More on Pullum and Dan BrownMy heavens I love blogging. Or at least reading blogs.
Over the last couple of years I have struggled with the fact that some of my 'documentary' channels fill themselves with discussions of how Dan Brown's novels misrepresent ... well, hmm, what could they misrepresent? Well the claim is all the stuff about Jesus and Mary Magdalene getting married and moving to France and spawning a line of descendants is not factual! So my problem is the whole framework is fictional - yeah sure no doubt there was a Jesus but who has any idea what became of him, and, come on, sorry, the resurrection is factual? So more pot and kettle stuff. But it seems there is an official version and media claiming to be scientific are worried about one fiction over another. OK not my problem.
So now I confess I have read three Dan Brown novels. I could not put any of them down. And I really enjoyed the fictional travelogues and look forward to seeing the movies when they come on my cable TV (I have even done some mental casting and hope not to be disappointed).
I understand from others that his geography can be a little off.
And in the one of the novels I regretted reading (but could not put down), 'Digital Fortress', where I actually know a little about the topic, his facts are appallingly off the mark.
But The Language Log links on the subject (follow the links from the post I hit on in the barking link in my previous post) point to the real problem. Brown writes in horrendous English. Pullum does the job of pointing this out nicely. I just wanted you to know.