58 replies to this topic

[vagansmom]

And Opus Dei is still a controversial organization. In my neck of the woods, there's an abbey nearby that had (maybe still has but I don't know) ties with Opus Dei. A friend of mine was involved with them for a period of time some years ago and has such strong opinions about some of their practices that she was part of a group of individuals who traveled to the Vatican for a meeting with officials there to discuss the organization.

[Mel Johnson]

So right there we have three heavily prejudicial factors working against the factuality of the book as "docudrama":  Suspicion of the Jesuits, suspicion of Freemasonry, and suspicion of Opus Dei.  That would make for a conspiracy addict's dream!

[vagansmom]

They each stand alone. DaVinci Code occasionally mentions a character from Angels& Demons but that's about it. You can read them in either order. I read DaVinci Code before Angels & Demons - not a problem at all.

[vagansmom]

They each stand alone. DaVinci Code occasionally mentions a character from Angels& Demons but that's about it. You can read them in either order. I read DaVinci Code before Angels & Demons - not a problem at all.

[dirac]

The Vatican expresses unhappiness with “The Da Vinci Code”:

http://news.bbc.co.u...ent/4350625.stm

[Farrell Fan]

As though this mediocre book hadn't sold enough copies over the last two years -- now comes the marketing boost of a publisher's dreams -- condemnation by the church!  

[dirac]

It does seem counterproductive, doesn't it?  

I haven't read the book and so can't attest to its quality, but it does seem to have engaged the interest of many people in the distant past, always a plus in my view.  (I loved your little parody earlier in this thread, Farrell Fan. Even someone who hasn't read it can get the point!)

[kfw]

dirac, on Mar 17 2005, 03:08 PM, said:

It does seem counterproductive, doesn't it?  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For some Catholics yes -- but it's hard to believe many haven't heard about the book already anyhow and decided whether or not to read it. For others no. The Washington Post quotes someone from a Catholic research organization in Rome as being "astonished at the number of Italians who tell [him] their faith has been shaken. Many historians agree that the book is hogwash (I haven't read either the book or its debunkers), but they haven't written thrillers to say so, so they haven't reached the same number of people.

[dirac]

Well, I'm sure the publisher is probably delighted, in any case.  

[atm711]

kfw, on Mar 17 2005, 04:51 PM, said:

Many historians agree that the book is hogwash (I haven't read either the book or its debunkers), but they haven't written thrillers to say so, so they haven't reached the same number of people.

They had better get busy...the movie with Tom Hanks will be here soon  :rolleyes:




edited to fix quote box

Edited by carbro, 17 March 2005 - 03:10 PM.

[Poppiedancer]

Joining the conversation rather late...

I read TDVC and I thought it was.....a load of rubbish.  I was certainly caught up in it while I was reading it, but upon reflection I wasn't particularly impressed.  I'm only seventeen but I wasn't drawn to any characters.  Having since read Deception Point and Digital Fortress I was amazed at the lack of originality in the same sort of figure being the 'bad guy' in all three books!!!

*I've discussed it with my friends and we agree that Brown has an obvious preference to highly intelligent women with legs, and highly attractive AND intelligent men. *

Then again, I wouldn't say this genre is my favourite anyway.  In the last chapter, Brown mentions that the Catholic Church, Opus Dei, etc had nothing to with the real thing...but they had been implicated throughout the story.  

Overall, I feel that I didn't waste my time because it was really only a book, and it did hold my attention, but, there was controversy around it which did sort spark my interest...

I'm not meaning to be inappropriate.









NB:  I have been raised a Catholic....but I read it regardless.  I think its harmless as long as no one proclaims it as gospel  

[dirac]

Better late than never. Welcome to the topic.  

[GWTW]

I just started listening to this book on audiotape and it certainly leavened my commute on this very rainy morning. OTOH it really is a heavy-handed opus - Farrell Fan catches the style incredibly well - I blurted "Leonardo da Vinci" out loud about ten minutes before the Vetruvian Man was mentioned on the cassette. I have yet to be acquainted with the curvaceous cryptographer - I except that awaits me in 3 hours time!

[dirac]

Do report back after you make her acquaintance, GWTW.

[GWTW]

What a load of rubbish - and personally, if I were a Catholic I'd be really annoyed by this book. The Catholic Church is hardly the first or the last religion to co-opt and transform pagan practices in order to draw in converts. As Pagan religions have their spring festivals, Christians have Easter and Jews have Passover - these festivals share many practices, just think about egg hunts at Easter and eating hard-boiled eggs at the Passover Seder and as eggs represent the renewal of life, I'm pretty sure that any pagan spring festival will incorporate them (together with a ritual sex act!).
Regarding the ritual sex act, as a 21st century feminist, I was annoyed that Dan Brown seems to think that a religion that respects women is one in which Woman enables Man to reach God by way of Sex. That's not my definition of equality or feminism.
Maybe it's my ignorance of the New Testament and Christianity but I really didn't understand what the issue was surrounding Mary Magdalene. Is she really still reviled by the Church? Isn't it a matter of interpretation whether she actually was a prostitute or not? I don't know how Jewish law was applied in Jesus' time but one reason observant Jews forbid premarital sex is because under Jewish law a man and a woman are married when they 'know' each other (and therfore premarital sex causes huge problems of divorce, adultery, bastard children, etc) - so perhaps Jesus and Mary Magdalene, who were both Jewish, were actually married...
Sorry for this rant - but you did ask.
P.S. As far as I'm concerned the canonical version of the legend of the Holy Grail was told in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, so TDVC is really heresy.