5 ms·

I would love to see a study on the influence of Dan Brown books on the likelihood of readers to believe in (popular) conspiracy theories. Somewhere in the 90s

I would love to see a study on the influence of Dan Brown books on the likelihood of readers to believe in (popular) conspiracy theories. Somewhere in the 90s I got a book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" from a friend who was into obscure conspiracy theories. It was a fun read, but in the end I took it more like a joke. Unlike my friend. Years ago, my SO came home with Browns "The Da Vinci Code" and forced me to read it on a holiday. It was as if someone wrapped a cheap crime template around "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" and my SO loved it. She was never into conspiracies, and most of those people who in the following months and years fell for the Da Vinci Code hype were in the same boat. But to me, it felt like someone found a way to sell fringe conspiracies to a mainstream audience. I applaud his idea to do that, but it somehow doesn't feel good.

zem 3y ago
I remember our parish priest actually addressing it at the time, he was like "look, this is a popular book and I'm not saying not to read it, just realise that it's pure fiction, especially the bit where he claims that Jesus was just considered a man until a committee got together centuries after the fact and decided that we would call him divine." it wasn't particularly fulminating; he was quite good natured about it all, but in retrospect I have to wonder if he had even read the book himself, or if the church hierarchy had wanted priests to make sure that that particular point was spoken against.
- Yoric 3y ago
  In Paris, there were so many tourists visiting some of the churches mentioned in the book and "educating" their children based on what they had read from Dan Brown that these churches had posters on the doors reminding people to please stop taking Dan Brown seriously. That being said, historically, there have been a number a debates among early Christians before it was made canonical that Jesus was divine. Debates continued a long time, too, to determine what the word "divine" meant in the context.
  - zem 3y ago
    oh, agreed, there was definitely a kernel of truth to that one. i just found it interesting that the priest not only said to remember the book was fiction, but to emphasise that that one point was fiction.
- mavhc 3y ago
  I read it was more the opposite, Jesus was more of a god who spoke to people through visions, and the early Christians edited the early writings to make him an actual person, because too many other Jesus's were popping up
- jacquesm 3y ago
  I don't think priests should get the final word on what constitutes pure fiction and what isn't. But it's absolutely hilarious to read this and I'll be sure to pass it on to my Catholic priest friend :)
Terr_ 3y ago
> It was as if someone wrapped a cheap crime template around "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" and my SO loved it. This "cheap wrapping" makes me think of Atlas Shrugged. I read the book completely "blind" without foreknowledge of it or its author--recommended to me by a relative. Partway through I felt the author was insulting my intelligence by trying to sneak a vapid manifesto (as an entire chapter, even) within a fiction novel, and I completed reading it out of pure spite, so that I could confidently denounce it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Atlas Shrugged is one of just a handful of books I had to put down because I couldn't force myself to endure the pain and finish. It truly is crappy writing.
- Krasnol 3y ago
  Yes, you're right. This is a perfect comparison. However, I've never finished Atlas Shrugged because it was so crappy, and I wasn't on holiday when I started it. It was actually the first book I stopped reading because up until that point I wanted to give the authors the chance for a turn at the end. I couldn't find any reason to do this with this book.
  - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
    Believe it or not, the book actual got more heavy handed towards the end, presumably as Rand realized her publisher wasn't going to accept another 1000 pages.
- OkayPhysicist 3y ago
  Only an entire chapter? Significant swathes of the book are just characters monologuing about how much they hate the poor, and how great their enlightened selves are for actively shooting themselves in the foot to spite the proletariat. I say often, and only half-jokingly, that Atlas Shrugged made me a socialist. I grabbed a copy for free that was otherwise being sent to the trash, and by the end, it was clear that I shouldn't have interrupted its journey. It's like if someone took Nietzche, discarded the good bits, replaced the overt misogyny with the more subtle "woman should improve themselves by being more masculine" variety, and then tossed in some kinda-rapey sex scenes to try and keep peoples attention through a 1000-page novel/manifesto. Read Kropotkin's The Conquest of Bread and Stirner's The Unique and It's Property a few months later, never looked back.
Yoric 3y ago
If I recall correctly, the authors of The Holy Blood and he Holy Grail actually sued Dan Brown for plagiarism.
ttepasse 3y ago
I already wrote upthread: The story behind the genesis behind Holy Blood, Holy Grail is far more funnier than the conspiracy theory in the book: The authors fell for a con-artist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Plantard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Plantard (I had the same experience like you.)
- Krasnol 3y ago
  Thank you for that. It instantly made the whole story even more funny. I love it :D

zem 3y ago

I remember our parish priest actually addressing it at the time, he was like "look, this is a popular book and I'm not saying not to read it, just realise that it's pure fiction, especially the bit where he claims that Jesus was just considered a man until a committee got together centuries after the fact and decided that we would call him divine." it wasn't particularly fulminating; he was quite good natured about it all, but in retrospect I have to wonder if he had even read the book himself, or if the church hierarchy had wanted priests to make sure that that particular point was spoken against.

Yoric 3y ago
In Paris, there were so many tourists visiting some of the churches mentioned in the book and "educating" their children based on what they had read from Dan Brown that these churches had posters on the doors reminding people to please stop taking Dan Brown seriously. That being said, historically, there have been a number a debates among early Christians before it was made canonical that Jesus was divine. Debates continued a long time, too, to determine what the word "divine" meant in the context.
- zem 3y ago
  oh, agreed, there was definitely a kernel of truth to that one. i just found it interesting that the priest not only said to remember the book was fiction, but to emphasise that that one point was fiction.
mavhc 3y ago
I read it was more the opposite, Jesus was more of a god who spoke to people through visions, and the early Christians edited the early writings to make him an actual person, because too many other Jesus's were popping up
jacquesm 3y ago
I don't think priests should get the final word on what constitutes pure fiction and what isn't. But it's absolutely hilarious to read this and I'll be sure to pass it on to my Catholic priest friend :)

Terr_ 3y ago

> It was as if someone wrapped a cheap crime template around "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" and my SO loved it. This "cheap wrapping" makes me think of Atlas Shrugged. I read the book completely "blind" without foreknowledge of it or its author--recommended to me by a relative. Partway through I felt the author was insulting my intelligence by trying to sneak a vapid manifesto (as an entire chapter, even) within a fiction novel, and I completed reading it out of pure spite, so that I could confidently denounce it.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
rootusrootus 3y ago
Atlas Shrugged is one of just a handful of books I had to put down because I couldn't force myself to endure the pain and finish. It truly is crappy writing.
Krasnol 3y ago
Yes, you're right. This is a perfect comparison. However, I've never finished Atlas Shrugged because it was so crappy, and I wasn't on holiday when I started it. It was actually the first book I stopped reading because up until that point I wanted to give the authors the chance for a turn at the end. I couldn't find any reason to do this with this book.
- OkayPhysicist 3y ago
  Believe it or not, the book actual got more heavy handed towards the end, presumably as Rand realized her publisher wasn't going to accept another 1000 pages.
OkayPhysicist 3y ago
Only an entire chapter? Significant swathes of the book are just characters monologuing about how much they hate the poor, and how great their enlightened selves are for actively shooting themselves in the foot to spite the proletariat. I say often, and only half-jokingly, that Atlas Shrugged made me a socialist. I grabbed a copy for free that was otherwise being sent to the trash, and by the end, it was clear that I shouldn't have interrupted its journey. It's like if someone took Nietzche, discarded the good bits, replaced the overt misogyny with the more subtle "woman should improve themselves by being more masculine" variety, and then tossed in some kinda-rapey sex scenes to try and keep peoples attention through a 1000-page novel/manifesto. Read Kropotkin's The Conquest of Bread and Stirner's The Unique and It's Property a few months later, never looked back.

Yoric 3y ago

If I recall correctly, the authors of The Holy Blood and he Holy Grail actually sued Dan Brown for plagiarism.

ttepasse 3y ago

I already wrote upthread: The story behind the genesis behind Holy Blood, Holy Grail is far more funnier than the conspiracy theory in the book: The authors fell for a con-artist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Plantard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Plantard (I had the same experience like you.)

Krasnol 3y ago
Thank you for that. It instantly made the whole story even more funny. I love it :D