Overton is dedicated, in faith, hope and charity, to a minister, a war hero, and a philanthropist. The latter two I'm indifferent to, as dedications, but it's that first one that gets me. "Faith: To David Barton, a man who knows that the answers were left everywhere in plain sight by our Founders."
David Barton is the founder of WallBuilders, an organization whose goal is to "exert a direct and positive influence in government, education, and the family by (1) educating the nation concerning the Godly foundation of our country; (2) providing information to federal, state, and local officials as they develop public policies which reflect Biblical values; and (3) encouraging Christians to be involved in the civic arena."
Oy, a dominionist. Swell. I guess it's good we know exactly where Beck is coming from, right there with the very first line of his book.
Then there are the acknowledgements. Beck thanks his ghostwriter, his editors, all the douchebags at Fox, including Neil Cavuto and Bill O'Reilly, (no mention of Hannity, though. Ouch!) and a slew of other people. But the best part is this:
Special thanks to ... All of the VIEWERS, LISTENERS, AND READERS, including the Glenn Beck INSIDERS. We're not racist and we're not violent ... we're just not silent any more.
[Bolding original]
Umm... Okay. I've read a fair amount of books in my time, but this is the first time I've ever seen an author go out of his way to let his readers know he's not a racist. If you (and this applies to everyone, really) have to make an effort to point out that you're not a bigot, it is time for you to stop, take a moment, take a thousand moments if necessary, and do a little introspection. What is it about your behaviour, your actions, your words that have the world at large thinking you're a racist? It could be the entire world is wrong, or maybe you've some issues to work out. Saying "I'm not a racist" isn't enough. And as for noting your followers are not violent? More on that below.
Moving on... The note from the author. I almost quoted the whole damn thing here, it's just that ridiculous. But let's go back to something I talked about yesterday. This word of his, faction.
I've been a fan of thrillers for many years. While nonfiction books aim to enlighten, the goal of most thrillers is to entertain. But there is a category of novels that do both: "faction"—completely fictional books with plots rooted in fact, and that is the category I strived for with The Overton Window.
I worked in the book business for a long time. There is no category of books called faction. Please, just knock that off. Faction is a real word, sure, but it already has a definition. See.
I know this book will be controversial; anything that causes people to think usually is. In this case, I hope that you are forced not only to think, but also to research, read history, and ask questions outside of your comfort zone. It will ultimately be up to each of us to search out our own truths.
Oh please. "I know this book will be controversial; anything that causes people to think usually is." Who says stuff like that? I mean aside from high school kids writing essays about Marilyn Manson? I've never read an author, especially one of genre fiction, who takes his work and himself so seriously. Dude, it's a thriller. Enough with the pretension. This is NOT some groundbreaking work. Hell, it's not even a new story.
"While this may go without saying even once, I feel the need to say it again" Oh, this is going to be good, isn't it?
This is a work of fiction. As such some of the characters in this book express opinions that I not only disagree with, but vehemently oppose. I included them in the story because these views, like them or not, are part of the current American dialogue. Ignoring them, or pretending that radical ideas don't exist in society, does all of us a great disservice. Silencing voices or opinions only pushes them to the shadows and darkness, where they can fester and grow even stronger.
Oh Christ. More exhortations against violence. Which, again, begs the question. Why is it necessary to state that your intentions, the intentions of your readers, are not violent? Shouldn't that be a given? Unless there's something in your work, your actions, some mound of historical evidence that might give people the notion you're maybe treading a dangerous line there. I don't know. But it seems like if "this may go without saying even once" then you really should have no "need to say it again."
When all is said and done and people look back at this time in the history of our great country, there’s only one thing I hope that everyone, critics and fans alike, call me ...
Wrong.
Newsflash, Beck: Most everyone (at least those with sense) are already saying you're wrong. We have been for years.
No comments:
Post a Comment