Timo Laine’s Journal

The Egyptian: do Finns love cynicism and graphic violence?

27 December 2009

The Egyptian (or Sinuhe egyptiläinen), the 1945 historical novel by Mika Waltari, was not so long ago chosen as the most “beloved” Finnish book in a poll organized by the national broadcasting company YLE. I had not read the book until now, and the result makes me wonder.

The novel is based on actual historical events in the age of the pharaohs, seen from the perspective of Sinuhe, a royal physician. While the protagonist is a fictional character, many other characters correspond to historical persons. The book has at least two characteristics that make it an odd choice for the most beloved book.

The immoral protagonist

Sinuhe is one of the most immoral characters that I have encountered in literature. He spends all his parents’ money on an expensive prostitute and drives them to suicide, and later takes revenge on the prostitute in a truly deplorable way. He does very little to prevent the death of his companion and their child. And during much of this he is daydreaming about being the legitimate pharaoh himself.

In general, it is not just that he does bad things, but that he does not even stop to think about what he is doing. And in the end he does not even seem to care much: his philosophy is one part cynicism and one part nihilism, mixed with brief periods of total confusion that some literary critics have mistaken for political idealism.

Brutality

The Egyptian is a violent novel. The cruelties that take place are very comprehensive. Seemingly every form of brutality ever invented is performed in one form or another in this book.

Some have singled out the description of the Hittite people as being particularly brutal. While it is true that the Hittites are said to live for war and make mattresses and cushions out of the skin of their enemies, overall it means little. Almost everyone in Waltari’s novel is cruel, down to the children and perhaps especially the women. And many of the characters are not simply cruel but also revel in their sadism.

Is the poll wrong?

There is no problem in depicting immorality and brutal violence. These are important subjects that merit discussion, and Waltari’s contribution is important. In addition to this, the novel has admittedly many virtues. It is historically reasonably accurate. It has a consistent and original style. It has many complex and memorable characters. It is also very entertaining, despite being a big book. In sum, I think it is a good book.

However, not all good books are beloved, and perhaps not even all great ones. What I do not understand is how a person can learn to love a book like this. I have a few theories about the poll result:

• You do not remember the book or the story itself but only the moment of reading the book. As far as I know, it is quite typical to read the novel in your teens. When you say you love this novel, you only mean to say you feel nostalgic about the moment you read it.
• The poll was not set up properly to answer the question about the most beloved book. The books were divided into categories, which meant that only the most important books were in the principal category. Everything else, including several popular novels and books for children (perhaps most importantly the Moomin books of Tove Jansson), were reduced to be part of less important genre categories.
• People did not respond to the question about what book they love, but about what book they thought in some way most important. Like I said, the themes Waltari explores in the novel are important.

• Previous entry: This is my journal
• Next entry: Machiavelli, blogs, and the freshness of information