When a book becomes influential enough, someone might try to impersonate it, since publishing doesn’t follow any hard rules.
For example, I was explaining to someone that, after (surprisingly not before) I got a job at my local library, I took out a communist manifesto, which I later learned was a fake, with writings in there that were not consistent with the official communist manifesto, such as a call for free love.
I have also spotted a lot of fake versions of Mark Twain books come in, which has a lot of parts deleted or inserted based on the writer’s desire.
On the other side of the issue, lately I’ve been watching a lot of the events unfold in the middle East and have wondered why nobody just ends violence over there for good by making fake Qurans. One or two people have hinted they’ve tried, with some altered movements centered around it (would you call this government gnosticism), but it’s not something you always hear.
What’s the most severe example of a fake version of a book you’ve ever seen/encountered?
What biases? (asking seriously)
That West Asia has been an especially violent place for centuries because of religion in general and Islam in particular, ignoring the predominant reason in modern history: Western imperialism. Also, Europe was the cause countless imperialist invasions & subjugations and both world wars, so it’s not even true that West Asia is more violent. Really it’s just Western chauvinism rebranded for the War on Terror. The articles I linked to can it explain much better than I can.
I see, thanks, I now understand why/how their remark could be read in that way.
I feel like if people never get an outlet to showcase inaccurate ideas, they may never change them.
What you said reminds me of that fake bestseller written by a sham to make the Iraq War easier to swallow but almost all of it is inaccurate: “Honor Lost: Love and Death in Modern-Day Jordan.” Worse of all, that book is most likely detrimental to real victims of honor crimes in Jordan.