News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Texas School District Banned My Book. Then Things Got Ugly by CRConrad on Thursday December 30, 2021 @05:16AM (#29735409)
Only thing that's missing would be any kind of proof that all the quoting and cross-referencing had anything to do with literary value, per se.

Personally, I suspect other reasons far outweigh that.

Re:A Texas School District Banned My Book. Then Things Got Ugly by finite_jest on Thursday December 30, 2021 @11:12AM (#29737896)
That's a fair point. I guess you could try to correct for that by giving more weight to references by non-Christian authors.

However, I believe with almost any reasonable measure you choose, the KJV Bible has a very high literary value. Even Richard Dawkins would acknowledge that. [1] And for what it's worth, I am not a Christian, so I don't think I am biased by religious zeal or something.

[1]: https://archive.fo/DckMc#selection-2193.0-2201.435

Re:A Texas School District Banned My Book. Then Things Got Ugly by CRConrad on Friday December 31, 2021 @01:50AM (#29745665)
> However, I believe with almost any reasonable measure you choose, the KJV Bible has a very high literary value.

I suspect people think so mainly because besides Shakespeare, that's the only thing most people know of that's written in this "cool" archaic language. Like Shakespeare, it's just on the limit of still being understandable, but full of thees and thous, which, the more people don't understand it, they love it all the more (as witnessed by the usage errors they commit when trying to use it, which judging from what I see online are more freqent than the cases of correct usage).

But when this particular edition was written it was in pretty much ordinary everyday language. And the stories themselves are the same old "vengeful old arsehole on a cloud smites sometimes his beloved semi-barbaric nomadic bronze-age shepherd people, sometimes their enemies" as in all other editions, so "great" as literature? Naah, I still just can't see it.

What "reasonable measure", exactly, makes it so?

> And for what it's worth, I am not a Christian

I am -- in name only (that's the first C in my username). I still believe in nominal determinalism in some cases, though certainly not in my own.

> so I don't think I am biased by religious zeal or something.

I am, all too often. Of the anti- kind.