I’m afraid I can’t see them. Can you explain what they are?
That’s the point. He can’t be a pariah at this point. The book is a bestseller, the movie’s probably going to be a smash hit. He’s a millionaire who had the wherewithal to win a lawsuit filed by Baigent and Leigh (and I haven’t read Holy Blood and Holy Grail, but it certainly sounds like there’s a strong case for lifting material there).
So the Church doesn’t approve. So they’re picketing him and boycotting the film. There’s still a big, big audience out there that’s already proved they’ll buy the books, and will go to the movie.
Compare that to Salman Rushdie, a brilliant author who has been made a pariah, who has been forced to live in hiding and saw his translator murdered for translating his works.
There really is no comparison here.
Brown’s kinda in the same situation as Monty Python, given the protests they got when they put out the movie “Life of Brian”.
One of the most interesting things associated with that suit is that no one - and I mean literally no one that I could find in the copyright law or writing communities - thought that there was even the tiniest microfragment of a case there. No one could understand why they proceeded with the suit, and no one was a nanobit surprised when they lost. All history was against them. (In a way that’s ironic, given the subject of the books, but there you go.) Strong case? Only in the way the OP has a strong case. :rolleyes:
Sorry to come down on you for this, but you obviously either misunderstood the case or really don’t understand copyright law. It’s vitally important to know that Brown did nothing wrong and that his accusers were lunatics. He did not win merely because he had the money to spend on lawyers. (The case would certainly have never come to trial in the U.S. either. Only an odd technicality in a previous British case allowed it.) Almost all modern writing depends on this understanding.
No need to apologize, mate 
Is there any more material on the case I can follow?
Or the twisted knickers that resulted from the release of “The Last Temptation of Christ”.
Or Kevin Smith after Dogma.
Literary:
I’ve read a couple of Dan Brown’s books and was very disappointed.
He has plot devices like the Head of Vatican Security not knowing what anti-matter is. :rolleyes:
The hero and heroine attempt to alert the Vatican to a ‘plot’ by using a historian and a woman in a short skirt. :smack:
Real life:
The British Government paid for armed guards to live with Rushdie, who also went into hiding, for years.
Several people connected with the book (translators, publishers) were killed as a result of the fatwa.
Nobody has made any such threats against Dan Brown.
If they were really upset, no doubt the authors of the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (which uses the same plot) would already have been targeted.
Given the facts, I fail to see why you think there are parallels or why anyone will be killed.
He’s got no reason to be worried about that. Rushdie made way more people angry, and they were far angrier, than Brown has. The worst Brown seems to have to worry about is some people bringing his movie extra publicity by boycotting it. If the parallels here are so obvious, I wish you’d explain them.
In the meantime, reading “Is Dan Brown the new Salman Rushdie” made me throw up in my mouth a little bit.
Except that Holy Blood/Holy Grail didn’t sell nearly so well.
Or get turned into a movie with Tom Hanks.
IIRC, “The Satanic Verses” didn’t sell too well until the fatwah was announced.
God, I hope you didn’t swallow! That would suck!
Well, let me leave some of you literary genius reviewers with this:
I like to break stuff down into the lowest common denominator so allow me to take you by the hand and we will do it this way…
Rushdie pissed off the Muslims Brown is pissing off the Catholics
My question was: Do you think Brown fears the same thing as Rushdie? Some of you answered in a way I found suitable, the rest just kinda "bared your fangs and yelled BREAKFAST!!!
The only thing that throws this whole “equation” out of balance are your inabilities to keep your minds “open” as mine was/is. (I used was/is to indicate past and present as it pertains to this thread and my life, Wendell)
As far as the cites, there were only two, but there are many more too numerous to include, and they are much more strongly worded.
In conclusion, I am not bitter, only a mite bemused and disappointed. And admittedly, not as intelligent. Which is, after all, why I am a member here.
But still smiling. I just love this place and its pile-on mentality. No matter if someone tells you “I am trying to keep an open mind” and “educate/discuss with me”, some of you take whatever is asked/said as a personal threat, and make it your personal vendetta.
Enjoy your Easter, and I’ll see you on the other side of the movie, which I am looking forward to very much.
Q
Wow, so they actually caused more harm by annoucing a fatwa than if they just kept quiet and ignored it. Would this be a proper example of irony?
I don’t know why you think anything you’ve posted has gone over anybody’s head.
Didn’t a lot of people answer this?
Your OP asked if Brown feared becoming a pariah. Based on the public reaction to his book, he has little reason to be afraid of that. He hasn’t faced mass protests or denouncements. He’s gotten some negative responses, but nothing like what happened to Rushdie. It seems that public opinion supports his crappy writing, as most of his audience is probably Christian. And nobody is threatening his life. So there is really very little comparison here. It’s much closer to what happened to Kevin Smith.
No. Absolutely not. Incredibly so. There is no threat from anyone or any organization connected to the Catholic church.
His big fear is finding a wallet big enough to hold the money he’s making.
It is to make the word “tolerate” into a past tense “tolerated.”
What is your damage? Are you just messing with us? Trying to prove some point about organized religion? What?
Even if Pope Sidious were to issue a dispensation to anyone for killed Brown nothing would happen. Today’s Catholics just aren’t as fanatical today’s Muslims*. Anything have to do with religion is going to draw *someone * to protest it. Period.
The Opus Dei aren’t hiding in your closet. Chill.
*Not all Muslims, but a good number can be whipped into a frenzy over things that most Catholics would shrug off and/or write a letter to the editor about.
For the record, Rushdie has not been living in hiding since 1997, and the Iranian government has rescinded Khomeini’s fatwa. Although he is still at risk from other fundamentalist groups, and he still has bodyguards assigned to him from British Secret Service.
And yeah, the OP’s comparison really fails on just about every level. The Dan Brown controversy will be totally forgotten in five years, and Brown himself will vanish from the public consciousness not long after. Rushdie’s fatwa is going to be long remembered as a major event in the life of one of the foremost authors of the 20th and 21st centuries.
If we’re asking questions, here’s one I’d love to know the answer to.
Is there something special about the Internet that precludes people from just typing the words, “Sorry, I was wrong”?