Da Vinci code - Not all bad?

[Oleron]

The book and film of the Da Vinci Code have come in for some, deserved, criticism on these boards. I'd like to play devils advocate by suggesting that their effect on the world has not been completely negative.

Firstly, I quite enjoyed the book (haven't seen the film) and thought it was a fast-paced page-turner. Yes, it lacked depth and substance but wasn't the worst book I've ever read.

Second, people are discussing christianity and its origins now. They are daring to question where the bible has come from and, more importantly, what it has left out. These are people who probably never gave a moments thought to religion or philosophy and now, thanks to Dan Brown, it has become a topic of water cooler discussion in the workplace.

I welcome this, even though most of the discussion is going down the woo route. Many of us got to be skeptical through questioning and considering our own woo beliefs.

 

[elliotfc]

I welcome this, even though most of the discussion is going down the woo route. Many of us got to be skeptical through questioning and considering our own woo beliefs.

Does Ric Flair believe in woo?

-Elliot

 

[Oleron]

Does Ric Flair believe in woo?

-Elliot

Apparently so...

 

[elliotfc]

Do Ric Flair fans believe in woo too?

-Elliot

 

[rocketdodger]

The plot and content of this story, like so many others, simply reinforces my maxim that getting trained in melee combat is a great idea.

 

[Yahya Sulaiman]

I'm getting tired of all these people writing books "cracking" or "debunking" The Da Vinci Code. It's a frickin' novel! Would they write a book "debunking" The Lord of the Rings? Besides, who can take a story seriously as an accurate source of history when it depicts the tale of the apple falling onto Isaac Newton's head as being true?

 

[Wudang]

Would they write a book "debunking" The Lord of the Rings?

Well yes, because it needs debunking. For goodness sake, the plot revolves around a ring that fits some giant demon then some sort of pixie. Are we supposed to believe the ring's a magic ring or something?

 

[elliotfc]

I'm getting tired of all these people writing books "cracking" or "debunking" The Da Vinci Code. It's a frickin' novel! Would they write a book "debunking" The Lord of the Rings? Besides, who can take a story seriously as an accurate source of history when it depicts the tale of the apple falling onto Isaac Newton's head as being true?

I think a lot of people believe that the Da Vinci Code, while not completely true, has many factual details which suggest a powerful conspiracy that hides the truth about Jesus and Mary Magdalene. That isn't commensurate to the Lord of the Rings, is it?

Also, I think Brown claimed that the novel was based on factual material.

I think many people do take the Da Vinci Code seriously, as two local priests have told me.

-Elliot

 

[Yahya Sulaiman]

I think many people do take the Da Vinci Code seriously, as two local priests have told me.

My point is, that's their problem. Any Christian with an even rudimentary knowledge of ancient history will know how inaccurate are many of the "factual details" of The Da Vinci Code. Never mind all the legitimate reasons for disbelieving in Chrisitianity: let's attack a fictional story! And then go after Harry Potter again!

 

[elliotfc]

My point is, that's their problem. Any Christian with an even rudimentary knowledge of ancient history will know how inaccurate are many of the "factual details" of The Da Vinci Code. Never mind all the legitimate reasons for disbelieving in Chrisitianity: let's attack a fictional story! And then go after Harry Potter again!

I disagree, I think we're all in this together.

More importantly, pastors are obligated to tend to the spiritual needs and questions of their congregation. So no, it is also the pastors problem. PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE APPROACHED ABOU IT.

Most Christians don't have the rudimentary knowledge you speak of. "the hell with them" is not the attitude most priests would have about that.

The Harry Potter thing is very different, and I suspect I would share your sentiments about that, and vice versa.

I see your point, but understand that many Christians do have questions about the book that they would like addressed by the church, priests, their religion. Done and done. Like you say...that's their problem. Not yours.

-Elliot

 

[c4ts]

I say it's detracting from people's ability to think critically, and leads to an unproductive line of questioning. They may be discussing the origins of Christianity in the sense that conspiracy theorists discuss current events.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I disagree, I think we're all in this together.

More importantly, pastors are obligated to tend to the spiritual needs and questions of their congregation. So no, it is also the pastors problem. PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE APPROACHED ABOU IT.

Most Christians don't have the rudimentary knowledge you speak of. "the hell with them" is not the attitude most priests would have about that.

The Harry Potter thing is very different, and I suspect I would share your sentiments about that, and vice versa.

I see your point, but understand that many Christians do have questions about the book that they would like addressed by the church, priests, their religion. Done and done. Like you say...that's their problem. Not yours.

-Elliot

I think you are missing something here..

Don't you have a problem with the idea that the writings of Dan Brown can make people ( so called Christians ) question ' The Word of God ' ?

 

[Yahya Sulaiman]

It reminds me of the scene in Dogma where Loki pretends to have stopped believing in God because of Alice's Adventures through the Looking Glass.

 

[Rustle]

The DaVinci Code sparks discussion.. but it is crap discussion. There are REAL historical questions to be discussed, especially about christianity, but now instead people are asking questions like "gosh is that really a woman in that painting?!?!?!" and "I learned in school that not all albinos are really evil!!!"

I have yet to see mainstream tv asking questions like "gosh, if the DaVinci Code is some hastily thrown together fiction, could it be that the Holy Bible is too?" or "people believe in the DaVinci Code, could it be that people will believe in anything you put in print?"

I have to say also, I'm one of the few that found the book to be a real snoozer. Concepts like "evil albino monk assassin" are great for tongue-in-cheek cartoons, but not for realistic suspenseful fiction.

 

[Meadmaker]

There was one aspect of the book that I found severely underrated. I had read an 11th century French grail legend. (I think it was the one by Cretien de Troyes (sp?) but I don't remember.) In it, several unworthy knights seek the grail, but Percival finds it. He finds it, not by finding the cup, but by understanding the true meaning of Holy Communion. Once he gets that, then the location is revealed to him, kind of as an afterthought.

This is spoiler material, but I don't think anyone who has read this far will mind. Nevertheless, I'll scroll, just in case. Spoilers below.


























Perhaps Brown didn't intend it, but I think he did intend it. In "DaVinci Code" four "knights" seek the grail. Teabing, the Bishop, Silas, and Langdon. Langdon eventually finds it, after he has grasped the meaning of the grail, which in this modern version is the comprehension of the "Sacred Feminine". I thought it was a clever update of a grail quest.

There's one other thing I find a bit irritating about the commentaries on the book. A lot of them mention the evil conspiracy afoot by the Catholic Church, especially the monk and the Bishop to keep the "true" grail secret, but no such conspiracy exists. That's some fairly clever deception by the author. The Bishop is trying to find the true grail, which he thinks is a cup. It isn't supposed to hurt anyone, he's just trying to get back in the Pope's good graces, because the Pope has pretty much disowned him for being way overboard on the conservative Catholic side. Silas also thinks it's a cup, and he's the troublemaker, who goes way beyond what he ought to have done. Teabing is the voice behind the conspiracy. He knows something about the "true" grail, but has duped the Bishop and Silas into doing his dirty work, because he thinks it should be revealed. The real conspirators keeping the grail secret are the guardians of the grail, the Priory of Scion. They have no intention of ever revealing it, because they don't want to reveal it to the unworthy. They preach the message, in secret where necessary, but really don't want to blow the lid off the operation. In this way they are like the Fisher King. They keep the grail hidden in plain sight, available to anyone with the faith to seek it.

Maybe I'm giving Brown too much credit, buit that's what I saw in the book, and I thought it was not exactly profound, but at least clever.

 

[elliotfc]

Don't you have a problem with the idea that the writings of Dan Brown can make people ( so called Christians ) question ' The Word of God ' ?

With the notion, or the fact? If it was some obtuse notion, yes I would have a problem with that...but that curtsies to the reality. My personal problem with the concept is independent with the reality of the situation.

-Elliot

 

[slingblade]

There was one aspect of the book that I found severely underrated. I had read an 11th century French grail legend. (I think it was the one by Cretien de Troyes (sp?) but I don't remember.) In it, several unworthy knights seek the grail, but Percival finds it. He finds it, not by finding the cup, but by understanding the true meaning of Holy Communion. Once he gets that, then the location is revealed to him, kind of as an afterthought.

Chretien and Wulfram von Eschenbach, actually. Wolfram's work inspired Wagner's Parsifal. According to Wolfram, though, the Grail was a stone.

And Percival got an unprecedented "second chance" to find the unfindable Grail Castle, that of the Fisher King, his uncle, after finding but leaving it the first time, by doing some good deeds and humbling himself. Yes, it was related to understanding communion, but also sin. His uncle had an unhealing wound in his groin for....20 years? until Percival understood the true significance of the Grail. Then his uncle was healed and Percival became king in his stead.

According to MuggleNet, his name means "pierces the veil," "pierces the valley," or "destroyer." It also translates as "bringer of peace" and "from the pear tree."

 

[Meadmaker]

It has been a few years since I read the grail legend, and the book was currently packed away until I get my basement remodelling done (which I hope will be finished this year, but you never know.) I was wondering if the failed grail seekers in the two books had any connections.

Or am I asking too much from a second rate author who stumbled on a formula at just the right time to make him a zillionaire.

 

[Oleron]

Most Christians don't have the rudimentary knowledge you speak of. "the hell with them" is not the attitude most priests would have about that.

Don't you find it weird that many christians have virtually no knowledge of where the bible came from or how it came to contain the particular books it contains?

I mean, they devote their lives to something they know almost nothing about?! They probably put more thought into buying their cars than investigating their chosen life path.

I know this was certainly the case for me when I was a xian. I had no idea how the bible was constructed or how the ideas of modern xianity evolved.
Indeed, I know much more about xianity since I became an atheist.

 

[elliotfc]

Don't you find it weird that many christians have virtually no knowledge of where the bible came from or how it came to contain the particular books it contains?

No. I think most Christians think that *I'm* weird for having pretty-dern God knowledge of that stuff. Weird is relative, nothing is inherently weird.

I mean, they devote their lives to something they know almost nothing about?! They probably put more thought into buying their cars than investigating their chosen life path.

But I don't think that people know what year the first Ford was built, or the history behind each and every mechanism in a car.

I do agree that people do *accept* the life path they are on, and if they are content, probably aren't all that interested in getting to the background of it, as much as you think they ought to be. I get your point, and it is a good point.

I know this was certainly the case for me when I was a xian. I had no idea how the bible was constructed or how the ideas of modern xianity evolved.
Indeed, I know much more about xianity since I became an atheist.

I know more about Christianity now then when I was a borderline agnostic/theist.

-Elliot