The DaVinci Code

The DaVinci Code
The Dec 8 issue of Newsweek has a fascinating article relating to women in the Bible, and particularly Mary Magdalene, using The DaVinci Code as a springboard. It's long and very thought-provoking.

I read it. I enjoyed it. I didn't like the ending though.

I agree that Brown probably doesn't believe the theory he's presenting, but he knew how intriguing the theory would be. Long before the book was written, conspiracists have been writing about the theories Brown presented in the book. I haven't read any of his other work, but it's obvious to me that he did his fair share of research. Even though the Disney thing sounds pretty farfetched and unbelievable, there are people that have presented this theory before the book was written. I'm not saying I believe it. I'm saying that I don't think that there's anything in the contents of The DaVinci Code that Brown did'nt find while researching.

Also, there are people that not only believe that Shakespeare was a freemason, but that he could've been the founder.

Though Dan Brown doesn't believe in much of what he presented, he is a wacky conspiracy theorist nonetheless.

This definately is not a book I would recommend to minors. The pseudo-history can easily fool many.

After some research I found that the ultra-conservative Catholic organization, Opus Dei, is very accurately presented in the book. Dan Brown even goes out of his way to clarify some of the negative misconceptions about the organization. It is a very contravercial organization even within the Church. Many notable Catholics have critisized them for some of their cultish practices.

Dan Brown seems to have a hidden agenda to shed light on Opus Dei. Even depicting them as un-Catholic.

I just finished this book and loved it! I didn't personally perceive any hint of whether Brown believed the conspiracies that he wrote about or not, but who cares. It was fast-paced, action-packed, and I had fun trying to figure out the puzzles before reading the answers.

I agree with Gus that it could be the next TV mini-series, but it's a good read.

Dear Dashes -- I quite agree that the ending is just a cop-out. He had to end it somehow. Of course he didn't invent any of the conspiracy theories. He just put them all together into one hilarious pile. The references to Walt Disney are just lagniappe. Somebody has just written a historical novel about Mr. and Mrs. Jesus of Nazareth. (Don't remember either author or title; it was reviewd on NPR last week.) Does it surprise anyone that Mrs. Christ is Mary Magdalene? The reason the book is such a runaway best-seller isn't because Brown has anything new in it; it's because he knows how to tell a tale quite breathlessly.

Shakespeare founded the Masons? Now there's a hoot! It would make more sense to claim that Jacques deMolay, the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar (remember the Priory of Sion?), who was burned at the stake in Paris in 1314, was the founder. But a true Widow's Son might have other ideas on that score as well.

BTW, my apologies for being so negligent in getting back to this thread. I was computerless for almost two weeks, could read the posts at internet cafes or public libraries, but couldn't post.

I just finished it!

I loved it!

The ending was definitely a bit of a backpedal -- these nice Opus Dei people are good, pious folk with a few loonies in their ranks, and the modern Catholic church is just so spiritual and pure. But he got plenty of digs in before that.

(edited slightly for possible spoiler)

Glad you liked it, Soz. When you said you were going to read it because of my recommendation, I got this terrible sinking feeling: What have I done? What if people now read it and think I'm a total illiterate for having recommended it?

Yeah, the back-pedalling is a cop-out. He does it a couple of times in the body of the book, too. I got the feeling that this might have been suggested by his editor, though. Can't take the chance of alienating every Roman Catholic who reads. One doesn't make the best-seller lists that way.

I have bought it! I shall read it during me hollies - which have just begun!!!!!

Same for me, Osso. I've gotten some not-very used books through Amazon that weren't in the library, or were on hold longer than I wanted to wait. Try Amazon'e "used" option and see what you come up with.

Can I do discussion that has some spoilers in it? My book club doesn't meet 'til the end of January and I want to get some stuff out before I forget (plus I want your help figuring stuff out.)

Like, the main characters' names HAVE to be anagrams, don't they? "Bezu Fache"??? What are they, though? I haven't been able to figure them out. That one seems like it could end in "zeb" which is nice and Biblical -- backwards it's "ehcafuzeb". Hmmmmmmmmmmm...

I'm sure there are a lot more puzzles in there that weren't explained. I almost thought he wasn't going to explain the very last puzzle! I was looking forward to triumphally revealing it myself. Ah well.

Another thing is probably general enough that I can post before getting a spoiler go-ahead (I hope) -- a huge weakness that I saw was how he ignored the Virgin Mary, cult of the virgin, etc. All the stuff he says about the sacred feminine et al is true, but was transferred rather successfully (certainly not wholly successfully) to the Virgin Mary. Interestingly, another book I read for this book club was "The Secret Life of Bees", which goes into the pagan origins and continuing goddess-worship of the Virgin Mary quite extensively.

So was intellectually dishonest of him to leave that out entirely, IMO. Though I'm sure he did a lot of editing -- for a book that long, it's astoundingly well-paced. Not much extraneous stuff there.

Probably right about pressure from editors, Merry Andrew. At one point, about midway through, I was thinking "how on earth did he even get this published much less make it a best-seller??" The "new Pope" thing is another backpedal.

This looks interesting:

http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/davinci/

Wow...cool, Sozobe! Except now I've got to go study the cover -- it will drive me mad, I'm sure!

About the names...not sure about the inspector, but my husband, who has (gulp) read about the Mary Magdalene/Jesus bloodline for years, says that Sauniere is the name of the priest at a church in France, Rennes le Chateau.

http://www.sauniere.cjb.net/

Bezu is a castle with historical links to the Templar.

Leigh Teabing is a play on the three authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, a book mentioned in said character's house, and the source of most of Brown's ideas within the narrative. The book was by Lincoln, Leigh, and Baigent. So, Leigh stays as Leigh, Baigent is scrambled to become Teabing, and Lincoln (being the only Englishman of the three authors) makes the character English.

Sauniere is based on Berenger Sauniere, the priest of Rennes-le-Chateau. His name was the fourth word in the story and, from that, I had the measure of it.

Sorry, Merry Andrew, but the history is not accurate at all. Brown makes mention of the Vatican and blood running fown the Tiber but at the date he specifies the papacy was located in Avignon and not Italy.

Constantine didn't make the modern Bible. As recent as 200 years ago, the Book of Enoch was removed.

There are others but, to be honest, the book is poor - a cut and paste of tourist sites and museum plaques, and a film script dressed as prose - and I don't want to waste more time on it.

Hi Mile-O-Phile, thanks!!! The names had been bothering me for a while.

I agree that it's a rather haphazard cut-and-paste job, historically speaking, but taken on its own terms -- a pot-boiler -- I thought it was well done. Great pacing.

The cut and past job was descriptively speaking, and not historically - that was just invented.

If you enjoyed it then, if you feel like tackling something similar but more rewarding then I suggest Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco. That's how you deal with conspiracy, and that's how it gets to you.

Oh, I've read it. Liked it.

I thought Brown was very influenced by Eco, that and "The Name of the Rose."

A lot of the historical stuff was invented, a lot was taken completely out of context, but that doesn't mean it was ALL invented -- there are kernels in there.

I don't think anyone is positing that "The Da Vinci Code" is Serious Literature. It was a lark, I enjoyed it.

Then again, I don't have any particular religious baggage, and I know that some people found it deeply offensive.

Nobody's saying that it's serious literature and I understand that because it isn't.

Yeah, he was definitely influenced by Eco; I think he tried to do a mainstream version of Foucault's Pendulum but found that he couldn't play with history and determine the links as well. Eco had already done the Mickey Mouse angle, anyway. Why bother?

"Sauniere is based on Berenger Sauniere, the priest of Rennes-le-Chateau."

I'm glad you mentioned that, I was just going to ask. Some say he found the Knights Templar treasure, since he was dirt poor in 1885 and then became inexplicably rich within years. When he died, the priest who heard his final confession was so shocked that he denied Sauniere last rites and would not grant his absolution.

As far as your comment about psuedo-history, yelloman, ALL history is essentially pseudo-history. How do we REALLY know who wrote what book about what event and when? This book is just as acurate as any history text book, or any other work of fiction for that matter.

By the way, I realise this thread isn't quite new, but I just stumbled on it and thought Id post. I know NOTHING about this board, so if anyone wants to help me out it would be greatly appriciated.

Hi Jacci, and welcome!

Looks like you know all of the important stuff already (how to post, etc.) but lemme know if you have any questions.

Good point about pseudo-history.