Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moskie
Come on guys, there's a potential discussion here, yet it of course instantly denigrates to a Bush-bashing and baby-raping (ha) thread.
|
Just stirring things up...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Moskie
So, in the hopes of having a conversation:
It's an interesting point regarding the Da Vinci Code. Many people *do* take the "history* explained in that book to be fact. So imagine if the subject of the book was something more topical and current instead of Da Vinci or the Illuminati. Say, a political party, or global warming. A phony history was made up, using real-life prominent figures and historical events as starting points.
I think some people are going to say that Crichton's novel is just along the same lines as An Inconvenient Truth and Fahrenheit 9/11... but I'd disagree with that. Crichton has no obligation to back up his claims in a novel, while Moore/Gore are genuinely trying to convince us of what they believe to be true. Crichton's work is more subliminal, and therefore less respectful, as far as I'm concerned.
|
I guess the real question should be: should authors of fiction be heald responsible for the ignorance of their readers? In some cases, I'd have to say maybe. While this book is fiction, it stand strongly on what Crichton is painting as reality. That's dangerous. It's like writing a historical fiction about WWII while suggesting the holocaust didn't happen.