Following Up

I just watched the Battles BC David episode. I must grudgingly give them partial credit. Yes, they reported Biblical accounts as historically accurate. By this I mean nobody bothered to say anything other than Goliath was a nine-foot tall dude. Oh, yeah, and I guess it's implied, but they never really questioned the existence of David. This is kind of a big deal, like if episode two of the following series, Battles AD, was all about King Arthur. I suppose we have slightly more evidence that David existed, but that's only because we think the Bible is a more credible source than the Camelot legends. Either way, that's not my point of argument. So why do I give them partial credit? They basically presented David as a bloodthirsty, scheming wannabe emperor. This certainly doesn't stick to the Biblical rendition. In fact, they mostly said that he behaved like a Mafia don and referred to Joab, his chief general, as his consigliere. As far as such things go, if you strip away the Biblical fawning over David, this is a pretty accurate description of how he behaved. It's also a useful delimiter between the concept of "history" and "national epic." So in this, Battles BC did an admirable job of reading between the lines of a national epic and finding something approximating history. However, midway through I was forced to revoke any and all credit they may have received. I saw a preview for next week's episode. Joshua. Seriously, what is this? The History Channel or Frank Miller presents Veggie Tales? Actually, I take that back. Frank Miller's version of Larry the Cucumber and Bob the Tomato would be awesome. Imagine Larry Boy going out to fight crime and corruption in the pouring rain. Then he comes home and finds a top-heavy naked woman standing at the door. She says she's been waiting for him, then picks him up and... Well, I'll leave that to the imagination. And if anyone needs me, I'm assuming I'll be in Hell...