Sigh

[tree_and_leaf]

I was in Borders this afternoon, looking for a chocolate croissant, and noticed that Sarah Paretsky was coming to speak about her new novel tonight. Too late for me, alas.

On the other hand, I did get a very good book about the history of doctrine. But Border's 'Religion' section drives me up the wall. They jumble together Bibles and liturgy, academic theology, popular theology, devotional books (mostly American), utter rubbish of the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail type, some books on magic that I suspect were misfiled, and ghastly novels like the Left Behind series, which certainly shouldn't be in the non-fiction section. You can't find anything. Blackwells is much better: a far bigger selection and categorised by someone who knows something about the subject (and no Baigent and Leigh or LeHay, or whatever the guy is called, which is a good thing). On the other hand, they do sometimes have good books, particularly from American publishers, which Blackwells sometimes don't - such as Pelikan's history of Christian Doctrine.

/rant...

Comments

[aervir.livejournal.com]

O ye Gods. What a strange way of ordering (or rather: not ordering) their religion section.

I mean I can even see why the books on magic might be there, as the neo-Paganists will probably regard them as expressive of their religious beliefs, but Holy Blood and the Holy Grail belongs in the section for, um, non-fiction of questionable value and Left Behind onto the fiction shelves.

Speaking of LB, there's a weblog shredding the books sentence for sentence, paragraph to paragraph, chapter for chapter here (http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/left_behind/index.html).I can't quite understand, however, how its author manages to plod through them so patiently without going mad...

And Blackwells is very lovely, and Borders has nice pastries. :)

[tree_and_leaf]

Thanks for the blog link - am somewhat speechless (I would say 'Get off my religion', but I expect they'd think I was a frightful pagan; why I even had a beer with dinner, and for my part, I would have to say: that's not actually Christianity, it's a hideous parasitical... thing. I'm almost tempted to say "Where's the Inquisition when you need it?', but that's going a bit far.)

[tree_and_leaf]

Oh, and the magic books were in the 'Christianity' subsection ;-). ALong with 'the Gospel according to Harry Potter' - although I have to say, I think JKR has written a more Christian story than the LB crew....

[aervir.livejournal.com]

Oh, and the magic books were in the 'Christianity' subsection.

Then I can certainly understand your confusion and exasperation. And -- "the Gospel according to Harry Potter"?

Is this some sort of trick to make all the Christian fundamentalists who are afraid of JKR's propagating witchcraft feel better? (Those guys include a former member of Parliament from one of the constituencies in my home town, by the way.)

[tree_and_leaf]

Well, it's actuallly more 'Witchcraft in HP is not Satanism (or even stanism, as I just typed!) and look, it teaches good moral lessons like loyalty to friends and choosing what is right over what is easy,' so it's not quite as silly as the title makes it sound.

[aervir.livejournal.com]

That sounds indeed rather sensible, but I'm still surprised that some people need a whole book to tell them this instead of figuring it out for themselves. :)

But I'm in a slightly bitchy mood right now, so I might be a bit hard on them...

[tree_and_leaf]

Oh, of course it ought to be blindingly obvious, but there you go... I knew a girl at St Andrews whose father (leader, whatever that means, of a small house church which, amusingly, met in a pub depsite being TT) made her swear never to read HP.

On the other hand, her brother was at a private Bible college where girls weren't allowed in boy's rooms, under any circumstances, even if they were brother and sister. Really makes you wonder about their view of their students.

[aervir.livejournal.com]

makes you wonder about their view of their students.

Um, they think these kids must be really kinky at heart...?

[tree_and_leaf]

Sounds like it, doesn't it! And these are the people who they hope will bring moral revival to a corrupt world.

I mean, even the most suspicious mediaeval clerics didn't suspect that all brothers and sisters secretly want to screw each other...

[aervir.livejournal.com]

And as the youngest of three siblings, with two elder brothers, I can only agree with them (the clerics I mean, not the loony Bible college staff). 'Cause ewww, just ewwwwww.

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

Actually, that was the case when my mother spent a year at Pershore college (agricultural) in the 1960s. Brothers and fathers weren’t allowed beyond the front door even into the common room. I suppose the ‘risk’ is that a girl could pretend to be in her room with her brother, but really she’s downstairs and the brother’s with someone else.

[aervir.livejournal.com]

Okay, that's the less kinky explanation then. ;)

[aervir.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the Inquisition might be a bit too much, but picturing the authors of LB being smothered by the comfy cushions of Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition is an oddly soothing thought...

Nobody expects...

[tree_and_leaf]

Lovely image: "Noooo! Not the comfy chair!"

[mrs-wolf.livejournal.com]

Tracking these End Times prophecies is a form of escapism -- something to keep the idle faithful from getting bored until they finally escape for good.

***sigh***

Why can't there be good pop lit?

[aervir.livejournal.com]

But aren't there just dozens of books which one could consider good pop lit (e.g. lots of genre fiction)? It just happens that none of them was written by Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye. :D

[mrs-wolf.livejournal.com]

I guess you're right! I keep thinking Christian pop, but I could even name some good Christian pop. (Though there are some that are quite bad. I hate the DaVinci Code, for instance.)

[tree_and_leaf]

I think calling the Da Vinci Code Christian is, er, a tad controversial...

[mrs-wolf.livejournal.com]

True that.

And I'm not sure I do. I was going by Borders placement, and the fact that it is quite religious. Christianity is a broad term, all you've really got to do is worship Christ, so technically, I am one, which would put half of Christendom in arms, and I don't call myself that.

It entirely depends on definition, I guess.

[tree_and_leaf]

It entirely depends on definition, I guess.

True. I mean, you can even debate about how you define 'worship' (as I believe there are Hindus who regard Christ as a god, as opposed to God.

I'm afraid my instinct is to go with the mediaeval Catholics and say those who are baptised are Christians, and if they no longer believe they are lapsed, but still Christian. That, however, would probably make me very unpopular :)

On the other hand, it does have the advantage of having a degree of objectivity and thus being a definition one can work with (especially as any other may well turn into 'Christian = someone whose ideas I approve of', or 'person at church whose ideas/ life I disapprove of = Not-Christian'...)

[tree_and_leaf]

Or, alternatively, that anyone who percieves themselves as being part of the Church or following Christ, is a Christian. That's my fuzzy liberal Anglican side coming out... But it's not much use as a practical definition, should you want one.

of course, the 'Baptism' definition doesn't work with books...