1. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    11 Oct '05 08:56
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Those aren't fiction.
    What are they, then?
  2. Et in Arcadia ego...
    Joined
    02 Feb '05
    Moves
    1666
    11 Oct '05 09:14
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Those aren't fiction.
    Yes, good one- that novel was pure fact!

    Excuse me whilst I sew my sides back together, you poor gullible soul.

    {whilst Dan grins at another 20 dollars in the till...}
  3. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    90892
    11 Oct '05 09:51
    More good "religious" fiction:

    The Human Age trilogy (Wyndham Lewis), comprising The Childermass, Monstre Gai and Malign Fiesta.

    "Part of the 'Human Age' trilogy, 'The Childermass' is Wyndham Lewis' most imortant literary achievement - an apocalyptic novel and a reworking in modern terms of Dante Alighieri's 'Divine Comedy'."
  4. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    11 Oct '05 13:531 edit
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    What are they, then?
    Non-fiction, of course. They must be. If they were fiction, the Catholics would not be so up in arms about them.
  5. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    11 Oct '05 14:10
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Non-fiction, of course. They must be. If they were fiction, the Catholics would not be so up in arms about them.
    You're in one of your "moods", aren't you?
  6. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    11 Oct '05 14:171 edit
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    You're in one of your "moods", aren't you?
    Which one? The one in which I won't let people have it both ways?

    Priest A: "I can't believe Dan Brown spreads all those lies about our church."
    Priest B: "But I thought those books were fiction. Is Jurassic Park a lie?"
    Priest A: "Well..."
  7. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    11 Oct '05 14:23
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Which one? The one in which I won't let people have it both ways?

    Priest A: "I can't believe Dan Brown spreads all those lies about our church."
    Priest B: "But I thought those books were fiction. Is Jurassic Park a lie?"
    Priest A: "Well..."
    Well?

    And how is it that the Church is trying to have it "both ways"?
  8. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    90892
    11 Oct '05 14:25
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    Well?

    And how is it that the Church is trying to have it "both ways"?
    If it's true that the Church claims the Dan Brown books contain lies, the books must be non-fiction, because fiction is untrue by definition.
  9. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    11 Oct '05 14:31
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    Well?

    And how is it that the Church is trying to have it "both ways"?
    By claiming that the content of his books is both fiction and lies.
  10. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    11 Oct '05 14:383 edits
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    If it's true that the Church claims the Dan Brown books contain lies, the books must be non-fiction, because fiction is untrue by definition.
    Huh?

    I can't believe you're joining DoctorScribbles' word games squad - I think you know exactly why the Catholics assert the Dan Brown books contain lies.

    When reading any piece of fiction, one apprehends information on two levels - the primary level of the plot and the characters, and the secondary level of background, setting etc. With any piece of fiction, one is immediately aware that the primary level there will be events and characters who are not real (although there might be real people featured as well - such as King Richard in Ivanhoe). With most fiction, however, the background information is generally assumed to be real unless the genre of the fiction explicitly contradicts it (e.g. Middle-Earth in Tolkien's works; or the world of Harry Potter). For instance, the characters of Oliver Twist are, obviously, not real whereas the general condition of society, setting, values etc. are assumed to be real.

    With Dan Brown's books, of course readers know the lead characters and plot is fictional but, since the background includes some reality (e.g. the institution of the Catholic Church, the Opus Dei organisation), the reader is liable to accept most (if not all) background assertions to be true (e.g. the Church tried to hide the truth of Jesus' marriage; Opus Dei fathers regularly and cruelly mortify themselves etc.)

    This is much the same as a person knowing that the Corleones are not real when reading the Godfather, but assuming that their behaviour and lingo is representative of the Mafia anyway.

    But, of course, you knew all this already.
  11. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    90892
    11 Oct '05 14:461 edit
    Originally posted by lucifershammer

    But, of course, you knew all this already.
    I must confess I haven't read the books & I didn't know even know there was a controversy. Dan Brown's books have "crap" smeared all over them. I'm as likely to read one as I am to read Wilbur Smith.

    I don't share your assumptions regarding fiction--for me, in fiction, anything goes, because it is made up. Whether or not it contains "facts" is beside the point. The closest relationship to reality that written fiction can achieve is to turn it inside out.

    The last book I'd consult for information on the Mafia would be The Godfather. The "facts" (real or distorted) are only important insofar as they add depth to the narrative canvas.
  12. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    11 Oct '05 14:531 edit
    Originally posted by lucifershammer

    since the background includes some reality (e.g. the institution of the Catholic Church, the Opus Dei organisation), the reader is liable to accept most (if not all) background assertions to be true
    Then you have an irresponsible reader. My copy of The DaVinci Code has this at the very beginning:

    "This book is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents are either the product of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resmeblance to actual persons, living or dead, events or locales, is entirely coincidental."

    The reader you describe is not playing by the rules.
  13. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    11 Oct '05 15:05
    Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
    Then you have an irresponsible reader. My copy of The DaVinci Code has this at the very beginning:

    "This book is a work of [b]fiction
    . Names, characters, places and incidents are either the product of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resmeblance to actual persons, living or dead, events or locales, is entirely coincidental."

    The reader you describe is not playing by the rules.[/b]
    Most readers don't "play by the rules", Doctor (customary disclaimer on copyright page notwithstanding).

    Now, unless you are a history buff or student, chances are that most of your presumptions about Victorian society are going to be based on Dickens and Austen. Nothing wrong with that per se - but it is something most readers do (at least at an unconscious level) most of the time.

    This is particularly true when book reviewers claim a book has been "exhaustively researched" (Publishers Weekly on The Da Vinci Code).
  14. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36105
    11 Oct '05 15:06
    Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
    I must confess I haven't read the books & I didn't know even know there was a controversy. Dan Brown's books have "crap" smeared all over them. I'm as likely to read one as I am to read Wilbur Smith.

    I don't share your assumptions regarding fiction--for me, in fiction, anything goes, because it is made up. Whether or not it contains "facts" ...[text shortened]... acts" (real or distorted) are only important insofar as they add depth to the narrative canvas.
    I'm not saying you'd consult 'The Godfather' for factual information, but it would inform your presumptions on the Mafia. (See also my Dickens/Austen example above).
  15. Standard memberDoctorScribbles
    BWA Soldier
    Tha Brotha Hood
    Joined
    13 Dec '04
    Moves
    49088
    11 Oct '05 15:102 edits
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    Most readers don't "play by the rules", Doctor (customary disclaimer on copyright page notwithstanding).
    Those who don't play by the rules have no claim against those who do. Dan Brown plays by the rules: what he writes is not factual, and thus he publishes it as fiction with the appropriate disclaimer. Your hypothetical reader doesn't play by the rules: he disregards the disclaimer's either/or dichotomy. If your hypothetical reader turns to Publishers Weekly to figure out whether everything he reads - fiction, even - is true or not, then he is need of some serious help.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree