The Da Vinci Code
After months of prodding, I have finally given in to the demands of my fiancee and read this book.
The Good:
- It brings some ugly truths about Christianity to a mainstream audience who might not trudge through more complex (read: better) books.
- It was fun.
The Bad:
- It was written like a screenplay for a made-for-TNT movie.
- The characters were horrific. (The Teacher... *retch*)
<SPOILER>
- The ending was a complete cop-out. "Let the mystery be" MY ASS!
The whole "the holy grail is a metaphor for Magdalene" thing isn't new to me, so maybe that lessened the book's intended effect.
</SPOILER>
The effect it did have on me was to want to read some non-fiction historical analysis of early Christianity, particularly pre-Nicene Creed. Particularly the story of Jesus Christ and how it came to be what it is today.
I was kind of surprised that a book that deals such devastating blows to Christianity has become so popular. Though I am also aware that Christians have gone hog-wild writing anti-DaVinci Code books.
The Good:
- It brings some ugly truths about Christianity to a mainstream audience who might not trudge through more complex (read: better) books.
- It was fun.
The Bad:
- It was written like a screenplay for a made-for-TNT movie.
- The characters were horrific. (The Teacher... *retch*)
<SPOILER>
- The ending was a complete cop-out. "Let the mystery be" MY ASS!
The whole "the holy grail is a metaphor for Magdalene" thing isn't new to me, so maybe that lessened the book's intended effect.
</SPOILER>
The effect it did have on me was to want to read some non-fiction historical analysis of early Christianity, particularly pre-Nicene Creed. Particularly the story of Jesus Christ and how it came to be what it is today.
I was kind of surprised that a book that deals such devastating blows to Christianity has become so popular. Though I am also aware that Christians have gone hog-wild writing anti-DaVinci Code books.
Comments
"Let the mystery be" MY ASS!
Hmmm. In what way would you say your ass is mysterious?
How many anti-Da Vinci code books asre there? It seems to be a mini-industry.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
when ron "little opie cunningham" howard does the movie he'll put in a nice hollywood ending for you.
It already has a nice Hollywood ending, that's the problem.
Originally posted by groverat
- It brings some ugly truths about Christianity to a mainstream audience who might not trudge through more complex (read: better) books.
I'm not sure which truths it brings. That Jesus was married? Probably not true. That Mary Magdala was the holy grail? Almost certainly not true. That Jesus was in the line of kings? Hmmm, David couldn't have been his ancestor because Joseph wasn't his father. That Jesus was really just a man who was deified by Christianity after his death? Well, yeah, that's the definition of Christianity.
Originally posted by BRussell
That Jesus was really just a man who was deified by Christianity after his death? Well, yeah, that's the definition of Christianity.
Do you honestly think mainstream Christians know, collectively, that the divinity of Christ was determined by a vote?
Do you think mainstream American Christians are aware of the wholesale adoption of ancient religious festivals/practices/beliefs and how they were co-opted (Christmas, Easter, communion, virgin birth, etc...)?
Most American Christians are about as interested in the true historical record of their faith as they are about how their TV works.
And no, I don't have a girlfriend, but if I did, I bet she'd try to make me read The DaVinci Code.
Anyway, reading real non-fiction about Jesus, christians and the Catholic church is a lot more interesting and put together much more interesting theories than silly half-formed conspiracies that can't tie piecemeal trivia together into an actual theory -- aka, Dan Brown's books. Hell, I thought the Catechism of the Catholic Church was a lot more insightful about the Church and Jesus than Angels and Demons.
It drove me nuts too that Brown treats the treader like an idiot, stating the obvious and going through incredulous dialog to make a simple point.
It's a good start, but I think groverat and most others here are above that level of reading.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
when ron "little opie cunningham" howard does the movie he'll put in a nice hollywood ending for you.
We can at least hope (vainly) that Ron would fix the complete astronomical impossibility of seeing Venus rising in the closing scene (whether it is doing so symbolically or not!), while the sun is setting. Can't happen! At least not without a cataclysmic rearrangement of the solar system that would do Immanuel Velikovsky proud.
Originally posted by shetline
We can at least hope (vainly) that Ron would fix the complete astronomical impossibility of seeing Venus rising in the closing scene (whether it is doing so symbolically or not!), while the sun is setting.
He also made an inaccurate reference to left-brain/right-brain. Hell if he had flipped a coin he had a 50-50 chance of getting it right.
Originally posted by groverat
Do you honestly think mainstream Christians know, collectively, that the divinity of Christ was determined by a vote?
That's not quite fair. The Nicene conference voted on and set down Christian orthodoxy, but most Christians before that time believed Jesus was divine in one way or another.
I agree that the book is good if people take an interest in historical aspects of religion. I just wonder if this book has the same effect on religious history as Stone's "JFK" had on that history.
Oh well....
Originally posted by groverat
Most American Christians are about as interested in the true historical record of their faith as they are about how their TV works.
What you say applies to most christians. For them the base of their religion is that Jesus is a deity. Questionning this destroy their faith. Being able to separate the mystic Jesus and the historical Jesus is a sort of schizophrenic exercice. The duality between the real and the mystic is very difficult to conceptualize for many people : most of the people are unipolar (materialist or mystic).
It's a good start, but I think groverat and most others here are above that level of reading.
Notice how I said I was coerced into reading it?
As part of the deal, I am making her read Catch-22.
Bad writing. Bad characters. Bad ending.
That's not quite fair. The Nicene conference voted on and set down Christian orthodoxy, but most Christians before that time believed Jesus was divine in one way or another.
Operative word, "most".
The fact that it was even a question that had to be settled should tell you all you need to know. Almost the entire belief structure is the result of politics and gamesmanship. I am not basing this off of the 2 days I spent reading The Da Vinci Code, of course, that would just be silliness.
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Originally posted by AirSluf
Literary Crack. Impossible to put down, but not really that good or good for you.
Agreed. It even had cliffhanging chapters! How low can you go?
Originally posted by SpcMs
I didn't read The Da Vinci Code. I did read, and enjoyed, Foucault's Pendulum (or whatever the title is in english). Someone told me the two are comparable so i might read it after all, but can someone who read both compare them a bit? I mean, are they equally good?
I've read them both - someone here at AI recommended it - and there's really no comparison. First, Foucault's Pendulum is a well-written book, even in translation. Second, "Foucault" takes the opposite approach to the whole Knights Templar/secret society conspiracy theory thing. Davnici: credulous, Foucault: skeptical.
You read Da Vinci for the plot, just to see what's going to happen next. You grin and bear the horrid writing and dialogue and characters. You read Foucault for the plot but just as much to enjoy the dialogue and the characters and the journey those folks go through.
On the other hand, most people I know who've read Da Vinci read it in a day or two, so what's to lose?
Also the fun thing about Da Vinci is how real places and works of art - like the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper - are integrated into the mystery story. It really is pretty cool.