Is Dan Brown the new Salman Rushdie?

[Antonius_Block]

@tomndebb

We are still talking artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals with no mention of historical events. It would be intersting to see an actual claim by Brown that he actually believes that Jesus married (Mary Magdalene or anyone else) and that the descendants of Jesus are still running around Europe.

In this March 2003 interview, he said:

One of the many qualities that makes The Da Vinci Code unique is the factual nature of the story. All the history, artwork, ancient documents, and secret rituals in the novel are accurate…as are the hidden codes revealed in some of Da Vinci’s most famous paintings.

Now, if you took that quote at face value, you’d think that Brown really believes that the Priory of Sion is a centuries-old organization, rather than the fraudulent creation of a convicted embezzler (and since-confessed conman) and a bunch of his buddies in the French Alps during the 1950s.

In his last major interview, with Entertainment Weekly back in late 2003, Brown is quoted as saying:

There are a lot of people who firmly believe all of these theories that are put forth in the book. And that is their reality, and you have to track them down and let them convince you. And with Da Vinci Code, I’ve said it before, I really began writing this book as a skeptic. I expected to disprove a lot of what’s in the book, and the more research I did, the more I began to believe it and realized, Wow, this makes an awful lot of sense.

@tomndebb

What we generally get are these coy statements intended to promote book sales.

I couldn’t agree more, but he does seem to have altered his story as the book’s popularity grew.

[BrainGlutton]

BTW, why is everybody calling Brown a “talentless hack”? He’ll never be on the short list for a literary prize, but so what? He writes in the “bestseller” genre*, and he writes at least as well as John Grisham or Michael Crichton or Tom Clancy.

*Yes, apparently it is an actual genre, which I was quite surprised to learn, in this thread: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=363921

[Dangerosa]

I don’t think he is talentless, I merely called him a hack. What he does, he does well. If he didn’t, he certainly would not have written an incredible bestseller. I found DaVinci Code unreadable, but my taste may be subject here. I can actually muddle through Byatt, Rushdie and Eco - but I can’t get through Grisham, Clancy, or Brown. My preference is somewhere in between, where readability meets good prose.

He is talentless only when speaking of his talent as a literary (as opposed to popular) author. On the other hand, Rushdie, while an excellent lieterary author, has never displayed any talent for being a popular hack.

Its the rare individual (and Stephan King may be one) who can combine popular with a literary skill set.

[Miller]

@BrainGlutton

BTW, why is everybody calling Brown a “talentless hack”? He’ll never be on the short list for a literary prize, but so what? He writes in the “bestseller” genre*, and he writes at least as well as John Grisham or Michael Crichton or Tom Clancy.

Heh. Since when has writing as well as Tom Clancy been proof that someone isn’t a hack?

[Loopydude]

@BrainGlutton

BTW, why is everybody calling Brown a “talentless hack”?

I could have been biased. My undergrad senior thesis was on Mary Magdalene, and the claims of factuality so irritated me from the outset, I was negatively inclined toward the writer from the get-go. Recent news aside, it struck me as such a shameless rehash of the bullshit found in Holy Blood Holy Grail I fairly wanted to sue Brown myself. I only made it through about a quarter of TDC , at the behest of a friend who loaned me the book and thought it was the beez kneez, before my disgust overwhelmed the effort, and but for that fact of ownership I didn’t throw it in the trash.

That, and I thought his writing style sucked arse. But, agian, I could have been biased.

[Quasimodem]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Interesting comment from the typical stuffy old Italian ccardinal. Now, if that was important, why did you not link to that rather than to the story which did not say what you claimed for it in your OP?

[QUOTE]

Because , when I saw the direction the thread was taking, I wanted to see how far your “Pack Behavior” would take you: separate the dissident, and then close in on him and attack.

I am amazed that someone as ignorant as I, am actually correct in my theory as it pertains to SDMB, which is:

1. Make sure to ridicule, no matter how well-intentioned and friendly the OP…
2. Be as sarcastic as possible
3. Gather forces
4. Attempt to subjugate by re-wording the OP and then asking for an apology for something not even intended
5. And then offering “one more opportunity” as long as the offender sees the error of his ways: Pack/Tribal Behavior

Godamm! Did you people really think I would forsake my pride for membership here???

Did you really , EM? Tell me why I should follow in your footsteps, when I despise everything you espouse: “If the masses agree, then I must be wrong?” I don’t know how old you are, but maybe you need to re-think that one, Dude. Going the way of the masses might not have ended up giving us the freedoms we now enjoy, or am I putting words in your mouth?

Did I “mess” with y’all?

No. Not at the outset, but the more you twisted my words and bashed Brown and my OP, the more interested I became in the outcome.

And finally, it has become evident to me that some of y’all may need to be examined to see if your rectum has suddenly changed places with your esophagus, because the shit you are spewing is getting all over the rest of the more well-meaning members of this website: You lost all sight of what the OP asked and took it to places it was never intended to go.

Some of you really are a sorry lot, aren’t you?

For the rest, I thank you for discussing this instead of retaliating. It made all the difference, and as I continue to await the outcome of this novel and film, I will remember the more intelligent words you chose to use.

Tomndebb, et al: I used to think y’all rock. Now you just ooze. I hate ooze. It has no substance and it smells.

I’m done.

Quasimodem

[JThunder]

People were quite respectful to you, Quasimodem, until you continued to harp on the alleged similarities between Dan Brown and Salman Rushdie.

Methinks that someone wants to get banned.

[Hamlet]

@Quasimodem

Interesting comment from the typical stuffy old Italian ccardinal. Now, if that was important, why did you not link to that rather than to the story which did not say what you claimed for it in your OP?

Because , when I saw the direction the thread was taking, I wanted to see how far your “Pack Behavior” would take you: separate the dissident, and then close in on him and attack.

I am amazed that someone as ignorant as I, am actually correct in my theory as it pertains to SDMB, which is:

1. Make sure to ridicule, no matter how well-intentioned and friendly the OP…
2. Be as sarcastic as possible
3. Gather forces
4. Attempt to subjugate by re-wording the OP and then asking for an apology for something not even intended
5. And then offering “one more opportunity” as long as the offender sees the error of his ways: Pack/Tribal Behavior

Godamm! Did you people really think I would forsake my pride for membership here???

Did you really , EM? Tell me why I should follow in your footsteps, when I despise everything you espouse: “If the masses agree, then I must be wrong?” I don’t know how old you are, but maybe you need to re-think that one, Dude. Going the way of the masses might not have ended up giving us the freedoms we now enjoy, or am I putting words in your mouth?

Did I “mess” with y’all?

No. Not at the outset, but the more you twisted my words and bashed Brown and my OP, the more interested I became in the outcome.

And finally, it has become evident to me that some of y’all may need to be examined to see if your rectum has suddenly changed places with your esophagus, because the shit you are spewing is getting all over the rest of the more well-meaning members of this website: You lost all sight of what the OP asked and took it to places it was never intended to go.

Some of you really are a sorry lot, aren’t you?

For the rest, I thank you for discussing this instead of retaliating. It made all the difference, and as I continue to await the outcome of this novel and film, I will remember the more intelligent words you chose to use.

Tomndebb, et al: I used to think y’all rock. Now you just ooze. I hate ooze. It has no substance and it smells.

I’m done.

Quasimodem

You “asked” a “question”, which people answered. You refused to offer convincing arguments to support an alternative “answer”, and, when called on it, you started with this bizarre martyr complex, insulted other posters, and finally, run away throwing a hissy fit like a 3 year old. It’s pathetic, and I suggest you stick with spewing your crap in MPSIMS, or, better yet, get a livejouranal.

[BrainGlutton]

@Quasimodem

Godamm! Did you people really think I would forsake my pride for membership here???

Why not? All the rest of us did!

[tomndebb]

@Quasimodem

And finally, it has become evident to me that some of y’all may need to be examined to see if your rectum has suddenly changed places with your esophagus, because the shit you are spewing is getting all over the rest of the more well-meaning members of this website: You lost all sight of what the OP asked and took it to places it was never intended to go.

Well, if you do bother to come back, be sure to leave the personal insults outside this Forum.
[ /Moderator Mode ]

[tomndebb]

That said, this is silly:

@Quasimodem

@tomndebb

Interesting comment from the typical stuffy old Italian ccardinal. Now, if that was important, why did you not link to that rather than to the story which did not say what you claimed for it in your OP?

Because , when I saw the direction the thread was taking, I wanted to see how far your “Pack Behavior” would take you: separate the dissident, and then close in on him and attack.

You seem to be saying, here, that in the Original Post, the very first post of the thread to which I am referring in this quote, you made a claim and then refused to provide supporting information for the intention of seeing whether there would be some “pack” mentality that would attack you for having done exactly that.

Why would you post that way? If you had information that a member of the church was calling for a boycott, why did you only provide a link to a group that was merely asking for a diclaimer in the credits? If you knew that you would be called to account for that discrepancy and you posted for the purpose of getting a negative reaction, then you would appear to be proclaiming that you were trolling. Since I am sure that you are not claiming to have trolled this thread, I am at a loss to understand what you actually meant to do.

Note that you claim that you “saw which direction the thread was taking” but you are talking about a comment I made regarding your Original Post.

[JRDelirious]

What the…

…well, this is infrequent but not unknown, the OP trainwrecking his own thread.

Evidently, the answer is no, Brown isn’t the new Rushdie, and there are not just differences of degree but ssubstantive differences in what the reactions in opposition to either writer have been.
That many of the posters chose to not miss the opportunity to throw in some snarkiness in the direction of Dan Brown should not have surprised Quasimodem or anyone (hell, any mention of any persons living or dead in a thread will almost certainly elicit somebody taking a dig at them) and it could have been easily rebutted with “fine, you think Brown’s a hack but is he in danger and if not why not?”; that a few went ahead and ridiculed the question itself, OK, I can see how it could bother him, but it surprises me that he took it so personally and combatively.

[Miller]

@Quasimodem

Because , when I saw the direction the thread was taking, I wanted to see how far your “Pack Behavior” would take you: separate the dissident, and then close in on him and attack.

The fact that almost everyone who read this thread disagreed with you is not necessarily evidence of “pack behavior.” It could also be evidence of a very poorly thought-out premise for an OP.

I am amazed that someone as ignorant as I, am actually correct in my theory as it pertains to SDMB, which is:

1. Make sure to ridicule, no matter how well-intentioned and friendly the OP…

Which hasn’t happened anywhere in this thread.

2. Be as sarcastic as possible

Well, granted, but it’s the SDMB, so that’s hardly surprising.

3. Gather forces

Also hasn’t happened, unless there’s a "Let’s all pile on Quasi email chain letter that I didn’t see. You posted an OP that a lot of people disagreed with. That’s all. You’re really badly over-reacting to nothing more than strong disagreement. Not one single person in this thread has offered you a personal insult. They have called your idea stupid, which is manifestly not the same thing. It’s also par for the course for debates on the boards, and quite a bit more civilized than you’d find on 99% of the other message boards out there.

4. Attempt to subjugate by re-wording the OP and then asking for an apology for something not even intended

Comparing wide-spread disagreement with being “subjugated” badly undercuts your credibility.

5. And then offering “one more opportunity” as long as the offender sees the error of his ways: Pack/Tribal Behavior

You were warned for offering personal insults outside of the pit, not for posting a poorly conceived OP. And not one thing you’ve listed here could adequately be described as “pack/triabl behavior.”

Godamm! Did you people really think I would forsake my pride for membership here???

This question makes absolutely no sense in the context of this thread. Who has asked you to forsake your pride?

Did you really , EM? Tell me why I should follow in your footsteps, when I despise everything you espouse: “If the masses agree, then I must be wrong?” I don’t know how old you are, but maybe you need to re-think that one, Dude. Going the way of the masses might not have ended up giving us the freedoms we now enjoy, or am I putting words in your mouth?

Total non-sequiter. Exapno said nothing of the sort, and bringing up “freedom” is completely random. I don’t even know what you’re trying to say here.

Did I “mess” with y’all?

No, and more importantly, no one has tried to mess with you.

No. Not at the outset, but the more you twisted my words and bashed Brown and my OP, the more interested I became in the outcome.

You need to learn the difference between vigourous disagreement and personal insult. People not liking Dan Brown isn’t the same as not liking you as a person.

And finally, it has become evident to me that some of y’all may need to be examined to see if your rectum has suddenly changed places with your esophagus, because the shit you are spewing is getting all over the rest of the more well-meaning members of this website: You lost all sight of what the OP asked and took it to places it was never intended to go.

Some of you really are a sorry lot, aren’t you?

That was uncalled for.

For the rest, I thank you for discussing this instead of retaliating. It made all the difference, and as I continue to await the outcome of this novel and film, I will remember the more intelligent words you chose to use.

Who, specifically, are you thanking? I ask, because your hostility in this thread is so inexplicable, it might be useful to see some posts that you think are acceptable to try to establish some sort of a baseline for understanding what you’re on about.

Tomndebb, et al: I used to think y’all rock. Now you just ooze. I hate ooze. It has no substance and it smells.

That was especially uncalled for. Guy’s just doing his job.

I’m done.

Okay.

[Steve_MB]

@Quasimodem

Have you read the novel? Brown makes points therein (and I realize it is a fictional work) that the Church will not (and has not) tolerate (d) heresy.

It’s been some time since the Church killed people for heresy.

If you want to respond that this is a result of secular power stripping the Church of the ability to do so, and not of any spontaneous moral enlightenment of the Church… well, you’re right. That doesn’t change the fact stated in the above paragraph.

[Quasimodem]

Who said I was gone?

I only said I was “done”!

Metaphorically speaking here:

And as the tribe/pack moves on to find new meat, they leave a bit of food behind for their “sentry” , and it is his job to yip and yap with the following:

@Hamlet

You “asked” a “question”, which people answered. You refused to offer convincing arguments to support an alternative “answer”, and, when called on it, you started with this bizarre martyr complex, insulted other posters, and finally, run away throwing a hissy fit like a 3 year old. It’s pathetic, and I suggest you stick with spewing your crap in MPSIMS, or, better yet, get a livejouranal.

And as the tribe/pack moves further away, and this poor sod runs out of piss to mark the territory, he begins to wonder. But by now the tribe/pack can no longer hear, and it is a moot point.

“Fellas??? Hey. Fellas!!!”

Now you can cue the crickets.

It didn’t have to end this way, but that is the end you wished, and I am sorry to see some of you go.

As for me, I will always stand up for what I believe, admit when I am wrong, but never bow to the masses just for acceptance. And if that makes me a “Martyr” then so be it.

[Steve_MB]

@JThunder

@Talon Karrde

Then again, Pat Robertson is probably anti-Catholic too.

Actually, Pat Robertson is pretty ecumenical in his views.

Yeah, he hates lots of different people (as I recall, he was able to come up with a rather extensive list of people who caused the 9/11 Massacre without including the actual perpetrators thereof). :rolleyes:

[Exapno_Mapcase]

I suppose I should be flattered that Quasi is singling me out for personal attack, although I thought that wasn’t allowed in this forum, anymore than using the putz smilie against me was in CS.

However, I do mind his lying about what I said. Let me be clear about what actually occurred.

There are opinions which cannot be refuted. I like cake better than pie is one such. There are also opinions that are based on objective facts. That Dan Brown is the new Salman Rushdie is an opinion that is demonstrably wrong. Many posters to this thread have demonstrated that this statement is wrong in every factual way.

When you defend a personal opinion, you may feel free to do so no matter how many others disagree with it. When you defend a position that is wrong, and has been demonstrated to be wrong, and rather than being challenged has been reinforced by literally every person in a thread, your continued defense of that position is beyond foolish. Otis Redding was wrong when he wrote in “Sitting on the Dock of the Bay:”

I can’t do what ten people tell me to do
So I guess I’ll remain the same

When ten people tell you you’re just plain wrong, and nobody stands up for your side, remaining the same isn’t an option. Namecalling is an even worse one. You are not a martyr; your wounds are self-inflicted.

I asked for an apology before, not for me personally but for all those in the thread, and got abuse in return. An apology is still called for. To every person that’s posted here.

[Hamlet]

@Quasimodem

And as the tribe/pack moves further away, and this poor sod runs out of piss to mark the territory, he begins to wonder. But by now the tribe/pack can no longer hear, and it is a moot point.

What the fuck are you talking about? Is this more of the martyr complex/delusional paranoia or are we the butt of some silly joke, because your responses confound me. I’m used to intelligent conversations, where one thought leads to another, with differing sides of an issue making their best points. In this thread, all I see is a sad, mistaken soul making no sense and trying, vainly, to garner sympathy by painting those who disagree with him as rabid wolves.

@Quasimodem

t didn’t have to end this way, but that is the end you wished, and I am sorry to see some of you go.

Actually, I wished to get an intelligent response from you as to why you would, in the face of arguments to the contrary, equate a request for a disclaimer to a call for, and commitment of, murder or an author. But, apparently, intelligent debate is either beyond you, or of no interest to you.

@Quasimodem

As for me, I will always stand up for what I believe, admit when I am wrong, but never bow to the masses just for acceptance. And if that makes me a “Martyr” then so be it.

No, it’s your constant whining and apparent persecution complex that makes you a “Martyr”. It’s your steadfast refusal to even engage in any intelligent debate with those who disagree with you that makes you pathetic. Seriously, you haven’t even tried to “stand up for what you believe”, you’ve simply stated what you apparently believed and then refused to support it and instead plugged your fingers in your ears and hummed the lyrics of Green Day’s Paranoia over and over.

[tomndebb]

OK. I am not moving this to the Pit, but we are all wandering far, far from the topic and getting much too personal.

I am closing this thread.

Quasimodem, feel free to marshal your arguments into a logical construction and submit a new thread either here or in IMHO. (I do suggest that you put some thought into actually assembling a coherent thesis to discuss; your open-ended question did not fare well.)

Alternatively, you (or anyone) may open up a Pit thread on the behavior of other posters. I strongly advise against that, as I see no reason to turn a fairly mild disagreement into a raging flamefest, but that is certainly an option.

This thread is done.

[ /Moderator Mode ]