h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

All the legends and theories presented in TDVC are real legends and theories... and that's how they'll stay because they've either been disproven or are impossible to prove one way or t'other.

I just hate the culture that's grown up around TVDC, various books claiming to reveal the 'truth', at least one DVD (also claiming to reveal the 'truth') and a puzzle game (which has nothing to do the the book or the grail or anything, it just calls itself 'Da Vinci Code (notice lack of 'the') as a means to make more sales).

<>

Hype, hype and then more hype. Which was was annoyed me enough to start this thread.

Given that this book is (imo) a rather mediocre who-dunnit *why* has it acheived such levels of hype? Is it because the subject matter is somewhat 'esoteric' and perhaps makes the average joe think they are somehow 'intellectual' by reading the book and understanding it?


az

The thing is the book generated no hype on it's own originally. I only heard about it after all the 'unauthorised truth' books came out and wanted to see what all the fuss was about.

Unfortunatly the book then got too big for it's own boots (to the point that all of Dan Brown's other books are filled with 'Praise for the Da Vinci Code' rather than snippets from their own reviews) and took the hype back as it were. Even so, I liked the book and resent the implication that I have acheived a false sense of cleverness because of this.

I'm actually quite clever anyway.

>> I'm actually quite clever anyway. <<

So am I. Clever enough to spot what's wrong with it.

RF

<>

Where did I ever call *you* an 'average joe', Mr Dreadful?


az

<>

Yeah, but do you mean above or below average?

Well, aside from the fact that you liked TDVC you otherwise come across as quite clever.




az

Why I oughta...

"But surely the "problem" is that it isn't, and that the points where real locations and facts shade into likelihoods, plausible speculation, implausible speculation and downright fiction are not necessarily clear without a degree of background knowledge?"

The same could be said of any novel set in the 'real world', from Agatha Christie to Zadie Smith. They are all set in reality but the events and people in it are fictional. I assume the whole thing is a fabrication, and it puzzles me that some people seem to think it is a documentary or something?

It reminds me of the current rash of 'paranormal' films and TV programmes (White Noise, Most Haunted), cashing in on the credulity of some sections of the population, who it seems will believe first and question later if at all...

<>

Oh, you mean the 'not clever' sections of the population?

Here I go again . . .




az

I think the reason why som many people think TVDC was real is because of all the 'facts' contained within.

Item: Opus Dei is a real organisation, although they seem more concerned with preaching dogma than employing masochistic albinos.
Item: Rosslyn chapel is one of the most likely candidates for the last resting place of the grail, and has been mentioned as such on serious documentaries.
Item: There is an apparently 'phantom' arm on the Last Supper, but if you look closely it could easily belong to one of the pictured attendants (it's just at an odd angle).
There are a couple of other things as well but I can't remember them at the moment.

I've just remembered my own major gripe with TVDC: that it faithfully parrots the misconception that pagan religions were all about femininity and sex.

Or TDVC, as the case may be...

>>I've just remembered my own major gripe with TVDC: that it faithfully parrots the misconception that pagan religions were all about femininity and sex.<<

What??!?? You mean there's more to paganism than teenage girls in black eyeliner getting celtic tatoos, tongue piercings and buying ornamental swords from really dark shops? I always wondered how stonehenge had been crafted by 15 year old girls having an identity crisis...

People like their "facts" to be straightforward, Mr D. Nuances like plausible extrapolationof the facts into areas of uncertainty tend to bypass them.

Noggin

I dont know of anything off the top of my head that is 1005 fiction.

The owl and the pussycat has elements of reality in it. So Im going to tentatively suggest all fiction has a grounding to one degree or another in reality.

However I dont like the idea of real legends It makes as much sense as factual lies, I know what the writer is trying to get at but Im not just being pedantic about oxymorons.

(Im not talking about you della )

The thing is that if one person says something untrue about the past its specualtion or whimsy if it is written down and lots of people have an idea that same thing might be true it can then be called a legend.

Like if someone hears voices its delussions, if hundreds hear voices its mass hysteria, if millions hear voices then suddenly we all have to go around respecting the ideas this voice tells those who hear it because it is now a "real" religion

one love

Nonononono... Stonehenge was built by aliens (who probably came to perv over the teenage girls in black eyeliner).

Here's the 'evidence': If you do the appropiate calculations on Stonehenge you get pi. The ancient Brions had no knowledge of the number pi, therefore Stonehenge was built by aliens (as reported by the Heirophant in Fortean Times).

<>

You mean like the Mysterons in Captain Scarlet?

Jesus, I'm in an odd mood at the moment.

<>

No. If it's *known* to be untrue then its a falsehood. If it's a speculation it is not known to be true or untrue, and may be either with varying degrees of plausibility or likelihood. At least some of the material in TDVC falls into this category.

Noggin

Yeah that's what I meant thanks for putting it in a way that even I can understand.