I remember this book as a Bad Book (from a literary standpoint) trying to be a Good Book (from an ethical standpoint). I read it at uni.
Now, with Jewish relatives by marriage in Montreal, the lack of Canadian People of David would have stood out much more. Also, as a Jew myself, it's weird that they would have ended up calling themselves or being known as People of David, because religiously, David is not a big deal. He's not one of the Patriarchs, and he's not Moses. He was a great war leader and a symbol of the glory and ethical traps of being king, and of course a great poet/musician, but he seems to me much more important to Christians (because of the tendency to identify Jesus as being of the line of David). Maybe that's the point, that other people call them the People of David.
On covers, if I was the writer then I would like one whose text equated my book with "The Lord of the Rings" best! (Unless I was aiming at Charles Dickens or something.)
The Star/Shield of David ✡ isn't an important religious symbol in itself, but it has, in relatively recent years, come to represent Jews and Judaism. I can sorta see an elision/transference process: "People of the Star of David" => People of [the Star of] David => People of David. Or maybe the reasoning that if David was important enough to name the symbol after, he was important enough to be who the people who used the symbol were from.
but he seems to me much more important to Christians (because of the tendency to identify Jesus as being of the line of David).
But the actual Jewish Messiah/Mashiach (or at least the most important and well-known concept of the Messiah, currently and historically) is indeed supposed to be of the line of David. The whole point of the genealogical retcons in Matthew and Luke was to associate the lineage of David with Jesus, because that's what most Jewish people even of that period knew about.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2020-10-11 09:35 am
no subject
Now, with Jewish relatives by marriage in Montreal, the lack of Canadian People of David would have stood out much more. Also, as a Jew myself, it's weird that they would have ended up calling themselves or being known as People of David, because religiously, David is not a big deal. He's not one of the Patriarchs, and he's not Moses. He was a great war leader and a symbol of the glory and ethical traps of being king, and of course a great poet/musician, but he seems to me much more important to Christians (because of the tendency to identify Jesus as being of the line of David). Maybe that's the point, that other people call them the People of David.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2020-10-11 07:01 pm (UTC)(link)On covers, if I was the writer then I would like one whose text equated my book with "The Lord of the Rings" best! (Unless I was aiming at Charles Dickens or something.)
Robert Carnegie
no subject
(Anonymous) 2020-10-12 06:12 pm (UTC)(link)But the actual Jewish Messiah/Mashiach (or at least the most important and well-known concept of the Messiah, currently and historically) is indeed supposed to be of the line of David. The whole point of the genealogical retcons in Matthew and Luke was to associate the lineage of David with Jesus, because that's what most Jewish people even of that period knew about.