What do you think?
Rate this book
If You Want to Know How I Got Brainwashed
Betsy Dovydenas is an artist who painted and wrote her story about joining a bogus church run by a bogus pastor.
In more than 200 monoprints with narrative text, she tells the story of being tricked, sweet-talked, coaxed, manipulated, conned, coerced and exploited.
In short, she was brainwashed.
This book shows how it happened.
In more than 200 monoprints with narrative text, she tells the story of being tricked, sweet-talked, coaxed, manipulated, conned, coerced and exploited.
In short, she was brainwashed.
This book shows how it happened.
220 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 14, 2021
1 person is currently reading
877 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
August 25, 2024
I gave it two stars to draw attention to myself.
My first thought was, heck! I'm inspired to infringe! I wonder if the author, Dovydenas, has been criticized for being so clever and unique as a ballsy artist. I just want to say, if so, boy that would be double jeopardy! Creative works have in common a degree of arbitrariness rendering it highly improbable that two people would independently create identical works. Hence, monoprints I think. Therefore, intent and knowledge are not required to establish liability for direct infringement of a copyrighted work (i.e., strict liability) and therefore even infringers who accidentally infringe are liable. U.S. law entitles a plaintiff to seek injunctive relief, as well as, actual (including lost profits and an accounting of the infringer’s profits resulting from the infringement) or statutory damages subject to the judge’s discretion (currently between $750 and $30,000 per infringement, or up to $150,000 for each willful infringement) and attorney’s fees for infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. Chapter 5, specifically section 504.
(shh, you didn't hear it from me)
Her works are not digital or mass-marketed, but are hand-rendered. It's the kind of thing that makes me question things like animal tested makeup and medicine. Her monoprints and watercolors and embodied identity are great works of authorship well within “works of visual art” under Title 17 of the United States Code, which defines copyright law and its moral rights protection under § 106(a) of that act. The phrase "moral right" is a translation from the French “droit moral” which the English translation does not convey adequately; that is, the idea of an "intellectual concept" of "inner meaning," thereby encompassing more than a right inherent in our notion of morality, but also a right that exists in an entity's ultimate being. Quoting Western case law: moral rights are understood as rights inhering in the artist's personality, transcending property and contract rights and existing independently of the artist's economic interest in his work, they are “rights of a spiritual, non-economic and personal nature that spring from a belief that an artist in the process of creation injects his spirit into the work and that the artist's personality, as well as the integrity of the work, should therefore be protected and preserved.” The doctrine is essentially a philosophical and pragmatic “right to integrity and attribution” in which creators are viewed as possessing an inalienable right to prevent others from, among other things, modifying, distorting, or altercating the integrity of the work even after the creator alienates the embodied work and its copyright."
My first thought was, heck! I'm inspired to infringe! I wonder if the author, Dovydenas, has been criticized for being so clever and unique as a ballsy artist. I just want to say, if so, boy that would be double jeopardy! Creative works have in common a degree of arbitrariness rendering it highly improbable that two people would independently create identical works. Hence, monoprints I think. Therefore, intent and knowledge are not required to establish liability for direct infringement of a copyrighted work (i.e., strict liability) and therefore even infringers who accidentally infringe are liable. U.S. law entitles a plaintiff to seek injunctive relief, as well as, actual (including lost profits and an accounting of the infringer’s profits resulting from the infringement) or statutory damages subject to the judge’s discretion (currently between $750 and $30,000 per infringement, or up to $150,000 for each willful infringement) and attorney’s fees for infringement as provided by 17 U.S.C. Chapter 5, specifically section 504.
(shh, you didn't hear it from me)
Her works are not digital or mass-marketed, but are hand-rendered. It's the kind of thing that makes me question things like animal tested makeup and medicine. Her monoprints and watercolors and embodied identity are great works of authorship well within “works of visual art” under Title 17 of the United States Code, which defines copyright law and its moral rights protection under § 106(a) of that act. The phrase "moral right" is a translation from the French “droit moral” which the English translation does not convey adequately; that is, the idea of an "intellectual concept" of "inner meaning," thereby encompassing more than a right inherent in our notion of morality, but also a right that exists in an entity's ultimate being. Quoting Western case law: moral rights are understood as rights inhering in the artist's personality, transcending property and contract rights and existing independently of the artist's economic interest in his work, they are “rights of a spiritual, non-economic and personal nature that spring from a belief that an artist in the process of creation injects his spirit into the work and that the artist's personality, as well as the integrity of the work, should therefore be protected and preserved.” The doctrine is essentially a philosophical and pragmatic “right to integrity and attribution” in which creators are viewed as possessing an inalienable right to prevent others from, among other things, modifying, distorting, or altercating the integrity of the work even after the creator alienates the embodied work and its copyright."
September 21, 2021
In this cult memoir-cum-picture book, Betsy Dovydenas uses earthy, sometimes Boschean images to fill in much of the texture that another author might have provided through words. This is a strength—for example, she gives enough backstory to help the reader understand what strings in her psyche her cult pulled on, but not so much that you lose sight of the primary plot.
What about this story stands out? Its commitment to conveying nuance through image, and how the sophisticated visuals complement the simplicity of the text. It almost comes across as an avant-garde children’s book—not because it’s simplistic, or written for children, but because the story’s been distilled to its essence. The words play the bones; the images, the flesh.
As a connoisseur of cult memoirs, I would say this one will appeal especially to the families of current and former cult members, thanks to its focus on the impact Dovydenas's cult involvement had on her most intimate relationships. It might also rope in those fascinated by cult dynamics but unwilling to commit to a full-length book.
What about this story stands out? Its commitment to conveying nuance through image, and how the sophisticated visuals complement the simplicity of the text. It almost comes across as an avant-garde children’s book—not because it’s simplistic, or written for children, but because the story’s been distilled to its essence. The words play the bones; the images, the flesh.
As a connoisseur of cult memoirs, I would say this one will appeal especially to the families of current and former cult members, thanks to its focus on the impact Dovydenas's cult involvement had on her most intimate relationships. It might also rope in those fascinated by cult dynamics but unwilling to commit to a full-length book.
Read
November 5, 2021It is a colourful picture book with bright drawings and emotive sketches. Since it is a picture book, one ( at least I do) tends to flip the pages quickly to see the drawings . Slow down - this book tells of a traumatic journey - of cunning people who use religion to allure, trap and swindle people.
The entrapment comes disguised as half -truths, warm (fake) care and casting of doubts over family ties. How would someone who is so normal and sensible capitulate mindlessly to give away money, change one's dress style and values at the behest of fake religionists? It is brainwashing indeed.
Thankful that Betsy 's extended family has the commitment and perseverance to rescue and rehab.
Read - and be mindful of wolves in sheep clothing around us.
Thank You Betsy for sounding the alarm.
The entrapment comes disguised as half -truths, warm (fake) care and casting of doubts over family ties. How would someone who is so normal and sensible capitulate mindlessly to give away money, change one's dress style and values at the behest of fake religionists? It is brainwashing indeed.
Thankful that Betsy 's extended family has the commitment and perseverance to rescue and rehab.
Read - and be mindful of wolves in sheep clothing around us.
Thank You Betsy for sounding the alarm.
October 28, 2021
More of this please. More confessional art that exposes the farce of totalistic religions and the manipulative methods of their leaders. Set yourselves free from mind control. Then tell your story and help others do the same.
October 9, 2021
An interesting read, especially combined with the artistic pictures that illustrate the concepts discussed, and especially from the internal point of view of the author/artist. Well worth the read.
Read
October 3, 2021If you want to know more about the community I grew up in....
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews