The Da Vinci Code

What the hell is this about? I have been hearing about it for years now. Never read it or anything. Just asking..

unrealistic that I won't be reading anymore Dan Brown books. I will see the movie though. I don't buy into any of it though (the Holy Grail actually being Jesus' blood line)!

That the holy grail wasn't the cup that Jesus drank from, but it is, in fact, his bloodline (saying that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had children) and that the bloodline can be traced to people today. I don't believe it, but a lot of people do.

many of the places and items he describes in the book are real, which makes it very interesting.

The Da Vinci Code is quite possibly the most realistic of the four. Consider this a warning about the other three.

unrealistic it was. So, no more Dan Brown for me. I am reading Michael Connelly right now. Much much better!

Deception Point was the best of the four books. I shit you not.

If you ever really want to pull a mean trick on someone, strongly recommend Digital Fortress to that person. Then be prepared to duck.

:7

IMO.

a history professor is killed at the Louvre. The way he died and the clues he left make the Paris police call in an art history professor (the main character) to investigate. He uses clues from the crime scene and famous paintings to track down the killer, which ends up involving the holy grail, the knights templar (a secret society believed to guard the grail), the Vatican and Opus Dei.

And wingnuts read too much into it?

Treat it as an action movie. You suspend your belief in what is real and what is fantasy for a couple hours and enjoy yourself.

It is an adventure/mystery, and on that note, if you weren't already familiar with the legends upon which the story is based, the information in this thread pretty much spoiled any sense of mystery it would have.

It is *not* something that wingnuts read too much into. Wingnuts of the Christian fundamentalist variety tend not to like it because it is heretical. It posits the humanity of Jesus. The Catholic Church officially condemned it, IIRC. If not officially, a lot of Catholics hate it because of the suggestions it makes about the life of Jesus and the role of the Church in supressing knowledge to maintain its power.

As a work of fiction and a novel, the book is very good on many levels and not so good on some others. Brown plays with existing legends, some historical facts, some historical inventions, and all together did pretty much what he set out to do: create a page turner.

The interesting/odd thing about the book is the reception it has received since it became so popular. If you treat it as a historical narrative, you're going to be disappointed. If you go into it looking for "facts" to pick at, you're going to find a lot of them. If you're offended by suggestions that Jesus was just a guy who had a lot of good ideas and who, gasp, even had *sex* with someone, it'll drive you insane. Some people buy in totally to the legends, among them those who follow the legends of the Knights Templar, and others negatively react to those who buy into those legends by hating the book, in essence buying into it themselves.

Anyway ... it's a freakin' novel, and it's entertaining. If you take it too seriously, one way or the other, you're going to be disappointed.

Sorry, I know half the world or more loves this book, but I hated it. I guess as a thriller that gets a reader to turn the page, it does it's job. But that's about the only good thing I can say about it.

moves it up into the top half of books. It is a good page turner. Is it good literature? Hell no. Is it an easy read? Hell yeah. As an English teacher, I think reading shit is better than not reading anything.

It was around 23 hours.

And much over-hyped. Primarily for the fundie crowd who have trouble distinguishing between fiction and non-fiction. I've read Dan Brown before. His thrillers are fine when you're reading them. Afterward very forgettable.

for a book club. I hear it's one long chase scene of a novel.

and he likes to end each one with a cliffhanger. If you can take that, its a fun read.

Jesus and Mary Magdelene were married. She got knocked up and ran off to France when he got busted for being the Messiah. Little Son of Jesus became the start of most of the royal bloodlines of Europe. This is a BIG secret. The Priory of Sion has been keeping the secret (but they are bloodthirsty, avant guard weirdos). And that's it.

(There is some evidence for some of it, but Dan Brown fucks it up so bad.....)


Khash.

But he said that he took the basic info from the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail.
As to the fundie bs-I'm a Christian. But I've always had the theory of God having sent his son to live among the humans and experience all human emotions. ALL of them. So why couldn't Christ have been knocking boots w/ Mary Magdelene? She was supposed to be gorgeous and supposedly came from a very prominent family. She'd be a good one to pick. And why not get her pregnant? He would have experienced the love of two people for each other and the love of a father to a child. Two very powerful kinds of love that would have changed who he was and allowed him a much better understanding of humanity.
Dan Brown's book was a piece of crap but I don't dispell the whole notion of Jesus experiencing human love. Truthfully, it always made him more accessful to me and made me want to believe in his ideals more.

If Christ was God made manifest as a human being, so that we could understand God and He could understand us... then surely sex was part of that. It's a driving force.

If Christ was Man (as well as God) then he must have felt desire. And acted on it. Why not with Mary Magdelene? She was beautiful, dedicated to the Gospel.

I just don't understand why so many (but not all) Christians are so anti-sex.

Khash.

they do not get enough, and what they *do* get is not good.

IMO, Christ was sent here for one reason only. And sex wasn't part of it. He didn't give into temptations. He lived a divine life. Not that sex wouldn't be "divine" but it would take away from what His focus and purpose was. That is just my opinion, and I do not get upset at people who have opposing opinions. Like the fundies do.

It took me so long to read because I was laughing so hard. I love that stuff.

So secret, so hush-hush.
I laughed too much. He chose the wrong book to base any kind of allegations on.

I'm all for the sex I think, particularly because it was weird to be a Jewish man of that age and not married (did I learn that from the book LOL?). And I too would find Jesus more accessible in light of a romance of some kind, for the reasons you stated.

But as to the child....that would create a strange sort of god race, which doesn't seem to make sense, since the whole point is that we here are not gods, which is part of the point of the entire Jesus experience.

Of course, I guess the whole God thing doesn't always make sense. :shrug:

Who knows?
But most of the books out there about it are dumb.

(although many people would say the book was so rotten on its own that it is impossible for someone to spoil it)

The other central premise of the book is that Da Vinci believed that the holy grail was MM and that the Catholic Church was actively hiding this secret. Da Vinci, as a member of the Knights Templar, was engaged in protecting the holy grail and also hid clues to its true identity in its work.

Either premise can be true without the other. That is, Jesus could have existed, married MM and had children with or without Da Vinci having believed it and put clues in his work, and Da Vinci could have believed it and put clues in his work with or without it being true.

:)

but poorly written. (IMO)

And rolls them into one, and writes a story around it.

Nothing new if you're already an amateur Fox Mulder ;)

"The Illuminatus Trilogy" has more sex & drugs. "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" is the non-fiction source of Brown's "secrets." But it takes an intelligent "could this be true" approach to some pretty interesting ancient stuff. Worth reading as an intellectual mind-game.

Damn, I need to really read the book so I can make a serious critique. Somehow, I've always got something more interesting to do--like clean out the catbox.

"The Da Vinci Code" is the book read by people who read one book per year. Then they insist on recounting every plot detail at every opportunity.

Harry Potter is better.

It is certainly a page-turner.

A certain suspension of disbelief is helpful...

I'm looking forward to seeing the movie.

Even my atheist husband enjoyed it.....go figure!

If you must read about the Vatican.

n/t

It debuts in May.

that the crucifixion/resurrection was a hoax and Jesus never actually died.

rehashing familiar conspiracy garbage. The guy has the most appalling writing style - really, really bad.

I only read it this past year but you'll be hooked once you read it. Very progressive ideologies about the church and women. I enjoyed it and I'm looking forward to seeing the movie. I think Hanks is a perfect choice for Robert Langdon!

are women, LOL!

I mean honestly.

Paul Bettany is so very awesome as the monk, Tom Hanks is so much of a better actor than the film deserved, Ian McKellen rocks all the time, and Audrey Tatou is a doll.

The book, as everyone says, was horribly written. I was unfamiliar with a lot of the conspiracy stuff, which I dig, so that was very cool to me, particularly the "hidden" stuff in the art. I read it in a day.

But the film is going to knock your socks off, plus be number one for about 23812937289173892378912378279837 weeks.

See the trailer at the site: http://www.seekthecode.com

bring myself to care whether or not Jesus was married to Mary Mag. Nice to know she wasn't a hooker. Two millennia of bad PR!

just like pretty much everything else.