|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:01 am
I wanted to see why everyone (at my school, at least) has been ranting and raving about The Da Vinci Code.
My opinion:
A lot of the theories are absurd when you look at them logically, but then again, it IS fiction. Despite the absurdity, it was entertaining.
I haven't seen the movie, and I don't really intend to go see it....
What are your opinions of it?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:27 pm
I could never get into The Da Vinci Code. Despite all the brouhaha about it, it proved impossible to get past Dan Brown's prose. His writing is just so very bad, that after thirty pages I couldn't take it any more and gave up. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 4:40 pm
I'm Catholic, and though I've been curious about what all the fuss is about, I couldn't get past the lies Dan Brown tells. True it is fiction, but the guy has been on the news claiming all his research was accurate, when really only the names of things he made up stories about were accurate. Case in point: Opus Dei is a society to help regular people to pray live their religion. It's not a secret society by any means and was only founded in 1928. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_Dei
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:08 am
Well....
in the book he doesn't exactly frame Opus Dei as a secret society.
Rather, two individuals within Opus Dei were used as pawns as a crazy old knight's plan to find the Grail. sweatdrop
I can't make any comments on Dan Brown's research since....well, I pretty much never do research on authors.
I couldn't put it down once I got well into the book though...
but then again, I might just be a masochist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:44 pm
Battousai-nii I'm Catholic, and though I've been curious about what all the fuss is about, I couldn't get past the lies Dan Brown tells. True it is fiction, but the guy has been on the news claiming all his research was accurate, when really only the names of things he made up stories about were accurate. Case in point: Opus Dei is a society to help regular people to pray live their religion. It's not a secret society by any means and was only founded in 1928. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_Dei There is that, too. I suspect part of my reluctance to actually read the thing came from people telling me "this book shakes the foundations of your faith!". Um, no. I've seen rather thorough explanations of why the fiction in the book is really quite fictional, and it's annoying that some people don't seem to grasp that it's all made up, including the historical bits. ...For example, the "sacred feminine"? WTF is that all about? It may make a good beach read, but the idea that it proves anything is ridiculous. So maybe if The Da Vinci Code weren't so outrageously popular, I wouldn't have formed such an antipathy to it. Who knows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 8:14 am
I develop that antipathy towards popularized books as well.
As for that "shaking of the foundation of your faith" thing. Well...it didn't shake me. I'll tell you what shook me, going to a Catholic school, where our Religion text books spouted nonsense about how satanic wiccans, astrology, and tarot cards are. It shook me to see that it was completley hypocritical. They'd say something one chapter, than contradict it in the next. I've never been a practicing Catholic anyways. It's just a part of my culture really. I'm Agnostic now, but my parents don't know that....
Anyway....I'm done with my litte rant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:22 pm
I actually really liked it. I thought it was a rather brilliant story, and I greatly enjoyed reading it, but I have no desired to re-read it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:18 am
I read a couple of chapters (to the ones that haven't read the book, it means a couple of pages). Brown's style is totaly sloppyand simple. He has many interesting little facts (or are they?), that unfortunately do not justify writting a book.
It was quite visual and action prone, which may stimulate many readers, but to me these ingredients without a good sound literary style mean a box-office film, not a book.
For those who credit him for his theoretic originality, I suggest reading Holy Blood, Holy Grail...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 2:41 pm
I read and truly enjoyed it. Though I do realize it is fictional it has gotten me thinking every now and then and made me take more notice of a lot of religious things. In a positive and negative way. I am an individual who forms various theories and I like to see fiction, fact etc.
I find it interesting how it's caused so much controversy and the numerous other books that even slightly dabble in random theories and fictions such as these have barely had a priest second glance them.
Yes, I am also a Catholic, but I thought it was a great read and I also adored Angels and Demons. I found it entertaining, thought provoking and something that I may re-read.
I see also how it can be negative but I think it has opened a lot of peoples ideas and thoughts and it seems to me that more people are doing research in some of the subjects that the book discusses. Especially, Mary Magdalene, the relationship between Mary and Jesus. People even go as far as visiting sites where the actions are claimed to take place. Therefore augmenting the tourist industry and the economy of certain areas. It has also added into the publicity of Leonardo DaVinci's works which I found that people were starting to slip away from. I also find that it has helped people either find new faith in their religion or discover that they dislike it. I don't believe that the book is as bad a thing as people claim. If a book can cause so much research on things that seem to be starting to be forgotten, on economies growing, on knowledge and discovery and a sense of research. I can't see how it's 100% bad and yes, I also see the negative things about it as well.
Right now I'm just expressing my opinion. I'm fully aware that this may not be that of others. I apologize if this has offended anyone. I'm just trying to give a new view on things. sweatdrop It's a habit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:10 am
For me, it was just a fictional story. I knew the historical facts weren't real, and I'm not very familiar with the Christian religion (since I'm not Christian, and never was at any point in my life) so it was less controversial for me, and I was able to enjoy it as more of a fantasy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romantic Conversationalist
|
Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:30 am
Ah, I'm still on chapter ten. sweatdrop
Personally, I don't like the style of writing in the book. I don't think it's bad, but it's just so drawn out and contrived that I'm having a really hard time going back to it.
The fuss that's been made over it seems almost amusing to me. It's fiction. What part of fiction didn't these people understand? I was surprised to see his disclaimer in the book, but it only states that the Priority of Sion is a European secret society and who some of the members were; that the Opus Dei is a deeply devout Catholic sect and the topic of recent controversy (which he hypes to his full advantage); and that "all artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
Of course, not all the documents were real, as some pertained to his own fictional character, and who could check up on secret rituals? But, even so, it's still fiction. I didn't read it as a threat to my (or anyone else's) religion. I believe the only reason it got so much attention from the religious community was because it became a popular book. Who would have cared about another crazy psudo-historically accurate novel if so many people hadn't been reading it?Epidemic of Insanity I develop that antipathy towards popularized books as well. As for that "shaking of the foundation of your faith" thing. Well...it didn't shake me. I'll tell you what shook me, going to a Catholic school, where our Religion text books spouted nonsense about how satanic wiccans, astrology, and tarot cards are. It shook me to see that it was completley hypocritical. They'd say something one chapter, than contradict it in the next. I've never been a practicing Catholic anyways. It's just a part of my culture really. I'm Agnostic now, but my parents don't know that.... Anyway....I'm done with my litte rant.
Teaching us that Egypt was a hopeless and backwards culture (they build the pyramids, come on rolleyes ), that those who believed in evolution were denying God ...
Yes, I digress. Back to the point, I don't think I've yet read a book that's claimed to "shake my faith" that actually has shaken my faith. I can see, research, and comprehend things on my own. In fact, what little of The Da Vinci Code I've read so far hasn't even told me anything I didn't know (save that the course of Planet Venus resembles a pentacle - still trying to confirm that).
I wouldn't dislike it so much if it wasn't so dosh garn popular.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:56 am
rockywitch I see also how it can be negative but I think it has opened a lot of peoples ideas and thoughts and it seems to me that more people are doing research in some of the subjects that the book discusses. Especially, Mary Magdalene, the relationship between Mary and Jesus. People even go as far as visiting sites where the actions are claimed to take place. Therefore augmenting the tourist industry and the economy of certain areas. It has also added into the publicity of Leonardo DaVinci's works which I found that people were starting to slip away from. I also find that it has helped people either find new faith in their religion or discover that they dislike it. I don't believe that the book is as bad a thing as people claim. If a book can cause so much research on things that seem to be starting to be forgotten, on economies growing, on knowledge and discovery and a sense of research. I can't see how it's 100% bad and yes, I also see the negative things about it as well. Well, the thing about all that research is it's mostly either fictitious (like "Holy Blood, Holy Grail") or aimed at showing why the fictitious research is wrong. And while it is nice that the DVC publicity has drawn people's attention to art and history, it's doing so by promising them conspiracy theories and thriller stuff. Wouldn't it be better if people were interested in these things because of their own merit, instead of as accessories to a clunky, improbable hackjob of a novel like "The Da Vinci Code"? It's probably illogical on my part, but something about it just annoys me. To put it simply, the reason "The Da Vinci Code" annoys me is the same reason that Britney Spears or Lunchables annoy me: the sight of so many people buying into what is undoubtedly crap. Incidentally, the Priory of Sion was a real organization, started in 1956 by a nutty pretender to the French throne who forged documents to make it seem really old. There's one fact you won't find in Dan Brown's list. For the record, I went to Catholic school for quite a while, and found it perfectly reasonable. So you know where I'm coming from. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:21 pm
No wries, I went to Catholic school for a long time to. I see where you're coming from and yes, I do wish that these things were researched for their own merit but obviously that isn't 100% being done and well, at least they're being researched.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:30 am
I really enjoyed reading the Da Vinci Code. However, I think that its prequel, Angels and Demons, is better (Angels and Demons seems to be much more exciting and fast-paced).
True, the Da Vinci Code is controversial and I believe that the conspiracy theory involved is most likely untrue, but my opinion is that people should take it a lot less seriously and just enjoy reading it as fiction. It's only a novel, none of it is universally accepted fact, and it isn't a law to believe it. As I see it, the book isn't deliberately trying to pick holes in Christianity, it's just trying to provide people with a good, thought-provoking read.
Dan Brown's style of writing isn't brilliant, but I think the plotline makes up for that. Yes, there are some flaws in the theories and such, but it still must have taken a while to research semi-true things and build a story around them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 2:40 am
So far at page hundred and fifty, I can say he still loves abusing chapternumbers...
Some of the plot seemed too obvious without making a cold theory when something may happen.
I have to mention that I read the book in english, surprisingly easy to read to be in foreign language.
When it comes to the popularity, I believe it is connected to conspiracies, which is the theme of the book(s). sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
