In news that should surprise nobody, Arkansas-based warehouse store Sam’s Club (Walmart’s version of Costco) has pulled copies of Brendan Powell Smith‘s new book The Brick Bible
Brendan’s publisher Skyhorse sent The Brothers Brick a copy of The Brick Bible a while ago, and I finally found the time to sit down with it over Thanksgiving. The book is a large-format paperback, like a graphic novel. Some of the photos are a bit dark and/or grainy, but given that they span ten years of digital photography, I suspect the lower-quality ones are the earliest (the ones I know are his most recent all show off Brendan’s stellar presentation skills).
In terms of subject matter, The Brick Bible is no more a children’s book than the Bible. In that sense, Sam’s Club isn’t wrong — yes, indeed, the Bible is rampant with “mature content.” And Brendan’s version doesn’t shirk from the difficult stories compiled by the Deuteronomist in books like Judges that rarely make the sanitized Sunday School curriculum. Yes, Brendan’s LEGO version of the Levite and his concubine (Judges 20) is tough to read, but so is the original. Don’t like the way Brandon shows God repeatedly making the Israelites stone their neighbors who’ve committed minor sins (a la the Taliban)? Too bad, it’s in the Bible. Think it’s a bit odd that God and Satan use Job as a plaything in their cosmic game? Read the book.
Oddly, though, The Brick Bible is just as thought-provoking and works just as well regardless of your religious or philosophical persuasion (as Bruce says). For the non-religious, the book confirms why some of us have set aside the belief system illustrated so well in Brendan’s book. For believers, The Brick Bible is an accurate (if incomplete) representation of the Old Testament. If your belief doesn’t come through stronger after seeing exactly what’s in the source material, don’t blame Brendan Powell Smith. But for all of you out there reading this (presumably LEGO fans) who might not see yourself so clearly on one side or the other of the religious divide, it’s a great collection of LEGO art with interesting building techniques and (generally) excellent LEGO photography.
My recommendation? Buy it. I’ll give you three reasons: First, because it’s a rip-roaring read that has all the crazy shenanigans in the ancient original. Second, to show support for a fellow member of the LEGO building community. Third, because buying this banned book makes a statement about corporate censorship in the face of the likes of Sam’s Club/Walmart. Sure, most of us live in countries where our governments don’t have the right to censor the art and literature we choose to consume, but corporations do have ever-increasing power over what we can and can’t read, watch, or listen to. I’d love to hear about a campaign to have the Bible banned from Sam’s Club on exactly the same grounds they used to ban Brendon’s illustrated LEGO Bible. Think of the children! Anyway, buy the book. Don’t let Sam’s Club/Walmart win.
I guess the confusion may come from the perception of Lego as a childrens’ toy and the assumption that a Lego bible would make a nice gift for a child.
Rather than keep receiving complaints from customers about the ‘inappropriate’ content, it’s just easier for the company to withdraw the book from sale.
Surely it’s less of a censorship issue (in that you can still but the book elsewhere), and more of a business one (keeping customers happy).
iirc the concept began as a satirical look at the bible, more or less laughing at “the belief system illustrated so well”… then it was discovered there was a large market in selling the images to conservative Christians, lots of books were sold to them, and (I guess) quite a bit of money made. So it’s a little… hypocritical to then complain when those conservative Christians complain about the images which were (originally) created to make fun of them.
“For believers, The Brick Bible is an accurate (if incomplete) representation of the Old Testament. If your belief doesn’t come through stronger after seeing exactly what’s in the source material, don’t blame Brendan Powell Smith.”
Let’s not go overboard here. The book, as stated, gives an incomplete and at times out of context look at specific incidents in the Bible. That might create great cannon fodder for its (originally) intended audience, but let’s not pretend that this is an unbiased look at the source material that can strengthen someone’s faith.
“I’d love to hear about a campaign to have the Bible banned from Sam’s Club on exactly the same grounds they used to ban Brandon’s illustrated LEGO Bible. Think of the children! Anyway, buy the book. Don’t let Sam’s Club/Walmart win.”
I know you’re being tongue in cheek here (at least I think you are), but this exposes the heart of the problem. I don’t know how much Brendan had a say in the marketing, but misleading marketing is what led to the ban. On it’s face, this book looks like unique presentation of the common children’s Bible story books. The Bible is an adult book, even if parts of it are child-friendly.
I love Die Hard but I’m not about to sit down and watch it with my five year old nephew.
When a private corporation chooses not to sell something that is not banning or censorship. It degrades the meaning of those words and makes it easier for *actual* banning and censorship to happen when people cry wolf so inaccurately.
Especially in the era of Amazon.com and many other online merchants there’s simply no reason to hang-wring over a single (admittedly large) merchant choosing not to sell something.
There is also the fact that LEGO = kids for 98% of the population and selling something that says LEGO on it and yet isn’t really suitable for kids is not sensible for a general interest store like Walmart.
Daedalus’ point is well made, although I feel that Rev. Smith’s intentions have been a misunderstood. The online Brick Testament does go to lengths to point out some of the contradictions in the biblical narrative, and some of the natural consequences of taking scriptural edicts too literally
Despite Smith’s own, publically acknowledged skepticism about organized Christianity, I do not think that it is fair to criticize his work as ‘incomplete’ or his stories as ‘out of context.’ The online Brick Testament is apparently the most complete illustrated Bible ever, and yet it is woefully incomplete because the book is just so large. Any adaptor is forced to pick and choose which parts to present. The Bible itself is an anthology, a collection of stories by numerous authors which, especially in the Old Testament, have very little in the way of a common theme other than telling the story of the Jews.
I cannot help but feel that the complaint here is not that Smith has taken stories ‘out of context,’ but that he has not framed these stories as a Christian would. He has not added contemporary Christian interpretation. That is, in fact, his point: to make the Bible itself accessible without imposing the framework of a particular interpretation. Millions of people grow up with a ‘context’ imposed on them by their religious leaders without really examining what the Bible actually SAYS (which, in itself, is really a translation of a translation anyway). Note how many people believe that the story of the Rapture or the 6,000 year age of the earth are actually in the Bible!
If it is false advertising to present a book without the extensive ‘background’ (the Biblical ‘Expanded Universe’) that has been developed around it by people other than the author, then Smith is no less guilty than his publisher. I do not think this is the case. The printed Brick Bible is apparently not a direct use of the online Brick Testament: I have read that it has been somewhat ‘sanitized,’ with somme of the sex downplayed (if not the violence). And yet there are Christians who find the more explicit online version quite reasonable.
The reaction by Sam’s Club implies that a published version of this public domain document MUST conform to accepted religious doctrine in order to be sold in their store. Banning alternative faithful presentations of the book that simply do not toe the line is no better than prohibiting the sale of books about 9-11 being an ‘inside job,’ refusing to sell Ayn Rand novels, or not carrying books by Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck. IN a word, censorship.
As Andhe pointed out, if customers believe that this is a happy Lego version of the Bible intended to assist in the inculcation of modern Christian interpretation in their children, clearly they are incorrect. But should the book then have a big sticker on it that says, “warning, this is not a Christian-approved product?” That is no less an instance of censorship, and no better than putitng a sticker on a D&D mannual saying, “this book talks about demons,” or a sticker on the Koran saying, “this thing has it all wrong.”
I think it’s fantastic, I’m not a believer myself but I love the objective presentation of the bible in the brick. (it’s not because you don’t believe in God you can’t appreciate a book like the bible, its just a matter of interpretation)
Nice discussion! I agree with everyone. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible to separate Walmart’s Bible-belt sensibility from their business decision-making, so we can’t really say for sure if it’s censorship or not. Fortunately, there’s plenty of other ethical and economic reasons to not shop there.
“There is also the fact that LEGO = kids for 98% of the population and selling something that says LEGO on it and yet isn’t really suitable for kids is not sensible for a general interest store like Walmart.”
Exactly.
Good for Sam’s Club for banning that. the stuff that Brendan Smith makes is not Biblical, and it’s really sick.
Some of you write as if you think that the ‘Brick Bible’ is written from an unbiased standpoint. It’s not.
There’s basically two possible biases with which someone will read the Bible. The Christian reads the Bible with the bias that the words are true (and beneficial).
The writer of the ‘Brick Bible’ presents the material from the perspective that the Bible JUST a collection of stories. In this case, a perspective that it is a collection of stories that are quite mock-able.
Only one of these biases is the correct way to read the Bible.
I have no problem with this book being pulled. As stated earlier, LEGO is first and foremost, for children. Using LEGO as the medium would give the impression to those unaware that this is intended for children. Now, I wouldn’t have an issue with the book if it indicated via a warning or disclaimer that the material may not be suitable for all ages. BTW, I am going on the assumption that the book contains the graphic sexual images (anal sex, etc.) that the web site showed. If this material is not present, then maybe it’s ok.
One other problem I have is the author not making his intentions known to the reader. It seems very disingenuous to me to profit from the very people your mocking, touching on beliefs that are deeply held.
From a LEGO standpoint, his presentation and building technique are both excellent.
Polynices> I agree with you that the book as not been ‘banned’ but it has definitely been censored. Denying media outlet censorship weakens freedom of speech.
Brickaroo> There’s a massive spectrum of views between the two extremes you give as examples.
Flail> For the author to be able to make a profit on the very demographic that he is satirizing is quite a testament (har har) to his wit and business sense. I think Sam’s Club’s decision to pull the book from shelves just shows that the company is clinging to it’s own religious beliefs and sees this particular publication as a threat. I’m sure you don’t see Satanic Bibles or Grimoires for sale there.