Category: Non-Catholic Apologists

Occasionally there is some book that hits it big and has all kinds of people praising how well it is written. I’m starting to get a reflective skepticism of such claims, because I’ve been burned too often by them.

I know, de gustibus non disputandum est, but some things are just poorly written.

This was what happened with the Harry Potter craze. People were going on and on about how well it was written, but when I read the first Harry Potter novel, I was stunned at how poor the writing was. I acknowledge that the book has some interesting ideas in it, but the way in which these ideas were given literary form was utterly incommensurate with the level of praise being heaped upon the book. It made me wonder about the people had who want to put J. K. Rowling up there with Shakespeare. Just how much exposure to literature did they have? Not much, if they thought that Harry Potter was the bee’s knees.

In case you haven’t read it or seen the movie, the basic plot of the first Harry Potter novel involves a young boy who has lost his parents and leads a dreary existence but who then discovers that he is the most famous, most important person in the world. Since readers typically identify with the protagonists of the books they are reading, it’s easy to use this premise as a ham-fisted, over-the-top, delusions-of-grandeur fantasy for the reader. Rowling has noted that she started writing the series while she was leading a rather dreary existence herself and working out her feelings over her divorce. Reading the first Harry Potter novel, I couldn’t help the feeling that on some level she was writing it for her own sons to atone for her divorce, giving them a marvelous escape fantasy from the realities of their broken family.

(If you want to read a sci-fi novel with a smilar premise that is more like what Harry Potter *should have been,* read Jerry Pournelle’s Starswarm.)

So when people started hyping how well written The Da Vinci Code is supposed to be, I was very suspicious. Once again, “interesting ideas” are delivered with an utter lack of literary style. The books is appalling written, but I don’t need to explain why because someone else already did.

Read this analysis from Language Log about Dan Brown’s incompetent wordsmithing.

Favorite quote:

“Brown’s writing is not just bad; it is staggeringly, clumsily, thoughtlessly, almost ingeniously bad.”

Occasionally there is some book that hits it big and has all kinds of people praising how well it is written. I’m starting to get a reflective skepticism of such claims, because I’ve been burned too often by them.

I know, de gustibus non disputandum est, but some things are just poorly written.

This was what happened with the Harry Potter craze. People were going on and on about how well it was written, but when I read the first Harry Potter novel, I was stunned at how poor the writing was. I acknowledge that the book has some interesting ideas in it, but the way in which these ideas were given literary form was utterly incommensurate with the level of praise being heaped upon the book. It made me wonder about the people had who want to put J. K. Rowling up there with Shakespeare. Just how much exposure to literature did they have? Not much, if they thought that Harry Potter was the bee’s knees.

In case you haven’t read it or seen the movie, the basic plot of the first Harry Potter novel involves a young boy who has lost his parents and leads a dreary existence but who then discovers that he is the most famous, most important person in the world. Since readers typically identify with the protagonists of the books they are reading, it’s easy to use this premise as a ham-fisted, over-the-top, delusions-of-grandeur fantasy for the reader. Rowling has noted that she started writing the series while she was leading a rather dreary existence herself and working out her feelings over her divorce. Reading the first Harry Potter novel, I couldn’t help the feeling that on some level she was writing it for her own sons to atone for her divorce, giving them a marvelous escape fantasy from the realities of their broken family.

(If you want to read a sci-fi novel with a smilar premise that is more like what Harry Potter *should have been,* read Jerry Pournelle’s Starswarm.)

So when people started hyping how well written The Da Vinci Code is supposed to be, I was very suspicious. Once again, “interesting ideas” are delivered with an utter lack of literary style. The books is appalling written, but I don’t need to explain why because someone else already did.

Read this analysis from Language Log about Dan Brown’s incompetent wordsmithing.

Favorite quote:

“Brown’s writing is not just bad; it is staggeringly, clumsily, thoughtlessly, almost ingeniously bad.”

. . . is now online. See here.

A couple of updates on Jack Chick:

1) I hadn’t realized, but the Catholic Answers Special Report that I wrote on Chick Tracts is online. (This isn’t the same as the article on my meeting with Chick. I’ll get that online soon.)

2) I finally found a copy of Jack Chick’s high school yearbook photo. This is a photo that I knew existed (one of two) but that I couldn’t find a copy of. Here is the original courtesy of the Jack T. Chick Museum of Fine Art:

Now here’s a comparison of how Chick looked back about 1942 with how he looks today:

I was pretty pleased at how the drawing I did came out. It shows the same wide mouth,  prominent cheek bones, and broad forehead that struck me when I met Chick. There are signs of aging (of course!), and his eyes look larger when he is wearing his glasses (which he doesn’t all the time; he had them both on and off during our meeting), but it came out pretty nicely.

A reader writes:

I just read your latest in "This Rock" about your encounter with Jack Chick.  Wow.  What a weird experience that must have been.  It was weird just reading about it.  I’m impressed with how you maintained a charitable disposition.  I don’t think I could have even approached the man for fear of getting beligerent with him.  I can’t help but laugh at how the encounter must have appeared to him through his lense of paranoid narcissism (or is it narcissistic paranoia?).

I noted in my blog (http://flyfishinggalilee.blogspot.com) that the article reminded me of one of those cordial meetings in a casino (or similar setting) between James Bond and his current arch-nemesis.  You should start introducing yourself as "Akin….James Akin."  🙂

What sort of film was he releasing?  Will you be reviewing it on your website or in "This Rock?" 

Thanks. Meeting Jack Chick was a truly surreal experience. I hope folks will check out the article on it in This Rock (it will also be put on the Web . . . eventually). Chick’s film, The Light of the World, is a standard presentation of the gospel as Chick understands it (with a few dashes of anti-Catholicism thrown in). I have a standing invite to review it for DecentFilms.Com,and I’ll post a link here when it gets done.

Incidentally, since Chick is such a recluse that he doesn’t let his picture be taken, I realized that I am now one of the few people who knows what he looks like. As a result, I decided to draw a picture of him–comic book style, of course! Here ’tis:

A reader writes:

I just read your latest in "This Rock" about your encounter with Jack Chick.  Wow.  What a weird experience that must have been.  It was weird just reading about it.  I’m impressed with how you maintained a charitable disposition.  I don’t think I could have even approached the man for fear of getting beligerent with him.  I can’t help but laugh at how the encounter must have appeared to him through his lense of paranoid narcissism (or is it narcissistic paranoia?).

I noted in my blog (http://flyfishinggalilee.blogspot.com) that the article reminded me of one of those cordial meetings in a casino (or similar setting) between James Bond and his current arch-nemesis.  You should start introducing yourself as "Akin….James Akin."  🙂

What sort of film was he releasing?  Will you be reviewing it on your website or in "This Rock?" 

Thanks. Meeting Jack Chick was a truly surreal experience. I hope folks will check out the article on it in This Rock (it will also be put on the Web . . . eventually). Chick’s film, The Light of the World, is a standard presentation of the gospel as Chick understands it (with a few dashes of anti-Catholicism thrown in). I have a standing invite to review it for DecentFilms.Com,and I’ll post a link here when it gets done.

Incidentally, since Chick is such a recluse that he doesn’t let his picture be taken, I realized that I am now one of the few people who knows what he looks like. As a result, I decided to draw a picture of him–comic book style, of course! Here ’tis: