The Spinoza Problem

Please give Amazon review a helpful vote - https://www.amazon.com/review/R3MBU9JM8HL6XQ/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm

This is decent historical fiction. I thought there were positives and negatives in the book which had me swinging between giving it five stars and giving it three stars.

The structure of the story consists of alternating chapters describing the lives of Benedict Spinoza and Alfred Rosenberg. I thought the parallel story format was an interesting concept, and effectively done. I found that when my interest in one story waned, my interest in the other story waxed.

I also liked using the relatively obscure Rosenberg as a counterpoint to Spinoza, if only because I have been translating Rosenberg's Protestantische Rompilger. Rosenberg is something of a mystery. Notwithstanding the sometimes slighting references to him by other Nazi leaders, which becomes a theme of Yalom's book, Rosenberg actually had quite a bit of clout and status. For example, Catholics were routinely sent to concentration camps for insulting the Myth of the Twentieth Century, which Yalom omits, and that text was used to teach Nazi leaders, which Yalom notes, and Rosenberg did win the Nazi version of the Nobel Prize, which Yalom also notes. In the book, these facts are framed to suggest that Hitler was patronizing Rosenberg, who might have something to offer the Party if his ego was stroked. Yalom certainly has a right to write his book as he wishes, but I don't get that from the facts.

That leads to my primary complaint with the book, namely that the characters are shallow and seem to be stalking horses for what I imagine is Yalom's perspective. Thus, Rosenberg is an ineffectual, intellectually-challenged snob. Rosenberg is depicted as having been swept up Houston Stewart Chamberlain's The Foundation of the 19th Century. I would have hoped for something more sophisticated and challenging. Treating the Nazis as imbeciles and/or having Daddy issues gets us nowhere near the question of evil in men's souls.

Likewise, the sections on Spinoza are hagiography. Everyone recognizes Spinoza as the most intelligent and virtuous people they've ever met. Again, this could be true, but it was laid on a bit thick. Likewise, Spinoza's foil, a skeptical Marrano named Jacob, we get a sense of authorial approval as Jacob becomes interested in the intellectual exercise of religion and then becomes a rabbi and then ultimately decides to found a community of Liberal Jews in the East Indies who will keep tradition but jettison all that belief about God stuff. As I read this story arc, I formed a real sense of a “Mary Sue” in development. On the other hand, I liked the psychiatric conversations involving the character of Friedrich Pfister. In these conversations, we could see Yalom's professional background.

I also like the historical detective work in Yalom's effort to uncover what a note associated with the Nazi seizure of Spinoza's library meant by “the Spinoza problem.” Yalom postulates “the Spinoza problem” was Rosenberg's efforts to understand how a great Geman like Goethe could be influenced by a mere Jew, or how a Jew could write such an insightful book. In truth, Yalom's explanation is speculation – the Spinoza problem could have been something else entirely.

That said, Yalom's book sparked my interest in Spinoza. I've picked up Spinoza's treatise and “A Book Forged in Hell.”

So, this book has redeeming qualities, but it also came across as a bit predictable. I question its historical accuracy, but it did keep my attention throughout.