The Yorkshire Ranter points out the similarities between last week's horrific attacks in Mumbai and Frederick Forsyth's The Dogs of War, and dubs it the "world's deadliest novel." Steinn picks up on this, and wonders if it's accurate:
The plot of Dog's of War is a coup in an African country, and it seems likely the book has been used as a "how to" manual several times, possibly most recently in the Mumbai terrorist attacks.
But, is it really the world's deadliest novel? And if not, what is?
I'm tempted to nominate Atlas Shrugged, but it's way too early to assess the impact of the current economic collapse. Also, it might wriggle out by being more of a polemic than a novel...
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The Yorkshire Ranter suggests that the Dog's[sic] Dogs of War by Forsyth as the world's deadliest novel.
The plot of Dog's[at least I am consistent...] Dogs of War is a coup in an African country, and it seems likely the book has been used as a "how to" manual several times, possibly most recently…
This is a piece I wrote in 2011, on the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. (Originally posted here.)
I believe that the sauntering I refer to has diminished. But instead of sauntering, our local and county police departments seem to have taken up a different hobby: Shooting unarmed people of…
If posting frequency is any indication, regular readers might be able to tell that the last two or three weeks have not been the highlight of my life. And, thankfully for you, I've kept much of it off-blog because of the unique personal identifying characteristics than prevent me from being too…
This is a preface to the preface to a piece I wrote in 2011. I have only this to add:
First as an aside, I suspected Trump could win the presidency, most people simply said it was impossible. But nonetheless, I was just as shocked as anyone else.
Here's the thing. American culture reacted to 9…
I bow to your mastery of all things literary...
I'm trying to think of some novel that was a big part of the rise of either communism, fascism, or perhaps colonialism. You'd think some scribbler would have produced something that was to communism what Uncle Tom's Cabin was to the abolitionists. Strangely enough nothing comes to mind.
Atlas Shrugged? Shame on you. Atlas Shrugged is more about personal accountability than Capitalism. Greed is what corrupts any economic system. It has been the Ego of the current monetary machine and the previous dabbling in the economy by Greenspan that has led us into this current economic predicament. The Bush administration has been fiscally irresponsible and has pushed the economy even deeper in debt. When we try to manipulate the monetary system we become overconfident in our ability to control the economy. That is why ultimately the bailouts won't work, this is why socialism doesn't work, and this is why our half Capitalism and half socialism economic system isn't working.
When are we all going to grow up as a nation and quit expecting our government to fix all of our problems? We have an amazingly high standard of living compared to the rest of the world yet we are too worried we are going to lose our homes because we have gone to far in debt buying big screen TV, new cars, and only asking how much down and how much a month. Instead of blaming Ayn Rand be a real man and admit if you are in economically in trouble it is because you wanted something now you couldn't afford and instead of saving up to pay for it you put it on credit. I hope you enjoy that IPhone.
whenever I hear of Atlas Shrugged I think of the South Park episode in which the police chief,having to learn to read, and succeeding, named it (Atlas Shrugged) as the worst book in history - a reason to avoid reading.
since I couldn't stomach finishing it, I can't comment further, but it was amusing.
I'' give you that Dean. It was a funny episode of South Park. Those are not afraid to call out anybody. I'll also admit that Atlas Shrugged isn't the most exciting read. It took me years to get around to reading it. But I still think the Ayn Rand's Objectivism philosophy is valid.
Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders" may be more deadly having arguably inspired 9-11 (the book starts with an attack essentially identical to that of 9-11 on the Capitol during the State of the Union address).
Quibble: Executive Orders starts with the aftermath of a 747 being flown into the Capitol building. The previous book, Debt of Honor, ends with this event.
I submit the Holy Bible as the world's deadliest novel....
Ian. You are absolutely right!!!
Ian: I submit the Holy Bible as the world's deadliest novel....
Because, of course, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.
Hank: You can make a case that Rand's disciples are misinterpreting or misapplying her work. (I've never read anything by her, so I can't take a position pro or con on that question.) However, it is undeniably true that Greenspan is a Randian, and probably many other architects of the financial bubble are, too. It would hardly be unique if the Randians were misapplying Rand's books, as many who call themselves Christians/Muslims/capitalists do the Bible/the Koran/The Wealth of Nations. But the influence is undeniably there.
Eric I appreciate your point and think you are correct. Just as people have misinterpreted the Bible to meet their agenda, so has the conservative right by misinterpreting Ayn Rand. Ayn Rand was a social Darwinist and an atheist. She would roll over in her grave at the abuse of her ideology. I see so many libertarians out there that are just republicans posing as libertarians. Even though Greenspan was a one time an objectivist, he sold out when he compromised his ideals during his last years in the Fed.
Bible is not a novel - it is a collection of short stories, and it suffers from uneven quality. (Qur'an has only one author, hence it sucks uniformly)
Sorry milkshake but I've got to agree with Ian, its the Bible. It WAS a collection of short stories but has been cobbled together (albeit poorly by various editors with sometimes competing agendas) and now basically two historical novels, the OT and the NT.
Neither the OT or the NT are novels in any reasonable sense. In the case of the OT a large fraction is devoted to law codes (most of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). Similarly, in the NT one has a variety of different sources telling the same story and then has all of the epistles which aren't a novel either. Calling either the OT or the NT a novel is just not accurate.
Wow, 6 hours and only one libertarian rant? the internets are not what they used to be.
"Instead of blaming Ayn Rand be a real man and admit if you are in economically in trouble it is because you wanted something now you couldn't afford and instead of saving up to pay for it you put it on credit. I hope you enjoy that IPhone."
yes, because we all know that nobody ever loses a job and can't find work, has a medical emergency and has no insurance, or has any other disaster strike and wipe out funds.
many people overspend, but a (not-insignificant) number do not and end up in trouble through no fault of their own. use a few quantifiers next time.
A red-eye flight and the turkey-withdrawal syndrome does not allow the proper keyboard gnashing today
Wow, 6 hours and only one libertarian rant? the internets are not what they used to be.
I know. Kids these days.
I'm also surprised at the lack of concern-trolling to this point.
Neither the OT or the NT are novels in any reasonable sense. In the case of the OT a large fraction is devoted to law codes (most of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). Similarly, in the NT one has a variety of different sources telling the same story and then has all of the epistles which aren't a novel either. Calling either the OT or the NT a novel is just not accurate.
Of course, there are plenty of novels which tell the same story from multiple points of view. And also epistolary novels galore. There are probably multiple novels that contain all those features.
The lengthy law codes are a bit of a problem, granted, but that really just puts the Old Testament in the same bag as Atlas Shrugged...
The libertarian rants and law codes: Heinlein can be just as preachy as Rand, only funnier. And Asimov was clear about the code of behavior for his robots.
Stanislav Lem has etics/humanity/religion - philosophising elaborations running for pages long in many of his "serious" works - in fact, he wrote an entire turgid book consisting of monologues from a supercomputer talking down to us.
But Reardon, regardless of the (agreed) real value of "personal responsibility", the meltdown does happen when the government fails to regulate what's going on. Most of it was from banks having lax standards, default swaps etc. and our government let it all hang out - they shrugged! (Note also Greenspan the Rand fan - how ironic: him presiding over the very contrived funny-money system of the government and its shadowy private corporation partner, the Federal Reserve.) Look at this post by Steve Benen and the great comments (including by yours truly.)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_12/015881.php
quoted:
December 1, 2008
THEY WERE WARNED.... It's common now to hear Bush administration officials, asked about the financial crisis, insist that they had no idea this meltdown was coming. Unfortunately, they were warned, but ignored the concerns.
The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents. [...]
Bowing to aggressive lobbying -- along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK -- regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way. [...]
The administration's blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of its governing philosophy, which trusted market forces and discounted the value of government intervention in the economy. Its belief ironically has ushered in the most massive government intervention since the 1930s.
Many of the banks that fought to undermine the proposals by some regulators are now either out of business or accepting billions in federal aid to recover from a mortgage crisis they insisted would never come. Many executives remain in high-paying jobs, even after their assurances were proved false.
...
I reasonably contend (argument at the bottom of this comment) that the most dangerous novel ever was Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" (1516 in Latin, translated into English in 1551), which makes him not only a Christian saint, but an SF one as well. Some experts have said that
science fiction is, first and foremost, a search for Utopia. Other critics emphasize the notion that science fiction offers a "menu" of Utopian futures based on new technological contexts for the human being, intended to be self-fulfilling prophecies; and also a "menu" of Dystopian futures, in which some unhealthy trend is extrapolated to a horrible extent, intended to be cautionary tales or self-defeating prophecies. In either case, Sir Thomas More's "Utopia" is an important milestone in the evolution
of the genre.
In this blog thread, my point is that Utopianism spawned the likes of Marxist-Lenisim, Nazism, Maoism, Sendero Luminoso, Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, and, between those, Utopia can be said to have led to somewhthere in the neighborhood of 10^8 deaths.