|
|
Post by CynanMachae on Feb 11, 2005 10:33:28 GMT -5
Hey guys,
I loved "Patrick"(read it in about a week) but I was wondering, do you think that Mr. Lawhead went a little overboard with the sexual content? I dont think he did but a friend of mine said he did not enjoy it because of the content. Any thoughts as to why Magrid was even in the book?
|
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 11, 2005 11:53:31 GMT -5
Hey guys, I loved "Patrick"(read it in about a week) but I was wondering, do you think that Mr. Lawhead went a little overboard with the sexual content? I dont think he did but a friend of mine said he did not enjoy it because of the content. Any thoughts as to why Magrid was even in the book? Sexual content? Really? The most I have EVER seen was in The Silver Hand between Llew and Goewyn. Granted, I haven't had a chance to read Patrick yet, but I can't believe Lawhead would write anything like that.... |
|
|
|
Post by Riothamus on Feb 11, 2005 12:29:22 GMT -5
It wasn't horribly explicit, but it was very much there, and most of it didn't seem to serve the plot or the story. It didn't ruin the novel for me--it takes more than a little naughtiness to ruin a book--but it was an unfavorable point, because it seemed a bit much. It's like Lawhead was standing there shouting "They aren't just HOLDING HANDS! Get it? No? Look!"  He could have accomplished the same effect if he were more spare with detail, and not have hurt the overall effect of the book. In my most humble opinion, of course. [And I should note that I loved Patrick, though it seemed a little worn.] |
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 11, 2005 12:55:29 GMT -5
It wasn't horribly explicit, but it was very much there, and most of it didn't seem to serve the plot or the story. It didn't ruin the novel for me--it takes more than a little naughtiness to ruin a book--but it was an unfavorable point, because it seemed a bit much. It's like Lawhead was standing there shouting "They aren't just HOLDING HANDS! Get it? No? Look!" He could have accomplished the same effect if he were more spare with detail, and not have hurt the overall effect of the book. In my most humble opinion, of course. [And I should note that I loved Patrick, though it seemed a little worn.] This is just blowing my mind... He dealt with the rape of Scatha's daughters in a very good, low-key way. I don't know why he thinks that he needs to start writing low-budget peep shows... |
|
|
|
Post by Child of Immanuel on Feb 11, 2005 15:56:26 GMT -5
It did make me a little uncomfortable... it stopped just short of crossing the 'appropriateness' line.
Why was Magrid in the book? Because Mr. Lawhead wanted her to be in the book. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by CynanMachae on Feb 12, 2005 0:39:34 GMT -5
I mostly agree with you, Riothamus. But I think that the book can still be enjoyed, despite the content. In fact, I would go so far as to say it improves the story... not that I enjoyed reading those scenes, but to look at the book as a whole(especially the last few chapters), I can't think of any way I could improve... also, the Goewyn Llew chapters are in TEK, Twrch.  |
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 12, 2005 1:06:45 GMT -5
also, the Goewyn Llew chapters are in TEK, Twrch. Get out! It is really? *Sigh* I guess you're right. Here's a thought for everyone... You don't suppose the content rubbed some people the wrong way and the publishers scrapped Hero as punishment, do you? |
|
|
|
Post by dinadan on Feb 12, 2005 10:49:03 GMT -5
I think that the sensuality is Patrick was to illustrate the point that the clegry hasn't always been celebate--and, in Patrick's case, it wasn't even a hinderance to his mission.
As for Llew and Goewyn...good Lord, they were married! Isn't it ok for adults who are married and love one another to have sex?
|
|
|
|
Post by filmzeek on Feb 12, 2005 15:40:50 GMT -5
Yo to all! I'm new to the forum, but not to Lawhead.
Here's something to consider: What if it was slightly historical that Patrick had more then one lover, and that he had kids from them. Lawhead is most of the time pretty historical, and that would be the worst hole to run in when you’re writing a historical book about christian missionairy who had lovers? Not saying that Patrick did, but could that be an option?
(Wassup FantasyFan?)
|
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 12, 2005 23:37:57 GMT -5
Yo to all! I'm new to the forum, but not to Lawhead. Here's something to consider: What if it was slightly historical that Patrick had more then one lover, and that he had kids from them. Lawhead is most of the time pretty historical, and that would be the worst hole to run in when you’re writing a historical book about christian missionairy who had lovers? Not saying that Patrick did, but could that be an option? (Wassup FantasyFan?) You're right FilmZeek. I'm never known Lawhead to shirk his homework when writing historical fiction and I've never known him to put sexual content into a book if it wasn't needed. Maybe he'll come online and clear this up for us some time. And yes, Goewyn and Llew were married... but he did push the envelope a little bed when it came to TMI. Ok, so they had sex. Just leave it at that... or insinuate it. |
|
|
|
Post by Riothamus on Feb 13, 2005 20:10:26 GMT -5
I mostly agree with you, Riothamus. But I think that the book can still be enjoyed, despite the content. In fact, I would go so far as to say it improves the story... not that I enjoyed reading those scenes, but to look at the book as a whole(especially the last few chapters), I can't think of any way I could improve... Oh, it can still be enjoyed--it's a great book. The sensuality just seemed a bit forced (to me,) a bit like Lawhead was trying too hard to make sure we knew what was going on. Hmm... I haven't done much study on Patrick the man, but I believe most studies tend the other way. However, Lawhead's stated that he doesn't think any historical documents--including Patrick's "Confessions"--are valid texts, so anything goes, I guess. But the issue--if issue you can call it (these segmented discussions tend to give too much weight to one point,)--is the level of detail, and its necessity. I'm personally not convinced it was needed. But that's me. [Incidentally, Twyrch--do you mean "a little bit" ? There's something oddly humerous about the way it's spelled now... ] |
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 14, 2005 0:34:01 GMT -5
[Incidentally, Twyrch--do you mean "a little bit" ? There's something oddly humerous about the way it's spelled now... ] LOL.... OMG, Yes.... I meant "little bit"... Oh well, it is very punny the way it is, so I'll leave it for posterity. As you'll find over time, I suck at spelling. |
|
|
|
Post by CynanMachae on Feb 14, 2005 10:23:45 GMT -5
(Wassup FantasyFan?)
Not much, FilmZeek...
I think I know you from somewhere...
|
|
|
|
Post by CynanMachae on Feb 14, 2005 10:37:11 GMT -5
As for Llew and Goewyn...good Lord, they were married! Isn't it ok for adults who are married and love one another to have sex?[/quote]
Yes, they were married... but were Patrick and Sionan married?
From Patrick - "Sionan was wife to me in everything but name..."
|
|
|
|
Post by twyrch on Feb 14, 2005 11:17:37 GMT -5
As for Llew and Goewyn...good Lord, they were married! Isn't it ok for adults who are married and love one another to have sex? Yes, they were married... but were Patrick and Sionan married? From Patrick - "Sionan was wife to me in everything but name..."[/quote] So... If Lawhead is depicting historical happenings, was it wrong to include it in the book? Was if any more wrong than the Bible depicting the story of Abraham and Hagar? Western Culture applies it sense of morality to events which happened during a time when morality differed from today's standards... Who are we to judge the "crimes" of the past.... |
|
Twyrch /|\
He could have accomplished the same effect if he were more spare with detail, and not have hurt the overall effect of the book. In my most humble opinion, of course. 
