jack

I won't say whether it exists or not, but much in Foucault's Pendulum much attention is paid to the implausibility of the idea there may be secret descendants of the Templars, putting a long-laid plan. Many other books (and conspiracy theories) have similar ideas.

How *would* you go about organising such a thing? First, a few background points.

* Obviously there are *some* secret societies. The masons actually exist :)
* If that helps the members out now, that's obviously a reason to do it.
* Or if they're following some religious purpose.
* Or if you want to shape the future of humanity.
* But would you want to found a society in order to benefit the N00-year-hence members of it? But that's what some fictional societies with a big secret seem supposed to do. (See 1984 for a philosophical discussion of maintaining a caste system.)

If you did want to, how would you do it? First, the parameters:

* Let's say you have a big secret you want put into effect or revealed at the next millennium.
* You want to prevent anyone finding out before hand, including the members.
* But want the secret to survive.

And, so, what:

* One technique is to simply write lots of instructions and bury them. They (hopefully) won't be found too soon and (hopefully) when they're found some people primed by rumour will follow the instructions.

( More )

I've loved this book for a while, since Grandfather introduced me a relatively long time ago. ( Read more... )

And I re-read it every few years, getting more of it. To be fair, I don't think I could ever fairly claim to understand it. When I first read it, I basically blanked on the end, and couldn't really have told you what happened. But loved the characters and enough of the happenings to love the book anyway. Now I've a slightly higher perspective, and see that the basic plot is really quite simple, though know I don't get about 80% of the references to arcane or literary sources.

Reading some of Eco's essays on translations makes me more aware. For instance, they're discussing words, and one of them comments how important it is, after all, God didn't create the universe by sending a telegram. "Fiat lux. Stop", the other quips. Apparently there was a rather better pun in the original Italian. But the point is that Casaubon and Belbo can't think about something serious without casting it in literary terms, nor without making fun of it.

That is a reason I like the characters. When I was teenager I didn't know why; now I can see how in many ways they're completely hopeless, addicted to the cabalistic ramblings they can't believe, but in the same way I am to, say, maths or programming :)

While I'm here, I can't resist the impulse to say even more about Dan Brown. I often recommend Cryptonomicon to people who want something like Dan Brown, but not stupid. And recommend Eco to people who want something like Cryptonomicon, but not stupid. I don't know what people recommend to peopel who want something like Eco, etc.

But seriously, who gets off comparing Dan Brown to Umberto Eco? About half way through Foucault's Pendulum, there's a passage where they enter meaningly pseudognomic phrases into a computer and generate a random combination of them. Interpreting this, they conclude that Jesus didn't die on the cross. Instead, his coming to england is interpreted as the legend of Joseph of Aramathea bringing the grail here. One observes that it's a nice story, but unfortunately too ridiculous and completely unpublishable. The other says he should get out more: someone[2] already wrote a book about that, which did quite well. Remind you of anyone else's theories?

Remember, this was *before* Dan Brown. If you bring out a book which is *already* being lambasted as ridiculous and believe it, you're being simplistic and credulous, or much more subtle and perpetrating a cosmic joke, but either way not in the *same* league. OTOH, writing *popular* books is definitely a skill, albiet a different and possibly more lucrative one from writing books I think have redeeming features, and I guess I wouldn't object to having it, and can't object to someone else being good at it; all skill is good. Though *I* wouldn't trade my bullshit detector for it.

[1] And part-time (non-fiction) Vanity press. It's amazing that I can sympathise with a vanity press; I guess because the authors are so insane.
[2] I can't remember the author, I assume it was real.