Why All The Sensationalism, Regarding The Televangelist, The Contributor, Etc.?? Options

[Daryl Fawcett]

This question is being asked of me over at MSDAOL, therefore, I created a topic on it there, and thought I would also create a similar one here, as I too am now wondering, why all this sensationalism?



Why not present the facts of it all, instead of facts mixed with fiction, etc.???



This post has been edited by Daryl Fawcett: Aug 23 2006, 08:00 AM

[PrincessDrRe]

Because what started this off was a big piece of fiction.

What starts something off normally ends up being sprinkled in it all....

[Daryl Fawcett]

Fiction shouldn't be mingled with truth, just as truth shouldn't be mixed with error.

Fiction mixed with truth is the work of the devil, and do we want to be associated with the devil's tactics?

[Clay]

Fiction shouldn't be mingled with truth, just as truth shouldn't be mixed with error.

Fiction mixed with truth is the work of the devil, and do we want to be associated with the devil's tactics?

and you believe that you possess the total truth? About anything? Everything we have contains some error... the only person who has total unadulterated truth is The Creator.... everyone else is suspect.... so while you may believe its a black and white world, it is not...

[Daryl Fawcett]

I am talking about known fiction that is being posted in the form of sensationalism.

To copy from somebody over at MSDAOL:

It just seems like we are straying away from facts and into the world of speculation and sensationalism with the following: "Back at the compound, the Televangelist leans back in a large couch. His eyes drift over to where a new step-daughter is playing and his lips curl in a slight smile. He reaches over and pats his new wife on the thigh, as he watches the little girl play. Memory takes him back over the years to another step-daughter."

This post has been edited by Daryl Fawcett: Aug 23 2006, 08:14 AM

[Clay]

I am talking about known fiction that is being posted in the form of sensationalism.

To copy from somebody over at MSDAOL:

was that posted as "fact?" does not the narrative it comes from claim to be a work of fiction?

[Daryl Fawcett]

To quote part of a post by watchbird:

"The Televangelist" is a very unique document in that it names no names, gives no dates, and claims to be a work of fiction. However, the lines which make that claim are the only purely fictional lines in the whole work, and were added after the work was completed at the advice of legal counsel. There are, to be sure, "fictionalized" lines within the document, that is lines where the story is told through the vehicle of the thoughts of the Televangelist as he supposedly reminisces or plans.

It's the last sentence in the above quote that concerns me, as this is stated as known fiction, which I am asking, why does it even need to be there?

[Clay]

To quote part of a post by watchbird:
It's the last sentence in the above quote that concerns me, as this is stated as known fiction, which I am asking, why does it even need to be there?

I have no idea and I would tend to be like you (if you remember my earlier posts on this topic) give me the facts and let me digest them.... I don't like dramatic stories in narrative form when there are facts to be had.... if I want to read a fictional account I will go to the store and buy a book written by one of my fav authors....

[watchbird]

To quote part of a post by watchbird:
""The Televangelist" is a very unique document in that it names no names, gives no dates, and claims to be a work of fiction. However, the lines which make that claim are the only purely fictional lines in the whole work, and were added after the work was completed at the advice of legal counsel. There are, to be sure, "fictionalized" lines within the document, that is lines where the story is told through the vehicle of the thoughts of the Televangelist as he supposedly reminisces or plans. "

It's the last sentence in the above quote that concerns me, as this is stated as known fiction, which I am asking, why does it even need to be there?

As I have said before ..... there is a difference between "fiction" and "fictionalized". Fiction means something that is not true. Fictionalized means something that is true which is written in the STYLE of fiction, and for the purpose of giving depth of feeling and breadth of context to the facts which are being stated in this literary genre.

As to the general answer to the question of why it was written in this style: The facts had already been presented in staid prose and with names attached to various individuals .... especially to those in positions of church leadership. (According to Matt. 18 principles.) They were completely ignored, or worse, the facts were taken back to the principal persons involved, who claimed that all were lies ....... and those who were trying to inform were persecuted the more for their efforts, including threats of lawsuits of various kinds.

It was in this atmosphere .... and with the advice of Legal Counsel .... that the author of The Televangelist wrote out the facts of a wide variety of problems in a "fictionalized" manner, hoping to get more people to read, ask questions, and hopefully not quit asking questions until they found out the truths that were partially revealled by this method.

It is a matter of history ..... though largely an untold and untellable history .... that it did indeed accomplish its purpose. And the answers that were found when people started digging far overshadowed the pale "fictionalized" pictures that were sketched out in The Televangelist. More than one person since then has exclaimed, "The Truth is stranger than fiction."

That continues to this day ..... and if you think that The Televangelist is overly "sensational" and "dramatic", then I can only say that this is because you haven't yet found all the factual stories that are incompletely sketched so dimly and unemotionally by the author of The Televangelist.

[Clay]

the problem is that people will conclude that whatever is contained in a fictionalized style of writing is in essence true, but the names have been withheld or changed....

[awesumtenor]

I have no idea and I would tend to be like you (if you remember my earlier posts on this topic) give me the facts and let me digest them.... I don't like dramatic stories in narrative form when there are facts to be had.... if I want to read a fictional account I will go to the store and buy a book written by one of my fav authors....

In the hyper-litigious atmosphere in which public discourse occurs in this society, sometimes the Jack Webb "just the facts, ma'am" style is not prudent. A lot of truth has been buried because the person wishing to bury it has deep enough pockets to keep court proceedings ongoing enough that the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth never sees the light of day.

In His service,
Mr. J

[Clay]

In the hyper-litigious atmosphere in which public discourse occurs in this society, sometimes the Jack Webb "just the facts, ma'am" style is not prudent. A lot of truth has been buried because the person wishing to bury it has deep enough pockets to keep court proceedings ongoing enough that the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth never sees the light of day.

In His service,
Mr. J

true... doesn't stop me from preferring that method though.....

[awesumtenor]

true... doesn't stop me from preferring that method though.....

i agree with you that your preference is the "preferred method"... however, one has to be enough of a pragmatist to understand that sometimes that just wont work.. no matter how earnestly it is preferred.

In His service,
Mr. J

[princessdi]

Well, now, this is just me, but was there really a man who had two sons and the younger took his inheritance and wasted on "riotous" living, etc., coin, lost sheep(we know the stories)? Or did Jesus also couch the truth within fiction so it would be better understood by all? Apparently, Jesus did believe the "just the facts" approach was prudent either.

To quote part of a post by watchbird:
It's the last sentence in the above quote that concerns me, as this is stated as known fiction, which I am asking, why does it even need to be there?

[Clay]

Well, now, this is just me, but was there really a man who had two sons and the younger took his inheritance and wasted on "riotous" living, etc., coin, lost sheep(we know the stories)? Or did Jesus also couch the truth within fiction so it would be better understood by all? Apparently, Jesus did believe the "just the facts" approach was prudent either.

see you are hellbound... with rocket rollerskates on... how dare you question a parable given by Jesus....