[NB: For my Brunei post, kindly see the next post. Thank you.]

The Da Vinci Code

Melvin kindly lent me this book to supplement the ones I'd brought to Brunei. It was an intoxicating romp, but small things kept jarring in my mind, not least the improbable conspiracy theories and dubitable references and interpretations of cultural works. If the theories propounded were true, they would make a hell of a story, but since the author gets even some basic facts wrong, the veracity of said theories is even more questionable.

For example: "The Bible did not arrive by fax from heaven... The Bible is a product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book... Jesus Christ was a historical figure of staggering influence, perhaps the most enigmatic and inspirational leader the world has ever seen. As the prophesied Messiah, Jesus toppled kings, inspired millions and founded new philosophies... Understandably, His life was recorded by thousands of followers across the land... More than eighty gospels were considered for the New Testament, and yet only a relative few were chosen for inclusion - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John among them... The Bible, as we know it today, was collated by the pagan Roman emperor Constantine the Great. My dear, until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet... a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal... Jesus' establishment as 'the Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea... a relatively close vote at that."

So far, so good, up till the last part - Constantine was not the one who collated the bible, and the definitive list of which gospels to include was not drawn up at Nicaea, but 42 years later in 367 AD by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria.

Continuing,

"Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made Him godlike. The other gospels were outlawed, gathered up and burned."

Huh? Maybe he confused Constantine with Qin Shi Huang.

Later, when he starts gushing about the Little Mermaid, you *know* something is wrong:

"The Little Mermaid was a spellbinding tapestry of spiritual symbols so specifically goddess-related that they could not be coincidence; the painting in Ariel's underwater home was none other than seventeenth century artist Georges de la Tour's The Penitent Magdalene - a famous homage to the banished Mary Magdalene - fitting decor considering the movie turned out to be a ninety-minute collage of blatant symbolic references to the lost sanctity of Isis, Eve, Pisces the fish goddess, and repeatedly, Mary Magdalene. The Little Mermaid's name, Ariel, possessed powerful ties to the sacred feminine and, in the Book of Isaiah, was synonymous with 'the Holy City besieged.' Of course, the Little Mermaid's flowing red hair was certainly no coincidence either."

(See also: Dismantling The Da Vinci Code, The Last Word; The Da Vinci Con.)


The Song of Silver Frond

As I read this book, I was struck by a thought: Is it just me, or are all of Catherine Lim's books about Young Female Chinese in Singapore in the 1960s? Perhaps her books are popular in "The West" because it is novel to hear descriptions of said Females and Singapore in that era, and in Singapore because of their nostalgic value. It is a niche market.

Also, there's something about her style and literary elements that makes me take notice of them. Most authors are guilty of the same, but some people pull it off more disastrously than others (Read: David Eddings). Perhaps it's the way the supernatural is treated - in a tale set in the "Real World", naturalism should be adhered to more strictly. Or perhaps it is the awkward metaphors and similes Or maybe it's the interjections and the refrains, which lend the narrative a plodding value at times. Some find them charming, but I find that they weigh the story down. Perhaps an extract will illustrate my point:

"Her fate had led her to this man, and to this failure. Even as she raised her hand in bitter remonstrance, she bowed it in weary submission. Her mother, and her mother's mother, too, had said in their time, 'it is our fate,' submitting to a decree from heaven on high, rolling inexorably down the generations, that said to women, 'Endure'."

That said, I appreciated the description of the hypocrisy of the Chinese ritual of false modesty or reluctance in the face of equally false praise or entreaties, and how both parties then engage in a charade of equally insincere protestations and assertations.

The plot of the book is another issue, however. The book is a celebration of the joys of pedophilia, the thrill of courting an innocent virginal girl and the relish of corrupting hitherto untainted girlhood. Look past the romanticisation and surrealism and the book is about how a 65 year old chi go peh (Translation: Dirty Old Man) lusts after a pubescent, nay, a pre-pubescent 13 year old girl (for her menses have not even begun!) and seeks to deflower her, who is mentally as well as physically immature. If this story had taken place in modern times, there would be no joyous celebration of the power of love and how it transcends all barriers, but an arrest of the man on suspicion of statutory rape and a conviction for the crime of underage sex.


The Cretan Chronicles

I brought the first book of the series (I'm still looking for Book 3), Bloodfeud of Altheus, to Brunei and thus had ample opportunity to critique it. I must say that while I enjoy the novel premise of the book, it has many flaws.

For one, the gods often lapse into modern speech patterns. This is evidence of shoddy editing. Worse still is how Ares talks in short sentences like a cave man. It's no wonder that the series stopped at the third book.

The gameplay action known as "taking a hint" is fraught with problems. "Taking a hint" is a way of getting the character to perform a non-standard action - one not given in the text. This is an interesting idea, but ultimately a bad one, poorly implemented. How is the reader to know what the non-standard action will be?

Often, I found myself wanting to perform some seemingly obvious non-standard action, only to have my character do something entirely different or worse. For example, I was at Apollo's oracle in Delphi and when I took a non-standard action, they accused me of trying to steal Apollo's jewels! At other times, I was penalised for trying to take a non-standard action when none was written in by the authors and thus "trying to be ahead of my time", or being too "cautious", "wary", "cowardly" or "un-herolike" (how trying to take non-standard actions is being "cautious", "wary", "cowardly" or "un-herolike", I do not know).

Perhaps the worst is when the text gives you information about some aspect of Greek history and mythology and then penalises you for absolutely no reason. Case in point: I was in front of the Pythia and when I took a non-standard action, the text told me the history and lore of the Pythia, and then deducted honour from me and gave me shame points. I was supremely incensed.

The implementation is also inconsistent. Similar actions, taken during similar situations at different times in the adventure lead to results that are diametrically opposite - sometimes they are good, and the hero gets a boon, but sometimes he is penalised and awarded shame points.

At other times, the book is unfair to the reader. At one point, the Furies (strictly, the Greeks called them the Erinyes, but no one can remember that name anyay, so) are pestering this man who'd accidentally murdered his wife. Placating them with a sacrifice deducts a point of honour for perverting divine justice, but leaving the man to be attacked gets you 2 shame points. On second thought - this might be a subtle homage to Orestes for his murder of Clytemnestra, so maybe it can be forgiven.

And of course, there are the parts where things are left unresolved - something you're supposed to do doesn't get done but the text doesn't notice, for example. In most gamebooks, these are minor but in the Cretan Chronicles, somehow I noticed them.

The book also recycles not a few Greek myths and legends, so readers with a passing knowledge of some of them get an unfair advantage. For example, the book shamelessly reuses the tale of Hera posing as a crone and Jason (of Argonaut fame) carrying her across, except that it is Altheus who does the carrying this time. Furthermore, the recycling of Greek myths and legends leads to a confusing mess, for some myths that belong to different times in Greek mythology are now juxtaposed.

Despite all this, I liked the book. Maybe that tells you something about me.


What If?: The World's Foremost Military Historians Imagine What Might Have Been

I've barely started on this, but I've already read the contribution by Victor Davis Hanson, whose articles on the National Review I'm familiar with and which seem, to me, to myopically obsess about freedom for the Iraqis, ignoring socio-political history and complex realities. His chapter deals with the effect of the Battle of Salamis on the development of democracy, and he professes admiration for the Imperial Democratic ambitions of Athens (kind of how he supports the Imperial Democratic ambitions of the Neo-Cons, actually).

Reading his thoughts on how pivotal Salamis was, I can't help but note that his speculations and extrapolations seem too far-fetched. He claims that Salamis was the point where democracy shifted from being solely for rich landowners to being the domain of populists and the mob by proclaiming that the poor, knowing that they had saved the day at Salamis by rowing the Greek triremes, now demanded a greater role in Athenian democracy. Surely Salamis was a contributory factor, but I think that existing socio-economic trends were already moving democracy in that direction, as surely as the Greek poleis progressed from Monarchy to Aristocracy to Tyranny and finally to Democracy.

I remember attending a history talk in J2 on the 3 greatest military leaders of the millennium. I took issue with the speaker's points, I forgot about which leader, and after the talk approached him to point out that even if that leader had not been around, what he did would have been done by someone else. At this point, he launched into a tirade against Virtual History, as he claimed that we could not analyse his accomplishments that way, for that would be assuming that everything else would have stayed the same.

Too much virtual history is bad, yes, for people can end up speculating endlessly with little basis in reality. However, Virtual History in moderation lets us apply some scientific techniques to history's study - something which is quite important. It *is* called a soft science, after all.


Bad Ads

I saw what is possibly the worst ad in the world in Brunei. In it, mothers and children crowd a room for what seems to be an award ceremony. Suddenly, the winner of the "100% Attendance" award is announced. The jubilant child clutches his trophy. Meanwhile, the other mothers are all exclaiming about how no one has won that award before. Then the ad ends, revealing that it is promoting... Dettol.

Now, Dettol smells foul enough as it is, but now I have another reason not to use it (unless I absolutely have to, like in Brunei after my Body Shop Papaya Bath Gel got stolen).

They really should have a site featuring the worst ads from all around the world. I'm not sure if Adcritic.com still offers ads for viewing, but if it does it can take up the challenge.


Kickapoo

He Who Must Not Be Named has been caught making an astounding faux pas! Kickapoo Joy Juice is most assuredly *not* Malaysian in origin. It is made under license from the Monarch Beverage Company in Atlanta and was introduced to SEA in 1966, but according to the company it is only available in Malaysia, Brunei and Bangladesh (they seem to have left out Singapore). More's the pity.