inspired by the opportunity for political dissent that such a mass tactic would provide, is impossible not to dream of such unity of hearts and minds. The subtlety of the author allows him to write the entire book from the perspective of the authorities whist, at the same time, lambasting their all too believable policies.

The prose style is dense and Saramago's archetypal style makes for an often difficult read. This is a book to read feverishly in a couple of days because it can be difficult to pick up and put down. Also the narrative distance that Saramago affords his characters means they are difficult to connect with and there is little emotional centre to associate with. Instead this is a fearsomely intelligent tour de force in which Saramago questions how we can live so passively in a world like ours.

And the question remains: what or who has led the populace to act in this divisive way? Or could it be that the City is suffering once more from an infectious plague, this time making people see more than any disparate group ever could. Perhaps I read too much into the ending of this book, but if not then `Seeing' has one of the most brilliantly conceived plots of any book I have ever read.


superb, 21 Apr 2008
Saramago has to be the greatest living writer today. His new book is a strange fable which draws the reader into the bizarre in a way which appears almost believable. Highly recommended.

death, where is thy sting?, 24 Mar 2008
There are several reasons why this is not Jose Saramago's best book. The first is that it is, if anything, two books rather awkwardly spliced together. The first is a satirical piece about a country reacting to the withdrawal and, later, return of Death - or rather "death" herself. Whereas in earlier novels such as "Blindness" or "The Cave", Saramago revealed the world to us through the eyes of his characters, slowly unveiling their confusion and disturbance, here he chooses the omniscient narratorial view traditionally favoured by satirists. I must say, it did not work for me. Saramago's steady and measured (at least in this translation) prose lacks both the necessary lightness and bite, and as a consequence his satirical observations can seem somewhat banal: politicians try to talk their way out of problems and do dodgy deals, the Church tries to cover things up, the mafia (or rather "maphia") make money, people muddle through. So w