[granville1]

Also the article talks about what really scares Blatty and what he thinks are outdated parts of the original novel.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/03/the-exorcist-book_n_993294.html

[fatherbowdern]

granville, thanks for sharing this!

 

Standouts to me:

Why did you add the extra scene?

“[ … ] At one point in our conversation I burst out with indignation about how so many “dense” filmgoers thought the demon took Karras out the window, making the ending seem to be a “downer.” There was a brief silence, and then – God bless his brave and honest soul! – Frank said quietly, “Bill, that’s what I thought happened, too! [ … ]”

Why do you think the story of “The Exorcist,” in its many forms, has resonated so much for so many people?

“[ … ] But I suspect that there might have been a somewhat less luminous basis for the power of The Exorcist’s argument for faith, which was the widespread and apparently rampant perception that the novel was based on a true story, the so-called “1949 case” of demonic possession of a young boy in Cottage City, Maryland. That perception was – and is – totally false. While writing the novel, the only facts that I had at hand were the classic symptoms of possession that had somehow remained an identical constant in every culture and in every part of the world going back to ancient Egyptian times.

“The 1949 case was the novel’s inspiration, the jump-starting electrical jolt being the last line of my first letter from the exorcist in that case, the Jesuit priest Fr. William Bowdern. After informing me that he was bound by the boy’s family to total confidentiality, he ended: “I can tell you this. The case I was involved in was the real thing. I had no doubt about it then and I have no doubt about it now.”

The words charged me with the confidence to write about possession with the heat of conviction.”

[Blatty's “perception” here is quite interesting. If I remember correctly, Blatty and Friedkin both promoted the film as “based on a true story,” without the need for a “warranty of merchantability.” While “the 1949 case was the novel's inspiration,” Blatty is finally confirming that he did not know the details of the now-infamous diary of Ronald Hunkler a.k.a. “R” a.k.a. “Robbie,” etc. Bottom line, Blatty is truly a writing genious. Perhaps my quick read is necessary for a final review.]

Father B

[granville1]

You're welcome – glad you enjoyed it.

[Author]

Posts