what did you expect to see? (Matthew 11:7).

This is one of the questions that Umberto Eco presents before the reader through his novel The Island of the Day Before . This is no mere questioning of the readers sensibility of a text but also of her/his awareness of the presence of time in a narrative. The Island of the Day Before is a typical postmodern novel, with all its constructs, including fragmentation, pastiche, textualized history, non linear narrative and a labyrinthine framework. Postmodern fiction has always tried to disown the numerous constrains imposed on its creation by the ideologies of time. Through this novel which was published during the mid 1990s, a period when postmodernism had already wrecked havoc on the concept of time, Eco displaces the dominance of time in narration. Eco literally plays with the ideologies of time and entangles and jumbles it up within the narration. By doing so, Eco successfully belittles the very presence of time. In a temporal maze set by Eco, time and the numerous ideologies associated with it fades into a state of absence. Eco does this through challenging the notions of history, using several metafictional techniques and through effective foregrounding of various debates related to the question of time. Thus through the presenting of time in an excess in the narrative of the novel, Eco underlines the illusionary nature of this excessive presence called time. Ecos text also deals with not just the narrative techniques associated with time, but also with the scientific ideas related to time. Are we capable of travelling into our past, our yesterdays? Is it possible to travel into the future? Is there any reality in

past or history? While science fiction works usually deal with the theme of timetravel, popularized by H. G. Wells in his The Time Machine, science especially physics has always been unsure about the possibilities of it. Stephen Hawking, Carl Sagan and many modern physicists have propounded on the possibility of time-travel by using the theories of Einstein, quantum mechanics, and latest technology. Observe Stephen Hawking as he propounds on the possibilities of time travel: Time travel was once considered scientific heresy. I used to avoid talking about it for fear of being labelled a crank. But these days I'm not so cautious. In fact, I'm more like the people who built Stonehenge. I'm obsessed by time. If I had a time machine I'd visit Marilyn Monroe in her prime or drop in on Galileo as he turned his telescope to the heavens. Perhaps I'd even travel to the end of the universe to find out how our whole cosmic story ends.To see how this might be possible, we need to look at time as physicists do - at the fourth dimension. It's not as hard as it sounds. Every attentive schoolchild knows that all physical objects, even me in my chair, exist in three dimensions. Everything has a width and a height and a length.But there is another kind of length, a length in time. While a human may survive for 80 years, the stones at Stonehenge, for instance, have stood around for thousands of years. And the solar system will last for billions of years. Everything has a length in time as well as space. Travelling in time means travelling through this

fourth dimension (STEPHEN HAWKING: How to build a time machine). But Ecos preoccupation is not with the very act of time-travel, but by using it as one of the major themes in the novel he expertly dictates to us our pseudo notions regarding time. For Eco time is more of a metaphysical entity, it is more in the psyche of the men who contemplate on it. Teachings of J. M. E. Mc Taggart and Julian Barbour, which regard time as mere illusion, are to be considered here to decipher Ecos ideas. Mc Taggart in his The Unreality of Time presented his views on time being an illusion. Julian Barbour also expounded on the unreality of time in his book The End of Time. Using several of scientific ideas, narrative postmodern strategies, and his masterful story-telling Eco dethrones time from its position. In The Island of the Day Before Eco presents a complex pastiche of historical narratives, semiotics, romance, philosophy, scientific discussions and religious debates. Eco faithfully follows the popular postmodern technique of using a romantic tale as backdrop to foreground numerous complex ideas. The main plot deals with the life and experiences of Roberto della Griva. Robertos ship, the Amaryllis, gets destroyed at sea by a storm. With the help of a fellow ship-mate Roberto escapes on a wooden plank. The twist in the tale is made right at its onset by Eco, the waves do not carry Roberto safely to land but he arrives instead on board another ship called the Daphne. Thus literally Roberto gets ship wrecked on a ship. He explores the ship to find it fully provisioned with barrels full of pure water, a huge collection of exotic plants, fruits and birds, and food enough to sustain him for a long time (time until Eco decides to dispose

of him). Roberto finds that the ship is anchored in a bay which separates two pieces of land, one of which is an island. On further exploring the ship Roberto understands that the crew is missing, and so is the boat. To add to all this Roberto does not know how to swim; all escape routes are thus cut by the narrator (Eco). Thus, for the present, Roberto is all alone on the ship. With nothing to do he starts exploring the Daphne in detail, simultaneously narrating his life story. Roberto is a Quixotic figure who had a great taste for romances during his youth. He was the only son and heir to the Pozzo di San Patrizio family who belong to the minor nobility, and who were lords of the vast estate of La Griva which was situated along the border of Alessandria. Roberto gets his first lessons in swordsmanship and horse riding from his father Pozzo. A typical day for Roberto would be in spending: time without friends, daydreaming of distant lands as he wandered, bored, through the vineyard, or falconry if he was hunting swallows, or combating dragons as he played with his dogs, or hidden treasure as he explored the rooms of their little castle or fort, as it could also be called. His mind was inspired to wander thus by the dusty volumes of romances and chivalric poems he found in the south tower (Eco 1995, 21). A Carmelite occasionally visits the family and Roberto is given lessons on the ways of the world. This Carmelite introduces Roberto to a certain powder of sympathy. On an occasion when Pozzo cuts himself while polishing a sword, this Carmelite uses the powder to heal him. The powder is not applied on the wound as such but on the blade which caused the wound, it is effective and Pozzo miraculously heals. The Carmelite

explains that the powder (or unguent), adhering firmly to the sword, drew out those virtues of iron that the sword had left in the wound, impending its healing (22). This powder of sympathy would later prove vital in Robertos understanding of the quest for longitudes. Roberto later formulates the image of an evil twin brother Ferrante on whom he blames all the evil and misfortune that befalls him. This can be regarded with relation to the psychoanalytical concept of the doppelganger or the alter ego. Ferrante would later play a major role in the plot. Roberto is forced to participate in the Thirty Years War because of his noble and chivalric father Pozzo. At Casale, where they arrive and stay during the war, Roberto befriends Saint-Savin, a skeptic and atheist. His theories against religion have a profound influence on Roberto. Robertos father dies valiantly at war, but his sacrifice seems quite wasted because in the larger picture of the war, which benefits only the powerful lords, contributions made by many are forgotten. Roberto gets injured during the war which affects his eye power, bright light of the day becomes unbearable for him. Later Saint-Savin is accidentally killed and Robertos wooing of a local village beauty becomes a disaster. Heartbroken and confused, he leaves for his estate at La Griva. After the death of his mother, he settles all his accounts and leaves for Paris. Paris Transforms Roberto. Here he learns more about science and much about the powder of sympathy. Paris provides him with hope of re-kindling his amorous thirst and he falls for Lilia who would become Robertos unattainable beloved, a lady to whom Roberto never opens his heart. Robertos speech on the powder of

sympathy at a Paris club catches the attention of the authorities headed by Cardinal Mazarin. He is a ruthless individual whose sole wish is to gain power over the sea by cracking the longitudinal problem. He threatens to put Roberto in prison unless he agrees to act as a spy on behalf of the French authorities to obtain the answer behind the problem of the longitudes by boarding a ship called the Amaryllis which is heading on an expedition funded by the British. Roberto gets on the ship and spies on a certain Dr. Byrd, who is using the principles of the powder of sympathy to calculate the longitudes. But misfortune befalls the Amaryllis and it gets destroyed by the storm. Except for Roberto all are consumed by the waves of the sea. Robertos solitary existence on the Daphne is disrupted on finding Father Caspar, who was hiding on board. He is a Jesuit priest and a philosopher who is also seeking the answers to the longitudinal problem. Roberto gets educated on numerous topics by Father Caspar and it is from him that Roberto comes to learn of the curious paradox related to the Island. According to Father Caspar the Island that they observe is the Island of Solomon. Father Caspars highly believable ramblings fascinate Roberto to such an extent that he starts to believe Caspars claims on the prime meridian. According to Caspar the prime meridian is passing right through the area near which the Daphne is anchored. The Island and the ship are hence on two different time scales. Roberto slowly realizes that the time scale of the Island and that of the ship where he stands have a difference of nearly twenty four hours. Thus the Island that he sees is actually that of the day before or he is observing a yesterday.

The Island and the time paradox which it offers becomes an obsession for Roberto. The idea of his setting foot on the Island of the day before, or his travel to his yesterday thus becomes his sole purpose. But both Roberto and Father Caspar cannot swim. There is no boat on the ship, the absence of which and of the crew is revealed by Father Caspar. The crew had abandoned ship when Father Caspar fell gravely ill, when he gets stung by an insect on one of his visits to the Island. Taking Caspars illness to be the signs of a plague, the Crew abandons him on the ship and takes refuge on the Island; only to be brutally murdered and devoured by cannibals. Father Caspar recovered from his illness later on but without the boat he too was unable to reach the Island. Roberto is later forced to take swimming lessons but fails to learn much. Father Caspar suggests the use of one of his contraptions, an underwater bell which would work like a modern day diving suit to reach the Island. Roberto and Father Caspar part, yet Caspar never emerges from the sea after submerging in it using his underwater bell. Roberto is alone yet again. With prospects of escape all around, yet prospects which in themselves seem illusionary, Roberto decides to do whatever he can to reach the Island. A swim to the Island is regarded by him as a trip from an uncertain future, a painful present into an all rectifying yesterday. By such a time travel Roberto weighs his possibilities of possessing his beloved Lilia also. Yet on finding it impossible to swim due to the strong currents which surround that area of the sea, Roberto decides to give up on his hope of reaching the Island. After freeing all the birds on the Daphne, he succumbs to the embrace of the sea and of death. He planted his feet against the wood,

thrusting himself forward to move away from the Daphne, and after following the side of the stern, he left it forever (503). Ecos novels usually deal with a medieval historical theme. In The Island of the Day before, Eco presents historical incidents like the Thirty Years War and the quest to find a solution to the longitudinal problem. But the history presented is not an exact account of events that had happened in the past, or were the exact events as recorded by historians. It is mostly a critique of historical narratives. Through the representation of historical events as textualized history or fictional history, eco expertly destroys the very sensibility of chronological ordering of events in time. It is a questioning of the arranging of events in a linear time. Eco presents a subverted history in which Robertos personal experiences are more vividly described rather than describing in detail the actual historical events. The very linear nature of time is challenged by Eco through the presentation of a subverted history. The historical narrative is not ordered, incidents are not narrated with absolute clarity, and jumps are made from a time in the present to a one in the past and back numerous times during the narrative. These kind of techniques together with the presentation of history from the perspective of a fictional character Roberto adds to Ecos total disregard for historical narratives and thus for linear time. In the opening chapter itself Eco underlines the claim that he is no admirer of exact dates which seem to be so vital for a historical narrative. With an uncertain beginning he questions the notions of chronological ordering in time: Thus with Unabashed conceits, wrote Roberto della Griva presumably in July or August of 1643

(1). Eco keeps himself at a safe distance by presenting the narrative as a historical account of Roberto, yet what he proves is that history can be very subjective, it can vary from person to person. The unsure dates, the use of a non-committal term like presumably makes this historical narrative more uncertain. Eco keeps us puzzled over the time in which the narrative unfolds. A historical event like the Thirty Years War is presented by Eco, but the focus is not on the events which are usually recalled in such a narration but on the marginal, farcical events which are mostly omitted due to their unimportance. It is Robertos history and hence incidents like those in which his father dies valiantly, yet without being remembered in the greater picture, is presented in detail: He (Robertos father) then rode outsideand galloped like a fury, his sword raised, against the enemy host.As proof of his courage, it was good; as a military action, very bad. A ball struck his forehead and he slumped (75). History as a grand narrative which affects the life of all human beings in a universal way is ridiculed by Eco. Ecos treatment of the historical incidents relating to the longitudinal problem is also quite subverted. During the mid seventeenth century efforts were going on to solve the mystery of the longitudes. Sailors could easily calculate the latitude using the positions of the sun and the stars in the horizon. But longitude calculation needed to be done by careful measurement of time. Ships got lost at sea or met with disasters. In The Island of the Day Before Eco, as the narrator, accepts that in those days this problem was a major issue: I imagine that in those days, and on those seas, more ships were wrecked than returned safely home (14). But his presentation of this quest for

longitude is in itself a non linear and fragmented one. He mixes historical incidents with a huge amount of fiction. There is the detailed presentation of a certain powder of sympathy which was used to calculate exact time. The clocks which he finds on the deck of the ship testify to the fact that efforts were going on to produce a timemeasuring device that would help solve the problem: The storeroom received light from another gun-port, and it contained clocks. Clocks. Water clocks, sand clocks, solar clocksmechanical clocksclocks moved by the slow descent of weights (149). Roberto himself realizes that these numerous clocks were indeed being used to find a solution to the longitudinal problem: What were so many clocks doing on a ship headed for seas where morning and evening are defined by the course of the sun(it should be) to seekel Punto Fijo!(the prime meridian) (152). What history tells us is that the solution to this problem was found by the mid eighteenth-century. This would later assist in ordering regions in time and indirectly facilitate colonization. Observe Cardinal Mazarin echoing the intentions of a French colonizer who seeks to sort things out with the answer to the longitudinal problem: The proof is that whereas we know enough perhaps of the New World, we know little of the Very Newhow empty of lands the other part of that globe still appears (187). Through this revelation Roberto comes to know about, the relentless struggle among the nations of Europe to gain that secret (198). With him we also come to know how the cracking of that problem made time a dominant entity throughout the world. The question is what good did come out of such ordering in time? The very presentation of the farcical methods used in a very serious manner by Europes elite scientists and

thinkers points towards the meaninglessness of such ventures, quests to manipulate time. Our memories of such actual events as narrated in historical texts is ridiculed by Eco. By mixing historical facts with fictional events of Robertos life, Eco also destroys our notions of history as a linear, purposeful process. It was all an elitist agenda to benefit only a few. The larger population was fed with an illusion of participating in the grand design of the world and was hence expertly hoodwinked. Roberto is Ecos representative of the postmodern man who has seen through the conceits and deceits of history, having seen history now as a place rich in whims and incomprehensible plotshe learnedhow treacherous was the great machine of the world, plagued by the iniquities of chance (108). By critiquing history Eco blurs the very boundaries that had separated history from fiction. History was seen as objective and universal. In the novel we find personal histories, textualized histories, non linear presentation of events and a general disregard for order, an order which was actually an illusion. This is a severe blow on the dominance of time. Eco also critiques the various ideologies including that of the church which used to persecute scientists who brought up theories which could prove fatal for the various teachings of the church. Eco expertly presents time also as an ideology which had, has, and is still playing a dominant part in influencing our contemplation of the world around us. Such ideologies rely on the past to explain the present, while postmodernism does the reverse. There is a rejection of the past which was considered as a controlling and signifying force for the present time. These ideologies present things as if happening in an ordered, actual time with a beginning and end. This is a

manipulation of our sensibilities into believing in a state of order and equality where everyone follows the same time. Father Caspars views on the great flood, the genesis and his wrong notions of time are presented to ridicule the theological teachings of that era which were completely wrong and which presented a false picture of time. Observe how Father Caspar believes time actually began with the creation of heaven and earth as mentioned in the Genesis: Life arrives on the fourth day, when the moon and sun and stars are created toseparate day from night.The sun and the moon, establishing our day and our night, were the first and unsurpassed model of all future clocks, whichmark human timea time that has nothing to do with cosmic time: it (human time) has a direction, an anxious respiration composed of yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and not the calm breathing of Eternity (257). Father Caspars idea of god using the water from yesterday to cause the great flood is indeed very enlightening: God then took from this abysso the water of yesterday and emptied it on the world of today, and the next day the same, and so on! (266). Eco presents time also as an entity which deeply influences our sensibilities and our very existence. Roberto is presented as the example for men who become intoxicated with the notions (wrong notions) of time. The idea of the island which is set in a yesterday becomes an obsession for Roberto: the Island Roberto saw before him was not the island of today but that of yesterday. Beyond that meridian it was the

day before! (337). From the Island, Robertos focus shifts to the yesterday which he craves to possess. Robertos intention seems to be a sort of time travel into the past where he can rewrite his life yet again, rectifying all his past mistakes. Robertos wish to live life anew through a trip back in time shakes his senses and affects his reasoning power, providing him false hopes and ridiculous possibilities: another illusion was forming. Roberto now was sure that the only escape from his reclusion was to be found not in unbridgeable Space but in Time. Now he truly had to learn to swim and reach the Islandto arrest the horrid advance of his own tomorrow (340). Temporal ideologies take a sinister form and they offer escapist possibilities, the focus is shifted to rectifying of a past or hoping for a better future, there is a rejecting of the one important part which is living in the now or the present moment. Robertos attitude of considering his exile on the Daphne as an: endless today, whose future lay only in arriving, some tomorrow, at the day before (345). Eco presents us with the solution to escape from the clutches of the wrong notions of time, which is presented as an influential ideology which leads Roberto to near madness. The solution is presented in a symbolic fashion: he (Roberto) flung into the sea all the clocks, not thinking for a moment that he was wasting valuable time: he was erasing time to favor a journey against time (502). This is to be considered as a reply to the state of confusion and paranoia caused by the ideologies of time. Time and its illusionary nature is further asserted by Robertos experience on his arrival on the ship Daphne; He must have slept twenty-four hours. This is only an approximate calculation: it was night when he woke, but he was as if reborn. So it was

night again, not night still. He thought it was night still (2). Eco thus focuses on the fact that time relies on our experiencing of events and these experiences generate in us a feeling of time. When we fail to experience an event, the event ceases to exist and with it the presence of time. Roberto sleeps for nearly twenty four hours on the Daphne after his ordeal at sea. He thus wakes up at night time, having slept the previous night. But he wrongly assumes it to be the same night that he arrived on the Daphne. The perception of change is thus vital in perceiving the passing of time. Only on observing and analyzing change, we can discern the amount of time that might have passed. Roberto becomes the voice of the narrator when he supports the notion of how important the phenomenon of change is in our perception of time. While observing the Island, Roberto learns that only by perceiving change one can distinguish even the very existence of an object. Robertos poetic expounding on this fact and his support for the importance of perceiving change through ones own senses is seen when he exclaims colors depend on the object that affects them, on the light that is refracted in them, and on the eye that fixes them, thus even the most distant land appeared real to his excited and afflicted eyes.Perhaps tomorrow, or in a few hours time, that land would be different (66). While this points towards the importance of perceiving things in time, it also questions the very concept of change. The phenomenon called change is represented by a constant flux, and time relies on this idea of change. Thus time exists with relation to eternal fluctuation. Time is thus based upon baselessness. Eco thus cleverly makes up aware of the lack of credibility in the perception of events in time.

Trust in a historical narrative is over. Thus the only method left is to represent a collection of images, styles which would generate the effect of the past in the present. Pastiche is thus used; it simulates and represents old space and time in the present through the amalgamation of several forms. In the case of The Island of the Day Before, it is a pastiche of a historical novel, philosophical narrative, semiotic discussion, existential treatise, and chivalric romance. History with its space and time mingles with a fictional space and time. In the novel, the historical debates are fused with popular scientific discussions of that period. There are numerous debates on the existence of life beyond the earth, But what if, in the great void, infinite worlds are moving (139). Eco wrote this novel at the end of the second millennium, a period when similar scientific discussions were held on this topic, the novel thus reflects the spirit of the times. The longitude problem was a major topic of scientific discussion during the seventeenth and eighteenth century, it also finds due representation in the novel. The use of the powder of sympathy, the method of the Jesuits and other such techniques are elaborately discussed. The romance of Roberto, Ferrante, and Lilia is interwoven with the other debates of the novel. An intriguing feature of postmodernism is the desire for theorists to practise what they preach, and for artists to preach what they practise (Sim 235). Eco is a world renowned semiotician and the novel The Island of the Day Before has a symbolic discussion of the orange dove. Ah, the dove was an image rich in meanings, all the more clever as each conflicted with the others (Eco 347). Thus begins Eco, taking his foot off the pedal for the duration of many pages to discuss on this symbol only. What

pastiche does is that it makes a collage of several discussions, all in different time scales, and presents a fragmented narrative. It effectively dumfounds the reader and dispatches her/him on a quest (a frustrating one) in search of coherence and order. Eco had already done this through his The Name of the Rose, where he sends the reader behind a string of clues. In the end, the hunt for a single textual meaning, or an absolute time would prove to be pointless. Postmodern time focuses only on the present moment. Time would seem cyclic and fluctuating but there is no pattern as such. There is no coherence as such and no attempt is made to order the events being presented. Time in non linear and hence an interpretation of the incidents presented and the obtaining of a meaning would be impossible. The reader is made an active participant in the narrative process; there is a merging of spaces, of the author and the reader. Eco as the narrator is seen interacting with the reader on several occasions in the novel. Metafiction is expertly used by Eco. The narrator is present throughout the novel breaking the flow of narration. Here we get a taste of his arrogance and sense of power: I will try to decipher his (Robertos) intentions, then use the terms most familiar to us. If I am mistaken, too bad: the story remains the same (8). Eco interacts with the readers and showcases how he can manipulate the narration of the text: unless the reader chooses to insinuatefrom now on I need him (Roberto) on deck full-timeI am freeing him from all illness, with authorial arrogance (280). The text takes the form of a labyrinth of texts (hypertexts) with multiple time sequences. In such a hypertext we can spot the use of intertextuality by the

postmodern author. Eco also cleverly uses intertextuality, in The Island of the Day Before; he cleverly gives some passing references to his earlier work The Name of the Rose: For the captain it was obvious that the books, having belonged to a plague victim, were agents of infectionhe had read of people who died by wetting a finger with saliva as they leafed through works whose pages had in fact been smeared with a poison (248). The text thus becomes more like a jigsaw puzzle. What this does is that it questions the need to order events in linear time. The Island, which Eco presents as a timeless relic, a perfect illusionary, self contained text is never reached by Roberto during the course of narration. He sufferedbecause of the Island he did not haveunattainablethrough its distancestood for a beloved who eluded him (68). Eco uses the framework of a labyrinth to distort wrong notions of time. The temporal maze is popularly sought when dealing with existential ideas related to time. The focus is only on the present moment. Metafiction, with its presentation of a text inside another text strengthens the notion of a temporal maze or a labyrinth of time. This generates confusion on the exact time and hence we start to treat time as an unimportant presence. Roberto becomes the representative of the postmodern man who feels himself caught in a labyrinth. We observe that he is never actually living in the past, but the most vital part of his life is lived in the present, the now. In a labyrinthine time there is no idyllic escape into a past or future time, but the existence in the now.

Eco strengthens the labyrinthine nature of the text by the use of multiple stories inside the text. In the novel we find Roberto himself engaging in the construction of a romance: He thought, namely, that he might construct a story, of which he was surely not the protagonist, in as much as it would not take place in this world but in a Land of Romances, and this storys events would unfold parallel to those of the world in which he was, the two sets of adventures never meeting and overlapping (367). Examine how we are presented with Umberto Ecos The Island of the Day Before, inside which is a narrators reframing of letters and notes by another person (Roberto), who himself presents another story where characters of his own creation take part in the action. A text within a text within a text, a labyrinth. What such a model of writing does is that it confuses the exact time of the narrative, facilitating the rejection of time as a dominant entity. Thus through numerous methods, by the use of science, philosophy, postmodern conceits Eco destabilizes the dominant state of time both in the narrative field and in life at large (to an extent). The concept of relativity in time relies on its association with scientific theories regarding the speed of light. Astronomical observations have proved that the light that we receive from the sun or the stars has to travel millions of miles in order to reach us, a period of time is also spent for this. When we observe a star twinkling in the sky at night, it is not actually the star of today or this moment that we observe but that of a time and space far before this present, a long before yesterday. We can contrast this

fantastic concept with Ecos presentation of an Island which is of the day before, an island of yesterday. Omitting the fact that both the scientific idea and Ecos fictional idea are fascinating, we find both steeped in illusion. A lot of our beliefs or our interpretations (misinterpretations) of scientific theories related to time are based on illusions. Observe the problem of the longitudes or the quest to finding the prime meridian which Eco discusses in detail in the novel. Latitudes, longitudes, prime meridian are all mere illusions, constructs of human imagination. They are formulated just for the sake of convenience, for smooth navigation and for setting up of numerous unwanted boundaries. Gradually these concepts have broken from the barrier of mere utility value to become domineering entities. Time thus began to influence our sensibilities. Eco is successful in proving that concepts like past, present, and future, associated with time are just to facilitate our understanding of the wonderful universe around us. They are hypothetical theories, like the theories of Father Caspar. But innumerable Robertos, like us, become so enamored with such ideas that we become mindless slaves to time and its dominance. The dominance of time over the human psyche, social structures, culture, and science is overwhelming. Observe the number of books written on it, the numerous discussions on the topic of time, scientific theories, philosophical propositions, fictional enrichments; time has been made by us into a powerful entity. Eco demystifies the time paradox and radically questions its relevance. Through his critique on time in the novel he dethrones the state of powerful presence that time holds and shuns this phenomenon to a marginalised state of powerless

absence. Eco does not completely reject time, but through his revelation of its unnecessary dominance over human psyche, our thinking and perceptions, he makes us aware of its illusionary nature, its gradually reducing strength and the need to channel its potentials. Realization is to dawn that time is for man, not man is for time. The New York Times reviewed The Island of the Day Before: Every age gets the classics it deserves. I hope we deserve The Island of the Day Before....Shipwrecked among archaic scientific nightmares and failed beginnings and dead ends of technology, we will recover the perennial hope of making sense of what happens to us (I). At the end sense has to dawn on us regarding time, Ecos novel is an attempt, one among many to make us aware of the dominance of time on our lives. Eco awakens our senses to observe the various wrong notions related to time. Eco is not supporting chaos a state of total disorder by rejecting the order of time, he is for the use of time to reverse all its ill effects, the breaking of unnecessary boundaries imposed by time, and the giving of free rein to the ideas in a human being and the promoting of a more flexible order of existence.