D'Juhn Keep on 24/5/2006 at 17:35
Quote Posted by fett
Where've you been? I tell RBJ to fuck off on a daily basis, but he's not being an absoulte ass right now, so I was being nice. As for you jumping in to referee how 'bout you go fuck yourself?
No, YOU, you useless feeble medicated cripple.
Chimpy Chompy on 24/5/2006 at 17:46
What bugs me about Brown's work (other than it being pretty mediocore storyelling in the first place) is, he seems to start off with what looks like fairly well-researched material, then throws his own wacky speculation in. And then refuses to tell us what's what. I recall Angels and Demons sounded plausible enough in a handwavy way on some scientific stuff, then suddenly pulled out ANTIMATTER BOMBS.
Now, I know where that dives off the wacky end. But the Jesus stuff in Davincicode? Not much idea what's known fact, what's legend, and what Brown made up whilst sat on the bog one day. I'm aware there's some amount of old scripture that says something or other, and some other gospels, and maybe Jesus had a gay half-brother and Fett goes RAAR MY TERRITORY YOU IGNORANT FOOLS when people discuss it, but that's about it.
So I'm not getting into the "he's fooling people" argument, so much as wishing the guy would stick an appendix on the end telling us where the facts end and his ideas take off. Rather than trying to tell us it's all facts, whether that's kidding or some genuine desire to lend credibility to the material.
Stitch on 24/5/2006 at 18:11
Unsurprisingly, fett didn't get Iggle's joke.
RBJ: The popularity of the book hinges on the fact that it in theory airs the church's dirty laundry while dressing it up as page turning fiction. It is (again, in theory) to religious history what Michael Crichton's books are to science. I guarantee you a lot of research went into The DaVinci Code and Brown very much believed he was shedding a little light when his talking heads lectured each other between puzzle solvings and chase sequences.
I'd agree none of this should be taken at face value anyway, but to dismiss it entirely as mere fiction seems a bit irresponsible. While I'll agree there is virtually no impact on the world in the sense that the church isn't in any danger of losing converts to Brown's silver tongue, we are currently barraged with magazine articles, television shows, documentaries, and books that examine Brown's version of events more closely. It's a hot topic, and has been so ever since the book skyrocketed to success two years ago.
I'll agree that the church should lighten the hell up and let this blow over (as it eventually will) but to let the book off the book entirely due to the fact that it's fiction seems to rather miss the point. Everyone I know who enjoyed the book did so solely on the merits of the history lesson presented as fact, and none of these people huffed paint as teens.
Rug Burn Junky on 24/5/2006 at 18:17
No, that's entirely the point, to do anything OTHER than let the book get a free pass due to the fact that it's fiction is to be a victim of its marketing plan. To suggest that this should be a controversy, or even worth discussing, is to be played like a fiddle.
I'm sure that there was a lot of research put into it, but that wasn't to make sure anything in the book was true, only to make sure it was plausible.
Comparing it to Crichton is perfect, he's full of shit too.
Stitch on 24/5/2006 at 18:30
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
No, that's entirely the point, to do anything OTHER than let the book get a free pass due to the fact that it's fiction is to be a victim of its marketing plan.
Except the book explicitly states that the facts behind it all are real.
The books deals with very real history in what many people believe to be an inaccurate way.
Of course it's popularity is going to result in discussion of said history.
And as far as Crichton goes, he at least had the good sense to stay speculative in the way he handled the science he was mangling.
SD on 24/5/2006 at 18:35
Quote Posted by Stitch
The books deals with very real history in what many people believe to be an inaccurate way.
So does the Bible.
Rug Burn Junky on 24/5/2006 at 18:36
This is turning into an endless circle: Of course the book explicitly says everything in it is real. That's his literary hook.
Believing him, or even pretending that this matters, is like getting up in arms over a magician claiming that he's really, honestly, truly going to saw that woman in half.
Stitch on 24/5/2006 at 18:45
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
This is turning into an endless circle: Of course the book explicitly says everything in it is real. That's his literary hook.
I really can't fathom how a phenomenally popular book that deals with church history can be dismissed so glibly merely because it's dressed up as a thriller and filed under fiction.
Edit:I don't know how much you know about the book, but one distinction is that it deals with church history, and not necessarily the contents of the bible, except in regard to the supression of certain texts. Brown's book is not merely fiction that disagrees with the church's fiction.
This is important as if Brown's book were just about, say, Jesus boning Mary Magdalene, I'd agree with you. I don't think Jesus was the son of god so I don't give a shit what anyone says about him. Hell, I'm not even sold on him ever having existed.
However, The DaVinci Code deals with the church's alleged history of suppressing the truth. It deals with real groups, past and present, and presents a series of questionalbe facts about both. Surely that should be treated differently than mere fiction?
ignatios on 24/5/2006 at 19:04
Quote Posted by Stitch
I really can't fathom how a phenomenally popular book that deals with church history can be dismissed so glibly merely because it's dressed up as a thriller and filed under fiction.
Conversely, I can't fathom how it should be given any sort of special attention just because it deals with church history rather than any other history in a revisionist or speculative or interpretive way. The controversy in The DaVinci Code touches a fair number of people, but that's really the only thing that separates it from other similar novels.
I'm with RBJ; the Church shouldn't have said anything about it, or at the most, they should have laughed it off. It's their fault just as much as Dan Brown's, if not more.
Rug Burn Junky on 24/5/2006 at 19:15
Quote:
I really can't fathom how a phenomenally popular book that deals with church history can be dismissed so glibly merely because it's dressed up as a thriller and filed under fiction.
Because on the scale of misconceptions that actually matter, arcane history of the RC Church ranks somewhere well below urban legends about Jimmy Page sacrificing animals so that the devil can bless Led Zep.
Besides, the whole concern is not over A)
what effects it actually has but B)
what happens if enough stupid people actually believe this. Who the fuck cares? There are fewer of them than anyone makes out, they're morons for believing it, and
the mere fact that they're morons lets us easily assume that they're not in any position that it matters whether or not they believe it.
I mean, "Won't somebody think of the children?" is bad enough, but when we as a society have to get our moral outrage by "Won't somebody think of the retards?" then we've gone a bit too far.
Quote:
However, The DaVinci Code deals with the church's alleged history of suppressing the truth. It deals with real groups, past and present, and presents a series of questionalbe facts about both. Surely that should be treated differently than mere fiction?
I do know more than enough to realize that it's not just about the events of the bible, and it deals with the subsequent centuries of the church's actions.
But no, that doesn't make it any different in my mind than other fiction. It's an alternate history, and plenty of other books have fictionalized history, look at Plot Against America, by Philip Roth.
As such, I naturally take it with a grain of salt, Brown's wink-wink-nudge-nudge-"thisisreallytrue,honest,guys" smirk notwithstanding. I should think that most other people do too.
