Confessions of Xenu
February 16, 2010Henry Baum No Comments »There’s a nice review of The American Book on Pod People. In the review, Cheryl Anne Gardner writes, “The alien thing almost had a Scientology glow about it,” which I took issue with because I don’t really see my vision of UFO contact as being comparable with the Xenu story. We got into a bit of a dialogue about it in email. Here it is:
Cheryl Anne Gardner: Thanks for the stellar read Henry, as far as your quibble with the review, allow me to explain:
I wasn’t saying you were advocating Scientology, I said it felt like a satirical jab at Scientology. Didn’t even have to be that. It could have been any of the cult groups that think aliens built the pyramids and will come to save the worthy. That’s why I made the connection initially. 
I was assuming Winchell’s father was just as demented as his son. His son seemed to think so. I think you might have misread that part of the review. I did say I felt it was satirical. That was what you were doing, right? Even if the Aliens do come in the end.
My quote from the review: “The alien thing almost had a Scientology glow about it. SATIRE of this sort definitely hits the hot buttons.”
I don’t really know how you infered anything from that line other than I thought it was a satirical jab. Look, you will obviously get some conflicting views about this book, and I am sure not all of them will match your personally philosophy or your intent. Some with think you are advocating aliens and a Christian hater, others like me will see the satire but get the point.
I don’t believe in quibbling about reviews live on the net. It looks unprofessional. Normally I don’t respond to such things, but in this case you clearly misread what I said.
As for the Aliens, well, I believe there is life out there, but I am more of a Douglas Adams mindset. The only reason Aliens will come here is to blow us up to make way for the highway.
Me: The thing with this book is that it came out of some pretty fringe obsessions (and paranoia) that I do think are possible – about consciousness, life after death, UFO contact, and the like. It may take a million years, but I do think humans may very well evolve to the point where we are able to enter dreams, contact aliens in other dimensions and so forth. Really. The cover of the book comes from a diagram from a book by UFO researcher Jacques Vallee, who’s got a more-progressive view of aliens and UFOs, in that they’re not just from another planet riding on a spaceship, they’re possibly a projection of consciousness. Long story. Anyway, point being that I find these ideas fascinating, so while I do condemn fundamentalist religion in the book, I don’t mean to be satirizing all fringe beliefs. In other words, I don’t think UFOs=Xenu because UFOs might actually exist. So that’s maybe where I was being oversensitive.
Thanks a lot for the consideration of the book. I probably shouldn’t have made that first comment before my 1st morning coffee.
CAG: Probably not. Coffee is good for the brain.
In Antiquity, I have a dead Assyrian King making contact with an archaeologist through her dreams, eventually in reality in the end. But it was to express my own beliefs and struggles when it comes to the nature of death, reincarnation, time travel, out of body experiences, and our deeper connection to the universe.
Now when people read Antiquity, some readers thought the King was God in a Christian sense. I got a lot of email. And while he wasn’t God in that particular traditional sense, the story was about finding faith. The faith that suits you as a person. Joliette wanted to believe in her science and she also needed to believe in something greater because she had lost her parents in an accident. Death was difficult for her to deal with. Just like the death of my father was difficult for me. Her God saves her by giving her hope beyond death.
I thought yours was satire, pretty harsh satire, but I got the point. We do need to evolve. I agreed with it on so many levels, I had to trim the review to keep it reasonable. There was too much to cover.
Your reader will interpret it based on their own dogma and beliefs. It’s the risk we take when we write this stuff. So I totally understand.
Me: Cool, good points about accepting interpretation. I should, uh, follow my own advice I’ve given in the past about not responding to reviews. It’s different when it’s your own skin at stake. But I DESPISE Scientology. The word makes me recoil, so that’s what happened.
Join the discussion