Alaska Darin Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Orson Welles broadcast of martian invasion caused a scare. The fear was real. The reason for the fear was false but the fear was real. Mr Welles presented his hoax as real and then admitted the obvious. Why one would think Welles and Browns hi-jinks are analogous is beyond comprehension. They are opposites. Both presented hoaxes. Welles admitted his hoax as hoax and the nation agreed; Brown presents a hoax as true and the nation agreed. 303497[/snapback] Probably because your relatives back then didn't understand fiction either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 This argument is ridiculous. Obviously, this book is fiction as has been clearly stated. That is fact and can’t be denied. It is advertised as fiction; it is found in the fiction section of the bookstore; the story and characters are not real. However, those that are so ardently defending the book as fiction seem to be overlooking beausox’s underlying point. While this book is fiction, it is very clear that Brown wrote it with the intent to further advance the theories he believes to be true regarding Catholicism and Christ’s life. Brown has stated that he believes the theories in his book are true; he did extensive (shoddy) research as shown in the bibliography. Brown wrote the book with these theories as a prominent theme, using a fictional story to dress it up and make it more appealing to the masses. If Brown just wrote a book detailing his research and expounding on the many theories, without the fictional writing, obviously it would not sell well. I don’t see why that is so difficult to understand. Brown obviously has an agenda and uses a fictional story to push it through to the readers and he does it very well. But to explain away the seriousness of Brown’s theories and charges, just because the book is “fiction” is missing the point. It is precisely because the book is fiction that Catholics and others are taking it seriously – because it appeals to the average joe and is selling like crazy,yet it is advancing theories as fact that mock and question the foundation of the Catholic faith. Fictional works can be very powerful social commentaries, they can (along with the media) lend credibility to growing causes, they can persuade, anger and enlighten. Just because you find a book in the “fiction” section of your local bookstore doesn’t mean it has no truth to it and can’t influence the reader. 303620[/snapback] Well said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 You mean to say that during the three public years of His life He just forgot to mention one minor factoid of His life, that is, and oh by the way, I have a Son or is it son? But why worry that fact would make no difference! 303566[/snapback] You need more, or some, years of Catholic schooling. For a self-confessed Catholic, can't you even do theology right? Jesus didn't write the Bible, even by the Bible's account. So Jesus didn't leave out parts of the Bible, the authors did. And even though the NT covers 3 years of his life, of that, it only discusses a few stories during the course of those three years. Maybe the part where he plays catch with his son in the backyard of his suburban Nazareth home wasn't good enough to make the cut of stories. Even if you accept that the Bible is the Word of God, who are you to question why certain parts of the story were left out? 30 years is a long time for Jesus to be wandering around- it must have been a compelling time, considering the blockbuster success of the other three years, and yet, that part of the story can't be found. Neither of us knows what happened. Which is why a writer of FICTION chose to take a stab at it. Notice how you are the only person arguing that the book is anything but fiction? One in the face of all the bookstores and readers of that book... only you. These fantasies of yours make you borderline certifiable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Just because you find a book in the “fiction” section of your local bookstore doesn’t mean it has no truth to it and can’t influence the reader. 303620[/snapback] Especially if the reader is an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 This argument is ridiculous. Obviously, this book is fiction as has been clearly stated. That is fact and can’t be denied. It is advertised as fiction; it is found in the fiction section of the bookstore; the story and characters are not real. However, those that are so ardently defending the book as fiction seem to be overlooking beausox’s underlying point. While this book is fiction, it is very clear that Brown wrote it with the intent to further advance the theories he believes to be true regarding Catholicism and Christ’s life. Brown has stated that he believes the theories in his book are true; he did extensive (shoddy) research as shown in the bibliography. Brown wrote the book with these theories as a prominent theme, using a fictional story to dress it up and make it more appealing to the masses. If Brown just wrote a book detailing his research and expounding on the many theories, without the fictional writing, obviously it would not sell well. I don’t see why that is so difficult to understand. Brown obviously has an agenda and uses a fictional story to push it through to the readers and he does it very well. But to explain away the seriousness of Brown’s theories and charges, just because the book is “fiction” is missing the point. It is precisely because the book is fiction that Catholics and others are taking it seriously – because it appeals to the average joe and is selling like crazy,yet it is advancing theories as fact that mock and question the foundation of the Catholic faith. Fictional works can be very powerful social commentaries, they can (along with the media) lend credibility to growing causes, they can persuade, anger and enlighten. Just because you find a book in the “fiction” section of your local bookstore doesn’t mean it has no truth to it and can’t influence the reader. 303620[/snapback] So, what you are saying is that Brown is preying on the gullible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Orson Welles claimed that his breaking news wasn't a hoax and even had "reporters," "law enforcement," and "eye-witnesses" who helped him report the dire situation to the American people. Do you think he really believed that little green men were attacking America? 303449[/snapback] Not sure if this was stated? Didn't Wells and the station tell everyone that it was NOT REAL before they started to air the show? Unfortunately, most people tuned in AFTER the disclaimer... And things snowballed. ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Not sure if this was stated? Didn't Wells and the station tell everyone that it was NOT REAL before they started to air the show? Unfortunately, most people tuned in AFTER the disclaimer... And things snowballed. ???? 303660[/snapback] I think that you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I think that you are correct. 303664[/snapback] I wasn't sure?... Thanks. Anyway, this thread has me throughly confused (beyond my normal confusion )! Being the spouse of a librarian... What would happen if a "consciencious objector librarian" refuses to shelve the book under fiction? Is that the same thing as as the Rx thread? God, things could get really messed up! THAT'S ALL WE NEED. Rogue librarians out there! Maybe I should write the ALA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Didn't Wells and the station tell everyone that it was NOT REAL before they started to air the show? Unfortunately, most people tuned in AFTER the disclaimer... And things snowballed. 303660[/snapback] You're right. At least those listeners had an excuse for believing it. There is a reason that DaVinci Code isn't in the Historical or Religious departments at Borders. It's a make believe story with historical and religious overtones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 One has to be in focus at some point to lose it. Ah, irony... The anti-Catholicism comes from repressed envy. 303621[/snapback] Ah, hell...not this broken record again. Does that make Dan Brown a Protestant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 No I could never reach your crap-throwing prowess. As crap throwers go you are the best. You see it is all a factor of crap production. You need all lot of raw material to produce it in the right proportion. the aromatic quality must be just right. And, of course, never have had a thought. So please respond in character. 303595[/snapback] Right. Let me sum up your posts describing your feelings for The Da Vinci Code: "It's fiction, but as a self-righteous Catholic with a persecution complex I insist on treating it as non-fiction so I can revel in being a self-righteous Catholic persecuted by a work of fiction." Do you have ANY idea how stupid you sound? I mean, think about it. You're arguing that Brown's work is non-fiction, so you can complain that he made it up to slam the Catholic Church. What kind of lobotomy have you had that you think you can demonstrate the idea "This book is fiction" with the premise "This book is non-fiction"?????? WTF????? There's a reason I post as the Crap Throwing Monkey. It's because the moniker fits better in discussions like this with lunatics like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Especially if the reader is an idiot. 303641[/snapback] Did you forget what board you are posting on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 ...and just to catch you in advance, in case you watch NBC tonight, the mini-series "Revelations" is also fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 So Jesus didn't leave out parts of the Bible, the authors did. And even though the NT covers 3 years of his life, of that, it only discusses a few stories during the course of those three years. 303637[/snapback] That's why I appreciate the authors' detail in describing Jesus's neighbor, Brian's life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 ...and just to catch you in advance, in case you watch NBC tonight, the mini-series "Revelations" is also fiction. 303747[/snapback] But it has anti-Catholic leanings, so even though it's fiction, it's non-fiction, because it's anti-Catholic, especially if someone in New Jersey throws a telephone pole at Ron Artest while illegally but not enforceably hence legally downloading a copy of his CD. Or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I think that you are correct. 303664[/snapback] I know how you dont like to fact check so I did for you. As usual you are almost right. It is true that there was a very brief disclaimer at the beginning but it was not until 40 minutes into the "adaptation" of HG Welles "War of the Worlds" that Welles announced it was a hoax. This was preceded by at least two "reports on site" of contemporary horror. It was all good fun. If I am not mistaken much of the action occurred in New Jersey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Especially if the reader is an idiot. 303641[/snapback] Is it that mods can impugn posters or the obverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I know how you dont like to fact check so I did for you. 303772[/snapback] I should have visited the author's official website like I did with Dan Brown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Is it that mods can impugn posters or the obverse. 303774[/snapback] Ooh, someone's defensive and drawing conclusions based on personal flaws. Head down to the market in search of thicker skin, lamb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Is it that mods can impugn posters or the obverse. 303774[/snapback] "Converse", you dolt. Not "obverse". Reading your posts is like listening to someone who just passed the TOEFL and now thinks he's Shakespeare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts