I know--if it has something about a lost or ancient manuscript, I'm going to give it a try. The mention of the Dead Sea Scrolls removed any doubt, and as soon as I dived into it, I saw that there was also a connection to the Aleppo Codex. Even better!
(In 2012, I read The Aleppo Codex by Mattie Friedman, a nonfiction account and was blown away by the history of the codex, the mystery of its travels, the intrigues and deceptions, and the difficulties Friedman had in four year pursuit of how the codex made its way to Jerusalem. Fascinated as I was by this excellent work, I was still surprised when my husband (not much of a reader) hijacked The Aleppo Codex for himself and was just as riveted by mysteries concerning the codex.)
Shoot, I'm going to continue digressing (again), but after reading The Atlantic article about trigger warnings and microaggressions, I'm going to give Jacobson's own "trigger warning" that comes in the Acknowledgments:
I approached this book with trepidation because any time you wade into religion and/or geopolitics there's potential for someone to get offended. That was not my intention. Any religious commentaries evolved from ideas, discussions with experts, brainstorming "what if" sessions, character motivations, and dramatic potential. I was not attempting to discredit, support, proselytize, or convince. In other words, I was telling a fictitious story. That's the definition of a novel. (emphasis mine, BTW)Jacobson also lists the many experts he consulted, including mentioning Mattie Friedman's The Aleppo Codex and a few changes he made to suit the story.
The plot involves terrorist cell activity that threatens the home front of the U.S. and that are connected to a missing Dead Sea Scroll which could threaten Biblical history. From the U.S., to England, to Paris, to Israel--fast and furious action with Karen Vail, Uzi, and DeSantos, characters from previous novels, working together with a fourth, and not completely trusted, new member of the team.
From Book Series in Order: Key to the success of Alan’s books is his primary protagonist, Karen Vail, a smart, tough and funny profiler whose character is modeled from a real life FBI profiler Alan Jacobson had the privilege of working closely with over the several years he spent with the Behavioral Analysis Unit of the FBI.
A Congressional Report about terrorism and Mexican drug cartels.
------------
I started this draft a week or so ago. Since then, Sam at Bookchase has posted about Anne Rice's article concerning political correctness. I'm disconcerted and concerned about political correctness changing the way we look at education and educators, comedians, art, and literature. Are we going to go back and remove all politically incorrect (according to whichever group is offended) books from the library? Will it determine whose novels get published? Freedom of speech? Freedom of thought?
George Orwell quotes from 1984:
“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” George Orwell quotes from 1984:
"The Ministry of Truth, which concerned itself with news, entertainment, education, and the fine arts. The Ministry of Peace, which concerned itself with war. The Ministry of Love, which maintained law and order. And the Ministry of Plenty, which was responsible for economic affairs. Their names, in Newspeak: Minitrue, Minipax, Miniluv, and Miniplenty." (1.1.8) (again, emphasis mine)
"By 2050, earlier, probably – all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron – they'll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like ‘freedom is slavery’ when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking – not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." (1.5.30)
*I had intended to schedule this review for October, but have decided to go ahead and publish it because Jacobson's comment about fiction and the definition of a novel set me off in so many directions about the kind of censorship we need to be apprehensive about in today's world.
The novel was quite a ride, not always realistic, but full of action and several things to think about, including what is involved in Sharia Law. I enjoyed this fast-paced novel and was impressed with Jacobson's background and the experts he consulted.
UpDate: Here is the Atlantic article: The Coddling of the American Mind online.
NetGalley/Open Road Media
Political Suspense/Action. Nov. 3, 2015. Print length: 400 pages.
OK, first of all, I'd like to read this book. Secondly, I love that quote and agree with 'that's the definition of a novel'. Fiction is fiction. Not fact. And...I am very much against censorship. It's the library person in me. I don't have to agree with ever book published or even want to read it or look at it. However....I am deeply concerned with 'rewriting' history. Isn't that how we learn - from mistakes? If we don't ever have any evidence of such, how do we learn or teach? And I guess that's all I'll say about that, but I think you and I are on the same wavelength here.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate some warnings about explicit violence or child abuse, but there is a tendency to carry the idea too far. Did you know you needed to be warned in advance of viewing art about ancient myths or about reading certain Greek myths? Should we avoid all references to traumatic experiences? Or opposing views?
DeleteRemember how we laughed at Thomas Bowdler and the Bowdlerization of Shakespeare? We don't seem to be aware that we are doing something similar these days. A very thoughtful post. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteOh, funny! I didn't think of Bowdler...or of Victorians substituting "drumstick" for leg in order to not shock anyone's sensibilities! Euphemisms and avoidance, we are good at that.
DeleteThe Aleppo Codex sounds really good. I enjoy books about lost manuscripts too, although I don't read about them very often.
ReplyDeleteI believe that political correctness has its place. I don't think it is a bad thing--at least not some of the time, in certain situations. I even think it can be important and necessary in certain instances. I also believe it can and has been taken too far. When I first heard talk about re-writing The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to make it more politically correct, I almost choked on my water. The first part of the quote you shared by George Orwell is exactly what went through my mind: “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” If we start censoring and "correcting" art, film, and literature to reflect today's standards of political correctness, who is to say we aren't going to stop talking about the bad spots in our history? Rewriting history is very dangerous.
I don't really like the term. political correctness, but I do understand that the intention is often about sensitivity to someone else's feelings. Something we should all take into account. On the other hand, rewriting The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn borders on the ridiculous. Most people who would rewrite a piece of literature would probably prefer to just ban it outright.
DeleteI totally agree with that rewriting history is a dangerous idea for society in general, and rewriting literature is a kind of cultural death.
I love books about ancient manuscripts, too. The Aleppo Codex sounds amazing. Thanks for the rec!
ReplyDeleteFriedman's The Aleppo Codex was truly a great nonfiction read, full of mystery and intrigue! And Jacobson't The Lost Codex was fictional suspense with lots of action and political machinations. :)
DeleteExcellent post! I agree wholeheartedly, and now I'm off to put this book on my tablet and look up your links. You have jump started the wheels in my head, which was definitely needed after the heat enduced lethargy/coma of the past few weeks!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the book, but when I finished and read his acknowledgement, I was off on another tangent. I don't want a world of "Newspeak." The tendency to try and please everyone and offend no one may have good intentions, but is ultimately impossible.
DeleteThis is a great post, Jenclair! While I may not totally into history and politics, I do think it's important to set the facts straight and not correcting it just because they are unpleasant or offensive to some. Things happened and we couldn't change them, but we can prevent the mistakes from happening again through understanding and learning from the past events.
ReplyDeleteOh, good point, Melody. How can we learn from history, if history is expunged when unpleasant? How can we learn from mistakes, if the mistakes are kind of retroactively erased?
DeleteWhich is not to say that acknowledging our mistakes (governmental, societal, cultural, or personal) is always easy, but pretending they don't exist or that the can be rehabilitated doesn't really work. Art and literature do reflect both the good and bad of societies.
I read what I thought was quite a good rebuttal to the Atlantic article over at the Mary Sue: http://www.themarysue.com/trigger-warnings-arent-coddling/
ReplyDeleteWhat bothered me about Anne Rice's response (apart from that I find Anne Rice rather irritating in general) is that she's conflating criticism with censorship. To steal a turn of phrase from Margaret Atwood, she's not clear on the difference between freedom to and freedom from. We're free TO write and say and publish what we want, but we aren't free FROM the consequences of that speech as it exists in a marketplace of ideas (i.e., from criticism of that speech). Readers objected to the way the Breslin novel coopted Jewish suffering for Christian purposes (plus the offensiveness of having a concentration camp commandant as a romantic hero), and people said, The author and the publishing house were wrong and should say so. But there aren't any real life consequences for the author or the publisher apart from people saying "we don't want to read your offensive book and we are upset that you published it" -- which, to me, is a perfectly reasonable response. So I wasn't really sure what part of that Anne Rice perceived as censorship.
Ha! I didn't even read Rice's article, and I should have before including a mention of it. What I feel uneasy about is the fact that monitoring and apologizing for art and literature can go too far. I have always been uncomfortable with Yeat's "Leda and the Swan," but I don't want it removed from anthologies. Political correctness can lead to an unofficial censorship and actually prevent people from thinking ideas through on their own. Maybe the phrase "vindictive protectiveness" from the article is what I'm concerned about. I'm still pondering this whole idea.
DeleteI just read the article you linked, and I agree that she makes her point very well. I do like warnings about about graphic violence, especially violence against women or children, as I mentioned earlier. Purging books like Huckleberry Finn of offensive words, however, may make them less uncomfortable, but less thought-provoking. I like that The Mary Sue article mentions the need to frame discussions about certain topics with sensitivity and prepare students to navigate the discussions thoughtfully.
Delete