The great writer Paulo Coelho is best known for his book, “The Alchemist” (see https://dispatchestk.com/2013/09/06/communique-to-the-public-from-the-second-philosophical-council-of-keeferton/). Alchemist had a predecessor, however, “The Pilgrimage”. Also, Coelho’s success as a writer was not inevitable. The first edition of Alchemist sold only 900 copies (now over 65 million copies in 80 languages).

Pilgrimage is a novel, but it is also a personal, first-person story based on a pilgrimage Coelho actually took 1986. One could say that it sets the scene for the rest of Coelho’s life, that he learns his purpose or mission. Not that he discloses it, but one could presume that his writing then takes off as a message that the heroic journey is available to every person (Joseph Campbell believed much the same thing). There are gems in this story, such as when his guide Petrus (name changed) says:

Changing the way you do routine things allows a new person to grow inside of you. But when all is said and done, you’re the one who must decide how you handle it.

or

People don’t like to ask too much of life because they are afraid they will be defeated. But if someone wants to fight the good fight, that person must view the world as if it were a marvelous treasure waiting to be discovered and won.

Here is where something in the writing bothered me slightly: “good fight.” Because the story is heavily set with Spanish Catholic scenes and terminology the term “good fight” may put off some readers as something foreign or that they can not approach. I would have preferred “authentic fight,” but then it would be my and not his story. Along those lines, I feared throughout that Coelho was presenting his pilgrimage as The Way for everyone. That being said, it is tempered as we go along so that we understand this is his journey, and it may be different for others.

It acknowledges the importance of personal meaning and faith that is reminiscent of Viktor Frankl when Petrus says, “‘[Y]our faith, saved you. Even though it was based on an assumption that was absolutely false.’ Petrus was right. He laughed at me, and I laughed, too.”

Importantly, he also takes on the fear of death as we have seen from Ernest Becker and Sheldon Solomon (https://dispatchestk.com/2024/01/22/escaping-evil/; https://dispatchestk.com/2022/01/16/sleepers-awake/; https://dispatchestk.com/2020/09/28/september-2020/; https://dispatchestk.com/2016/08/15/communique-to-the-public-from-the-fourth-philosophical-council-of-keeferton/; https://dispatchestk.com/2016/04/28/the-worm-at-the-core-why-death-is-the-most-important-thing-in-life/). But Coehlo has a different take. He (through Petrus) sees human consciousness of death as a reason to have “profound respect” for humanity. That the future will be positive because humans will act on their immortality projects to be remembered, and these will be positive things. “What people regard as vanity—leaving great works, having children, acting in such a way as to prevent one’s name from being forgotten—I regard as the highest expression of human dignity.” But, he recognizes that death also brings great fear (terror management theory) and bemoans the fact that this could, but does not, become a great positive:

They do not see that with an awareness of death, they would be able to be even more daring, to go much further in their daily conquests, because then they would have nothing to lose—for death is inevitable.

Coelho was writing after Becker’s “The Denial of Death” had won the Pulitzer Prize but before Solomon et al had produced the social science research to back up the theory. But Coelho’s way of looking at it is nice.

The work is inspiring. He also discusses the importance of a person being able to listen, yet how hard it is for people to do. This is key to a pilgrimage of any kind, being able to quiet one’s self and to listen and be attentive to what is around. One can learn that which is profound in the simplest of moments, and this could be the most important lesson on one’s way.