In an interview in 2008, Redfield claimed that The Celestine Prophecy is more a parable than a novel. He went on to explain: “A parable has a structure much different than a novel. A parable is to entertain, but also to pull together insights and to not only tell a story, but to tell a story that elevates one’s awareness at the same time.” Do you agree with Redfield’s assessment of his work’s structure? How does this work follow the conventions of a novel or of a parable?

The narrator of The Celestine Prophecy is never named. How does this impact your understanding and experience of the text? Does its anonymity make the story more universal? How would its effect be different if the “I” were named and the character were developed with more particular details?

The Celestine Prophecy can be interpreted as a critique of modern Western culture. What evidence could you use to make this case?