In Praise of Folly - Desiderius Erasmus

"And now, let him that will compare the benefits they receive by me.... as if there were any difference between perishing and being another thing! But I restore the same man to the best and happiest part of his life"

-In Praise of Folly, Desiderius Erasmus

 

This book was really awful. I was glad when it was done. Maybe someone else would have a different opinion, but it was poor.

 

The book was written from the perspective of Folly, as though she were a real woman. So, the book is everything that Folly praises. Such as rowdy living, little self-control, living for happiness.. etc.

Because of this, the book had the same flow all throughout the 71 long pages. No part was more exciting than the other. There was no thrill, no excitement, no suspense. Zilch. Nada. Since it was like that from beginning to end, I felt like I was always waiting for the book to get into the good part. But it just didn't.

 

The word choice wasn't so great either. Certain words and phrases were used so often I grew to hate hearing them. 'Add to this', 'subtleties',  and 'on the contrary' are the some I felt were used too often. I really should've counted how many times Erasmus used those phrases... because you wouldn't fully grasp my point without a proper number. It would probably be like me using the word 'actually' for anything and everything in every paragraph. It's not that the phrases or words were used incorrectly, though, they were just used way too often.

 

Another thing that irked me, although this may just be a pet-peeve, was that Folly would say something, then be like "did I say? oh I meant..." For example, "... of men that overcharge the Roman See - I mistook, I meant honour - might beg their bread."  Why couldn't she just say honour in the first place?

 

I found it interesting that Erasmus dedicated the book to Sir Thomas More. They were good friends, and apparently Erasmus was Thomas's favorite author. Although I wonder what he thought of this book. I personally loved Utopia, so I thought maybe Erasmus would have the same style of writing as Sir Thomas More in  In The Praise Of Folly. I was wrong. It was not the same at all. I would say the book itself was foolish.

 

If I had to pick one good thing, it would be that we learned a little about what the times were like then.  Since he is poking fun at man's foolishness we briefly see what the church was teaching, how philosophers acted, and the like. I would have likely enjoyed it more if there were more insights of that time.

 

I think maybe if this was written in modern times it would be funny. Most of the things he talked about that were foolish then, are just not happening today. So we don't really  get the full impact, because people don't act that way anymore.  

 

I'm betting this book was a hit in its time, everything was relevant and happening in present-day. The language would've been easier to understand, and maybe it even had comic book-like humor. I just don't think In Praise of Folly is a book that stands, or will stand, the test of time.