The DaVInci Blog

The DaVinci Code is out in paperback and the hardcover is still hanging around the bestseller lists while better and more worthy books have come and gone. The movie is coming up next month, spreading its gospel of rumors and distortions and fictional accounts of conspiracy. The Templar Legacy is on the best seller lists with its take on hidden Gnostic gospels that would demolish traditional Christian dogma. The Holy Blood, Holy Grail guys have another "nonfiction" book out beating the same dead horse that Jesus survived and married Mary Magdalene. A recent study reports Jesus may have walked on ice, not water.

And then there's Judas' gospel, "lost" for a millennium or more, that is finally seeing the light of day. It's supposed to be written in the second century, so can't be direct from the fink himself.

"God made me do it!" he whines in this gospel. "I was vital to His fulfilling the prophecy!"

Which, if true, would call into question the nature of Christ's sacrifice, making his crucifixion God playing with loaded dice instead of letting free will fulfill prophecy, demolishing (you guessed it) traditional Christian dogma.

Gnostic gospels exist. What is it in our nature that makes us eager to believe that they are concealing deep dark secrets? Why do so many want to believe they're truthful but are willing to doubt the official gospels? Doesn't that tell us more about ourselves?

It seems to make no difference that these gospels are in print, available in many book stores and over the internet. Even available in Catholic bookstores, which have no obligation to carry them.

The Council of Nicea in the fourth century put together the New Testament that we know today. They had to go through a lot of manuscripts and texts that purported to be the word of God, true accounts of Jesus' life, the Apostles' lives and works, letters and sayings, etc.

Critics and conspiracy theorists assert that they destroyed the texts that emphasized Jesus' humanity, while keeping the texts that emphasized Jesus' divinity. While that may be, if they were truly trying to determine the will of God, perhaps that was God's will. But people are much more inclined to cry coverup; some, depending on their agendas, see the jettisoned material as proof that the Church Fathers were hiding all kinds of alternate viewpoints.

Couldn't it be that a lot of the rejected material was repetitive, poorly written, obviously fraudulent, or clearly pushing someone's personal agenda? It happens in books and articles that are written about current events or figures in the news. There have been numerous books about John F. Kennedy and Winston Churchill. Does anyone accept everything each book asserts as, you'll pardon the expression, gospel? Maybe some, but many seek out various sources -- news items, eyewitness accounts, rebuttals from friends and enemies.

To get back to Mr. DaVinci. Why did he put himself in The Last Supper facing away from Christ? Did he see in the apostles cowards who turned away from Jesus in fear for their lives that night? And did he put himself in like that as a wry comment on his own weaknesses and imperfections? Or, if he was an atheist, maybe he just did it for laughs. Heck, if he was just a joker, we're lucky we didn't get Peter making rabbit ears behind Christ's back.

Did he paint them without halos to emphasize their humanity? Was this because he was giving a hidden sign that he had sympathy for the Gnostic viewpoint, who saw Jesus as human, not divine? Or was it his own personal viewpoint that Jesus, while God, still had a mortal body? Or that the apostles, about to run away in the Garden of Gethsemane, hadn't earned their halos yet?

DaVinci was a man of genius living in times dominated by Popes and kings and dukes and what have you. Was he a Gnostic? Was he an atheist? Does any of this matter today when we look at his paintings?

I think I'm going to write my own Gnostic conspiracy book. It will deal with an obscure sect of Rosicrucian’s who are the guardians of a holy relic that was suppressed by the Church in the 5th century. Yes, it's the Holy Spice Rack of Galilee -- made by our Savior himself, in his carpentry shop. It was an item of such poor quality, showing total ignorance of basic carpentry principles, that many at the Council of Nicea felt it was a fraud put forward to prove that Mary was, in fact, a single mother. Joseph was obviously not around to teach Jesus his trade, which meant he took a powder when he found out that Mary was with child, which would cast doubts about Jesus' divinity. I feel I will have a ready audience.

Destroyer Movie news from Warren Murphy

Brian Murphy released this item this afternoon on Warren Murphy's Forum

Warren Murphy announced today that he had signed a Destroyer film production deal with Robert Evans independent production company in Hollywood. The deal covers film and television, as well as computer
games and merchandising, and the old man says "after quite a few years in the Destroyer doldrums, we've got a chance here of seeing something good happen."

For those who don't know, Robert Evans is a one-time actor who took over the running of Paramount Studios when the company was down the drain and on the verge of bankruptcy. In just a handful of years,
Evans produced The Odd Couple, Rosemary's Baby, Chinatown, Love Story and The Godfather, and turned Paramount into the hottest studio in town.

This is great news, though I realize it may take awhile for a movie to begin production and there are many things which can go wrong.

I'm really hoping this stirs interest for the Destroyer books with a publishing company, and that this comes sooner rather than later. The contract with Gold Eagle is up as of this year and I'd like to see the books continue on with a minimum of interruption. Even if a publisher can be found, there would be more of a gap than the usual three months Destroyer readers have become used to.

A new publisher might choose to issue only two books a year instead of four. Or they might issue two Destroyers and two spinoffs (good too!). Or four Destroyers and two spinoffs (I'm getting greedy here).

Windows XP

Warren Murphy has started a blog in the forums of his website. A few weeks ago, amid many other things, he mentioned his hatred of and frustration with Windows XP. Most of his frustration was not being able to find things, which are spread out in odd ways. And always being asked what to open a program with when he clicks on it.

I don't have too many problems opening things, since I mostly work with Open Office documents. When you save a new OO document, if you type .odt after the title you choose, it opens up in OO automatically when you need to view it again. I do have a problem choosing media stuff, but I generally know what to go with. The new Harry Potter movie had me downloading something called InterActual, which isn't a very good DVD player. I gave up trying to view anything on it and opened it in Windows Media center, which worked fine.

Last night, for some reason, I decided to go beyond what usually comes up when I click on Programs (Windows XP usually only shows you the programs you use most frequently). I got into "Windows Digital Media Enhancements," which looked interesting. Though, like Warren has pointed out, why it's so far away from "Media Center" which is under Accessories? It's all media, isn't it?
Anyway, under WDME (I'm not going to keep typing that whole thing out!), they've put a program that allows you to convert audio files to the Windows format (.wma), and a program that prints a label for your CD and CD case.

Thirdly, it has a "Party Mode" which is basically a full screen skin for your Windows Media Player. That was a little frightening. I turned it on and couldn't find a way to get out of it, so I had to click on control/alt/delete. When I went back to the Settings screen, there's supposed to be a little X somewhere that removes you from the party, but I don't recall seeing it the first time and I'm not going back to check. The big window with the randomization setting in my player is enough for me.

Now, for the last and creepiest thing. WDME has something called Windows Dancer. When you click on it a little dancing woman appears in the bottom left hand corner of your screen. The general operating question here is: why? Who thought this up? Is this so lonely people won't have to dance by themselves? Or in case you feel like having a party and everyone's busy?

When I see these things, I feel just like one of the Beverly Hillbillies, trying to figure out the billyard room and the cement pond.

"Granny! Uncle Jed! There's a little woman dancin' on the screen!"

"Weee-el doggie!"

"Jed! Jed!! Get that 'lil goomer off the screen!"

I felt bad for her dancing away to nothing, so I opened my WMP and opened a song. I'm Alright isn't exactly the hip hop she seems to be bopping to, but it'll have to do. It's more suitable than The Donkey Serenade or O Holy Night.

It's good to know that Microsoft is gearing it's Windows for parties. When you're dancing, programs don't need to make sense. Items don't have to be near similar items.

Pathetic Losers

A few friends and I have been having a little problem recently with hackers. Saturday when I went to my website all the news items on my home page, which I have been using as a blog, were gone. No one took credit, though.

Shortly before that, my friend Jerry had a small hacking problem also, though they left something in place of what they'd hacked, and most of his home page and everything else was left intact.

Now tonight, when I go to my site, everything looks normal, except when I go to my forum, the only other place on the site where I have any content, and not only is it missing, but there's something left in place. Bragging by the pathetic losers who have too much time on their hands and whose mommies should be monitoring their Internet access more closely. Unfortunately, Jerry's site has been hit by the same people and I can't access it at all. And Jim's is the same. So I don't know how much they're going to end up losing.

The really pathetic part of this is, we're all such small, untrafficked web sites. Jerry says a mutual friend wrote to him saying it looks like someone's targeting us personally. And that Dclub, a web site we all belong to and administer, might be a future target.

Jerry says he's going to take precautions before that happens. Dclub just finished being restored and doesn't need to take another hit, though thanks to the recent problem, everything's backed up and certain sections are also being saved off site for greater protection.

I'm not sad for my site. The forum contained some fan fiction I've written, and I've got them all saved to disc anyway. And the blogs they hit, thanks to my tendency to cross-post, and write them up in Open Office before posting, can be restored fairly easily too. The worst that could be lost on Jim's site is his thoughts on the Destroyer books he wrote, but Jerry says that's saved off site too. Jerry has more on his site, though, and hopefully that won't be lost.

If it should turn out to be a disgruntled Dclub member, he/she probably isn't a regular. I'm certainly not going to let this make me paranoid. Most of the regulars are frequent posters, or long time members and I don't see any one of them having this level of childishness and viciousness.

This and That

Slow week. Was sick during much of it. Not real sick; just enough to be uncomfortable and sleepy because I kept waking up coughing and choking.

Good week in that it started with a pleasant surprise: Brian Murphy finally got Warren Murphy's forum back up. You could read the old posts, but couldn't post anything new since the day after Christmas. He changed to PHP BB, which is better than what they had, and created separate forums for each of Warren's books and series.

Then he created a forum for Warren to write blogs in, along with a forum for our comments. No blogs as yet, but I'm hopeful. Warren did write in saying he might have some news on the Destroyer front. I hope it's got a new publisher.

The DestroyerClub's forum came back on line too. It's only been down for three weeks, but that's still too long. There was a time when it looked like all the posts would be lost, which would be annoying. There was also a possibility that we'd lose the member's list, which would have been a real inconvenience. Anyone who wanted to post or get into some sections would have had to register again.

But none of that happened. The admins decided to start anew by locking the old forum and opening up a new one, with the same topics pretty much as the old one. It's been going good so far. A few of the regulars aren't back, but I know one is off line and the other's pretty busy in his off line life, so they should be back too someday.
***********
Read a pretty good book, unusual type for me, but I try to read something in a genre I wouldn't usually pick up. That's the good thing about a large and well stocked library. You can take chances when you're just borrowing.

Prayers for the Assassin is set in the near future. In 2015 nuclear bombs that destroyed NYC, Washington, DC, and Mecca are blamed on Israel. Civil war breaks out in the United States.

Twenty five years later, the nation is divided into the Islamic controlled North and the Bible Belt South. Most of the population of the Islamic Republic are moderate or modern Islamics, but the hard line fundamentalists have power beyond their numbers, and the Christian minority are discriminated against.

Then a historian uncovers evidence that Israel might not have been responsible, which would destabilize the nation and the world. When she goes missing, her uncle calls his former ward, Rakkim -- who is also her lover -- to find her. Other people are looking for her too, including a psychotic assassin who was in the same elite unit as Rakkim. Will Rakkim find her first? Together, will they survive reveal the secret?

Good paced thriller, not too violent (I'm squeamish). The hero and heroine here are Muslims, as are most of the major characters, including the villains. It's not a Muslim bashing book; though a fundamentalists is a bad guy, another one is not, and the psycho assassin only recognizes one god -- himself.
**************
I also found out that starting next Friday the Scifi channel is finally bringing Dr. Who to US audiences. I used to watch the parts of the old series when they played on PBS many years ago. They only played the Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker episodes. Fun cheesy special effects and simple plots (it was a children's series after all). Fun to watch.

There was a movie several years ago that updated the series and went nowhere. It was ok, as far as I can remember.

Scifi is showing the first year of the new series. If it's any good, I hope they go on to show the next year's episodes. There's a new Doctor the second year. I've heard good things about it; will enjoy checking it out.

Workshop with Tom Coughlin

Tom Coughlin, a native of my city who writes books set locally, was at my city library tonight giving a talk on successful self publishing.

My book is only on its first edit, and I don't know what I'll do with it -- try to get an agent to look at it, try to self publish, shelve it and write a second, better book. But I have a theory that it's better to know as much as possible about as many things as possible. Since I've started writing seriously, I've been reading all the books on writing and publishing I can get hold of, visiting author's web sites, writing web sites, picking up stray bits of info wherever I can find them.

If what I've learned never benefits me, it might help someone else, so I'll pass along a little of tonight's talk here.

First, the three things that prompt a reader to buy: a cover that is bright and catches the eye, a good title, and a reasonable cover price.

Three things that a store owner looks for: cover and price also. But also if it is set locally, the bookseller figures it'll pique the interest of natives and tourists (if it's a place that has a bit of a tourist trade).

If you're shopping your book around locally, don't just hit bookstores. Try gift shops, restaurants. If your book is the only one in the shop, it stands out. Big chains don't buy self published books as a rule, but a few of them have managers who are willing to give your book a chance. Be prepared to do a bit of traveling and promotion to get your books in as many outlets as you can within the area where your book is set.

Autograph as many of your books as you can before you bring them around to stores. Invest in a roll of stickers that say they're autographed and get those on the front of the book. Make up promotional posters featuring the book's cover and ask around in shops if you can put them up in the window.

If 6x9 paperbacks sell for $14.95 generally, try to sell yours for a little less. Don't sell for more; you're trying to get people to buy an unknown author.

Of course, you still won't make a profit unless you work hard and write the best book you can. And let people you trust and who are in the know about these things read the book and tell you honestly whether your book is good enough to make an investment of time and money worth while.

And it does take a bit of money. Print on Demand isn't as good if you're going to put them in local bookstores and shops locally. You don't get a discount for bulk. However, if you're going through a printer, you have to buy a minimum -- usually about 3300 books. Even with a discount, it adds up.

For example, my Nano book would cost me $8 a copy if I'd wanted more than the free one. Multiply that by the number you'd have to purchase if you wanted to get maybe five or six copies in several dozen local outlets. Say 48. That would be $384. But with a printer who offers a discount for bulk, that same book might cost me $2.95 apiece for 3300 copies. That's $9735.

Say you sell your book for $13.95. You'd have to sell at least 698 books to break even. You would only have to sell 27 of your POD printed book. But firstly, that's a much higher percentage of sales -- over half your POD stock as opposed to less than 1/3 of your bulk stock. Second, you'd be selling in much fewer places, making it harder to sell even that many.

And that won't happen unless you're out hustling. People aren't going to be beating down your door unless by some miracle Oprah gets hold of a copy. Even if she hates it, the curiosity factor alone would make it a success! Well, we can dream.

I haven't even touched on cover art and the cost to hire a good artist or photographer. Unless you're an artist, or know someone willing to work for a credit in the book, that's probably a few thousand dollars.

Print on Demand is probably best if you sell just through the POD's online site. At least initially, it might let you know if the book gets a good reception, if you hear back from a buyer who doesn't know you personally, just bought the book because it sounded good.

To wrap up, a very good talk, many points raised to think about. I thought Mr. Coughlin should have brought some of his books for us to purchase, but he said he just wanted to give the talk with no strings attached. I think I'll buy at least one of his books though. He was a teenager in the sixties while I was under ten. He probably has a much clearer memory of the stores and restaurants from then than I do.

Let's see... Bon Marche, Sparks. The Dutch Tearoom. I remember the murals there... MacQuades. I think I've got that spelling right.

Currant Events (or problems with spell check)

First, I must apologize to the currant growers, who may have come across this title when searching the web, and came here eager for news of the current state of the currant industry.

One of the problems if you're a bad speller, is relying on programs within Works, Word, Open Office, Gmail, Email, etc. that are supposed to check your spelling, making you look erudite, thus giving your opinions and rants greater weight and respect. Usually, they're pretty good, not up on the latest netspeak and shortcuts, but that's a small problem.

The bigger problem is homophones (rain/reign/rein, break/brake). Most of them I don't have trouble with. Occasionally, I'll have to stop and think: they're = they are, their = belonging to them, there = a location. I generally find if I'm typing fast that last one will get by me sometimes. And spellcheck can't tell you you're using it incorrectly.

My biggest homophone problem, as you might have guessed, is the word which means contemporary. I was using it frequently in something I was writing, and I'd have to check the dictionary every time it came up.

At least in this case, a mnemonic device has proved very effective. If I need to write about current events, or an electric current, or river current, a picture of an animated, wrinkled fruit pops into my head. It is jumping up and down, waving its little stick arms, its eyes angry and mouth going a mile a minute. The currant is ranting (get it -- nudge, nudge)! It is therefore not the write right (damn homophones!) spelling for any of the meanings I want to convey.

I'll never get that wrong again. Now, if only some spellchecks could be made to admit when they don't know what a word is. Recently, my Open Office spellcheck didn't highlight the word "dieing," which I had twice in a manuscript. Since it couldn't figure out what I was trying to say, it just ignored the whole business.

Deliveries

Today I got the two things I had ordered. First, UPS delivered the second Destroyer adaptation from Cutting Audio. They really ship promptly; I only placed the order the 19th. I'm looking forward to listening to this one -- Infernal Revenue -- more than the last one. It's one of my favorite Destroyers. I'm glad that Cutting Audio got the contract to do the adaptations, but I wish they weren't doing them in the order the books were published. I don't remember if the other company did that too. I didn't buy them all, just the ones I liked best. Cutting Audio may only have the contract for this year; I don't know if Gold Eagle will bother once they no longer have the contract to publish the books. However, they do retain the rights to all the Destroyers they've published, for how many years I don't know. So they'd still be making money on the books if they let Cutting Audio continue. And this way, maybe eventually we'd get to an audio adaptation of The End of the Beginning!

Second, the mailman delivered my book from Lulu.

I knew I'd be thrilled to see my book as a book, not just a computer file, but I had no idea how it would affect me. I actually teared up a little as I was looking through it. And not because of grammar and punctuation errors (though they are certainly there)!

It really is gratifying to see something you've created in your head and on the computer in solid form. It's a book, darn it, a real honest-to-God book. Not with the polish or sophistication of a commercially published book, but still... At least maybe, if I'm reading it through all the way for the first time really since finishing it, if it still holds my interest, maybe that means it's not hopeless.

Horror at the Movies

I'm not a horror movie aficionado. My taste in scary movies runs to the old Universal monsters -- Frankenstein, Dracula, the Wolf Man -- or the poorly done ones of the fifties and sixties. You know: the Blob, the Creeping Terror. Monsters that had to be helped by their victims, who stick their hands in unknown goo or run around in circles or really, r e a l l y slowly until the guys under the shag rug catch up with and devour them.

I've completely ignored horror's evolution into the bloody and gory, the psychotic madmen with chainsaws and the supernatural villains who kill without discrimination or motivation. You can get enough of that reading the news. Callous sadistic people are a minority, but they make themselves known. In short, I don't like these movies, so I don't see them.

My friend's husband, son and sister in law go to every horror movie. It's a thrill -- like riding a roller coaster or bungee jumping. And a test: they can face the grossest of the gross-out stuff and take it. That's fine with me. I don't like the bloody, explicit horror movies that started with Day of the Dead, but to each his own. I don't think it's the end of civilization, or that people will see these things and become desensitized or psychotic killers. There are some traits, like callousness, that are inborn, and emerge to a greater or lesser degree depending on a person's upbringing.

However, the latest excuse for a horror movie disappointed them. I'm not naming it; it doesn't deserve any publicity. It wasn't a question of gore, even though this was excessive, according to them. It's the spirit of the movie.

Even in the worst of these things, there are a few conventions. There's usually a hero who outfoxes the killers, a few people who have been made sympathetic and the audience roots for them to survive. Generally at least some of them do. The evil force -- whatever it is -- is defeated. At least until the sequel.

This movie, it seems, is extraordinarily mean spirited, even for the genre. According to my friend her son described it thus: The first half hour is soft porn -- beautiful young people continuously having sex -- boobs and penises out bouncing around. Then the remainder of the movie is unrelieved bloody violence. Brutal torture and bloody killings. Everybody dies. One girl who survives being blow torched in the face and having her eye pulled out throws herself under a train, gore and body parts flying about. No reason is ever given for what's happened; there is no plot.

I wonder about the motivations of the writer, director, and anyone instrumental in foisting this off on an unsuspecting public. I've read conservatives who say that Hollywood's liberal screenwriters and directors are more interested in pushing their own leftist agendas than in making good films. Is this some sort of propaganda effort by necrophiliacs? Do the people behind this film get off on gore? Is that why they have the soft core at the beginning -- to get everyone excited, then abruptly replace the images of sex with those of violence? And they hope that people are going to stay stimulated and begin to associate violence with feelings of sexual pleasure?

Not that I believe it's going to work. As I said earlier, that level of callousness and psychosis is inborn. All they're going to get from this effort, if anything, is people demanding their money back. My friend's son was disturbed and disappointed. This movie will, I predict, sink into obscurity; even the DVD version will end up in the bargain bins and go largely ignored. Unless it's publicized by people objecting to it. It is objectionable. But, much like a two year old gleeful shouting naughty words, if there's too much of a fuss made over it, thrilled by the reaction he will continue with it longer.

Recent Rowling Article

Very good J K Rowling article in the Tatler. The only version I could find was from The Leaky Cauldron's files. It went into how her mother's death while Rowling was still writing the first book has been felt in the series as a whole. Death is never far away in the Harry Potter books; Rowling doesn't pull any punches. Good characters die, bad characters die. Facing death becomes inevitable when the only alternative is to sit by and let evil spread unopposed. Yet even with that, Rowling's deaths aren't noble sacrifices as a whole. Characters are killed suddenly and senselessly. Diggery doesn't get a chance to fight back. He isn't killed throwing himself in front of Harry and taking a Killing Curse meant for him. Black's is quick -- the result of a lapse of concentration during a fight. Minor characters are killed off-page, brutally and arbitrarily. They're targeted because they oppose Voldemort, but it seems to be more a matter of luck than of skill who escapes and who dies.

The one jarring sentence in the article is, unfortunately the first one. That sentence, "A tear slowly trickles down JK Rowling's cheek," sounds uncomfortably Rita Skeeterish to me. It reminds me forcibly of the one of the sentences Harry spies being written down during his first interview with her. "Tears fill those startlingly green eyes as our conversation turns to the parents he can barely remember." (GOF, U.S. paperback ed. p.306) It doesn't spoil the article, but it kind of tripped me up until I got into the rhythm of the rest of the piece.

Rowling hadn't wanted to let her mother she was writing a book, probably because she hadn't much hope of getting it published. I think that was the biggest regret -- not that her mother missed all the fame and fortune and adulation. That's a big regret of mine, too. My mother always thought I could write for publication, but while she was alive I hadn't tried. I haven't published a book or an article, but I was published in the New Blood anthology, and that would have thrilled her. I think she would have liked that I was expressing myself here and in blogs too.

But you can't change the past; you just have to go forward and try not to regret what you can't change. And hope there's a way that somehow, somewhere, our mothers are aware of what 's going on and are happy for us.