« Depressed monk's suicide linked to reading TDVC | Main | Reactions, reactions, and more reactions... »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b7c369e200d834b60a6d69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Has Dan Brown "become the ultimate scapegoat for the cultural snobs"?:

Comments

Owen

This is rather like the "Harry Potter is getting kids to read {and some adults} so how bad can it be?" argument.

Cristina A. Montes

It's not enough to get people into reading; people should read critically and develop a taste for the right kinds of books.

I once made an analogy that if TDVC is potato chips and Coke (downright junkfood), "Harry Potter" is diet Coke (still junkfood but less fattening), and the classics are fresh vegetable salad. Well, maybe my analogy is wrong; TDVC should be compared with cigarettes.

ANd yes, a lot of literary snobs fell for TDVC. Frankly, I think genuine classics-infatuated literary snobs are better than those who have read and loved TDVC and consider themselves more sophisticated readers than the readers who are, for them, to "timid" to stomach its outrageous claims.

The literary snob in me (yes, I'd openly admit it!) chuckles whenever I encounter people who rave about how well-researched TDVC is and but say they find "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy too difficult to read.

Owen

Yes, exactly, Cristina. My point exactly. And if it helps you feel less alone, I happen to be reading {besides my copy of THVDHoax} Dostoyevsky. :)

MLC

I find it somewhat amusing that the charge of literary snobbery should be made by the "Guardian" of all newspapers which is known as being the oracle of the liberal elite.
It's my belief that the "Guardian" would display an equally snobbish attitude to TDVC if it didn't follow said "Guardian's" own agenda of Christianity bashing.

talpianna

I think the comparison with the Harry Potter books is a bit unfair: the latter aren't literary junk by any means, although they are certainly not the best juvenile fantasy around.

This topic was raised on the RUNNING WITH QUILLS blog by one of the authors who contributes to it; it sparked quite a discussion, and I am still amazed that quite a few readers think it a well-written book.


I must admit, however,that all I've read is the excerpts quoted in THE DA VINCI HOAX!

I think a friend of mine still holds some sort of record for having realized it was a crock after reading only the first two words! And being able to write reams of demolition based on only the first paragraph. (Of course, she has the advantage of being a real, live (if retired) mueum curator herself.

Cristina A. Montes

My apologies. :) As I said, I openly admit that I'm a literary snob, and I openly admit being a rather cruel Harry Potter basher. I plead guilty to having offended one or two Harry Potter fans here at home. :) I must admit J.K. Rowling has her strengths, and these are humor and details. It's just that the Harry Potter books are not the best juvenile books around, and yet they're selling as if they were. Maybe I would be more forgiving of the Harry Potter series if it generated less hype. And while the Harry Potter series promotes some values I find problematic (although this is not the forum to discuss them), I'd rather that people read Harry Potter than TDVC.

talpianna

My last sentence in the comment above should of course read "museum," not "mueum." And I proofread it!

A mueum, of course, is a place full of cats (like my home).

The comments to this entry are closed.