1. COMMENT: AUTHOR: KC  DATE: 10/26/2009 3:03:41 PM

    Salvation, for example, comes to characters when they drink a drop of the Nazarene’s blood contained in vials attached to a pair of earrings. What does that say to a reader who has no vial of blood? I suggest it implies that salvation is a fictitious construct not attainable to real people.

    Do you really believe that? It’s pure nonsense. No one thinks that they cannot be saved because they don’t have any of Jesus’ blood on hand to drink. Not any more than people think they can’t escape their trials without a wizard named Gandalf.

    —– COMMENT: AUTHOR: KC DATE: 10/26/2009 3:05:02 PM

    And by the way, I did not care for Vanish, by Tom Pawlik at all. It bored me to tears.


    —– COMMENT: AUTHOR: Rebecca LuElla Miller DATE: 10/31/2009 9:36:30 PM

    Hi, KC, thanks for your comments. First, I brought up Vanish because of comments I made in my review at A Christian Worldview of Fiction:

    I’ve said often enough, supernatural suspense is not my genre of choice. Yet I end up reading far more of it than I care to because it’s lumped in with fantasy in the “speculative” category.

    Except, this time, I am happy my involvement in CSFF spurred me to read Vanish.

    Second, you made my point about the drop of blood. No one will think that’s what’s needed for salvation, so that opens the door to dismissing salvation as a device, a fictitious element just like the Collectors.

    As John wrote in his post, some denominations do believe the literal blood of Christ is present in Communion, so this use of blood in the story seemed off to him.

    My point is, the blood of Christ is serious and sacred. It is at the root of the Christian belief in forgiveness of sins. I believe Eric intended to show that. I think it didn’t work. Obviously others think it did.

    That’s why we have these blog tours. Others can hear what we think and make up their own minds.



What do you think?