Re: "Da Vinci" Debunking

Elizabeth Vandiver wrote:

> JMM asked, plaintively,
>
>> Isn't the DVC fiction? Are we supposed to come away with honest to goodness
>> truth and/or fact from the fictional experience, so to speak? Or maybe just
>> the semblance of same for the sake of a good tale?
>
> Yes, it's fiction. But unfortunately it comes with an opening page headed,
> bluntly, FACT.

Silly me. Then it's *got* to be so.  Sounds kinda' like the current post
9/11 narrative we here in the US are experiencing, doesn't it?

[snip]

> Unfortunately, the students I've talked to who read it (and the people I
> overheard discussing it in a restaurant recently) are VEHEMENTLY certain
> that Brown wouldn't have said these things were FACT if they weren't ....

[snip]

> They think it reflects genuine history.

Well, yeah. I see your point. I guess I suspected as much anyhow.

But why would folks think that someone who is clearly writing fiction about
things that are so certainly FACT would not, frankly, be writing history?
Can they be so dim as to think that there isn't a difference? (Don't answer
that.)

Looks like we've got some educating to do. Problem is that one cannot write
a NYT best seller rebuttal novel.

Plaintiffly,

JMM / LMC