Courage, intellect and success: three typical characteristics that could easily be attributed to the hero of any story. Take the cunning, manipulation and eventual failure and you have the typical villain. In The Name of the Rose, Umberto Eco decided to take the familiar theme of "good triumphs over evil", and twist it in such a way that readers see their apparent hero, William of Baskerville, fail in everything he set out to do. Do. do, and his nemesis, Bernard Gui, succeeds. Why would Eco choose so deliberately to reverse the usual roles, and how does he manage to pull it off so well? In order to answer these questions, we should carefully examine the literary techniques chosen by the author. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay William of Baskerville is clearly Eco's portrayal of Sherlock Holmes in The Name of the Rose, and Holmes' adversary Moriarty is embodied in the character of Bernard Gui. Throughout the novel, readers see constant demonstrations of William's resemblance to Holmes. He's a detective, has the Watson-type character of Melk's Adso, and has a Moriarty-style adversary, Bernard Gui. Gui is an Inquisitor, the same job William once had. In fact, they were on the same team. However, William left the Inquisition, realizing that his rational, enlightened and humanistic character was not suited to the job and that he was unable to bring himself to sentence people to death based on mere suspicion of heresy. It is interesting to see that in the face of his rival, William fails. The first of numerous cases occurs in the debate on the poverty of Christ: initially William's task is to protect Michael from Cesena, ensuring that he is not required to associate with the Pope in Avignon (where he would surely have been executed on the grounds of being a heretic) and, essentially, to ensure that the meeting with the pontifical delegation takes place in the best possible way. It's interesting to see William's first and main mission fail: the meeting descends into chaos and Michael ultimately ends up in Avignon, in mortal danger. In this case, Bernard Gui, sent by the Pope in the hope of provoking such unrest, succeeded. Gui's victory in this sense is connected to another of his achievements: he is an inquisitor, and the task of an inquisitor is to find heretics and condemn them to death. While at the abbey, Bernard Gui discovers several "heretics", some of whom are completely innocent. This fact is irrelevant, since what matters is that Bernard Gui is doing his job. By having these people killed, he is doing his job well and is therefore successful once again. The fact that Michael of Cesena ended up in Avignon soon after his arrival warns readers that this character is on the path to success, while William of Baskerville similarly appears to be on a losing streak. After failing to meet the papal delegation in order, and thus having Michael from Cesena to Avignon, "fearing for his life", William's second major task is to solve the mysteries surrounding the murders that occurred in the abbey. First, the abbot asks William to investigate Adelmo's unsolved death, the first of a series of seven. One of the abbot's first remarks is, "I was very pleased to learn that in numerous cases you have decided that the accused was innocent," a statement that tells readers not only that William's humanitarian nature was an important factor in his emerged from the Inquisition, but also that her character is completely opposite to that of Bernard Gui. At the time of introducing thischaracter, there have been four murders, and William was only able to identify the circumstances after these four people died, which of course is too late: he is tasked with solving the mystery, and thus preventing further deaths, but once again , he can't do it. However, through the use of logical thinking and superior intellect in solving crimes (albeit too late), readers see further similarities to the character Sherlock Holmes, one who is also famous for using the same qualities. Looking at the stories (and indeed the character) of Sherlock Holmes, readers can perhaps understand why Eco chose to have his hero fail so regularly throughout his novel, rather than succeed in typical epic style. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author of the famous Sherlock Holmes series, had the character of Holmes killed in a battle with his enemy Moriarty: A few words could be enough to tell the little that remains. The experts' examination leaves no doubt that a personal contest between the two men ended, as it could not but end in such a situation, with their staggering, clasped in each other's arms. Any attempt to recover the bodies was utterly hopeless, and there, deep in that fearful cauldron of swirling water and seething foam, will forever lie the most dangerous criminal and foremost law enforcer of their generation. ...who I will always regard as the best and wisest man I have ever known. Through this excerpt, we can see that Holmes, a much-loved character, is ultimately defeated. The narrator, Watson, is left with the memory of Holmes as an intelligent and wise man, similar to the way Adso views William throughout the novel. In fact, the only reason the Holmes character was revived was due to popular public demand. In Holmes' defeat, we see the author's original intention for his villain to triumph over his hero, and we can see that Eco's decision to have a Sherlock Holmes-style character results in a similar story in The Name of the Rose . Rose is undoubtedly strongly influenced by religion: it contains numerous references to the Bible (mostly to the books of Genesis and Revelation), and the theme that evil will sometimes prevail over good is found in several Psalms: His Ways I am always prosperous; he is haughty and your laws are far from him; he mocks all his enemies. He says to himself: "Nothing will shake me; I will always be happy and will never have problems." This Psalm alludes to the idea that good does not always triumph, as do the following verses: Do not worry when men succeed in their ways, when they carry out their evil plans... A little longer, and the wicked will not be there more; even if you seek them, they will not be found.... The wicked plots against the righteous and gnashes his teeth at them. Eco's use of religious allusions throughout the novel may well be a factor in why he chooses to make William fail where Gui succeeds. By using references to the Bible, which alludes to the idea that good does not necessarily always prevail over evil, he can make his story portray the same concept, where, although the hero fails in many respects while the villain succeeds, William is still seen as heroic. . He gains knowledge and understanding and in this sense, regardless of everything else, he is remembered as a hero. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a custom essay The way Umberto Eco chooses to go against the traditional "successful hero" story which can be seen as the result of many influences, from the undoubted resemblance of William of Baskerville.