Hello friends
Welcome to my blog, here in this blog I am talking about one of the famous texts by Dan Brown. That is The Da Vinci Code , published in 2003. This is a mystery thriller novel and it explores an alternative religious history whose central plot point is the bloodline of Jesus and Marry Magdalene. The Da Vinci also provokes an interest in speculation concerning the Holy Grail.
This book is extensively denounced by many Christian denominations as an attack on the Catholic Church, and consistently criticized for its historical and scientific inaccuracies. The novel nonetheless became a massive worldwide bestseller that sold 80 million copies as of 2009 and has been translated into 44 languages.
Brown states on his website that his books are not anti-Christian, though he is on a 'constant spiritual journey' himself, and says that his book The Da Vinci Code is simply "an entertaining story that promotes spiritual discussion and debate" and suggests that the book may be used "as a positive catalyst for introspection and exploration of our faith."
Here in this statement, Brown wants to say that he was not against the Christan realign at all but here he wasn't to say that he wants to promote spiritual discussion and debate. If we are looking for the text in which also we get several clues that realize that this is not an anti Christian text.
Because Robert Langdon argues fiercely in favour of Catholic church with Leigh Teabing. Because Robert Langdon kneels at the Sarcophagus of Mary - and turns out to be yet another Secret Keeper rather than revealer. Because Robert Langdon decides not to destroy the faith.
But In a Way it is not a Christian text at all. Because in the text we can see the various lies there.
There's a lot of debate going on about the text and its historical facts so here I would like to give a review of Marcia Ford. What he was telling ..
" Regardless of whether you agree with Brown's conclusions, it's clear that his history is largely fanciful, which means he and his publisher have violated a long-held if unspoken agreement with the reader: Fiction that purports to present historical facts should be researched as carefully as a nonfiction book would be. "
- Marcia Ford.
So the movie isn't a Christian or anti Christian movie. But we have to debate on all the aspects of the movie's portrayal. It should not be banned. We should accept it as a creative art.
So the text is the Speculative fiction. What is Speculative fiction ? " Speculative fiction is a broad category of fiction encompassing genres with certain elements that are nonexistent in terms of reality, recorded history, or nature and the present universe, covering various themes in the context of the supernatural, futuristic, and many other imaginative topics." So the text is also like certain elements that are non-existent in terms of reality and recorded history.
“Although it is obvious that much of what Brown presented in his novel as absolutely true and accurate is neither of those, some of that material is of course essential to the intrigue, and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman has retained the novel's core, the Grail-related material: the sacred feminine, Mary Magdalene's marriage, the Priory of Sion, certain aspects of Leonardo's art, and so on[1].” How far do you agree with this observation of Norris J. Lacy?
I agree with the observation of Norris J. Lacy. Because whatever things we find in the movie is not absolutely true and accurate. But here we can see that the screenwriter Akiva Goldsman has retained the novel's core, the Grail-related material: the sacred feminine, Mary Magdalene's marriage, the Priory of Sion, certain aspects of Leonardo's art, and so on. That all the things make interesting narratives.
(If)You have studied ‘Genesis’ (The Bible), ‘The Paradise Lost’ (John Milton) and ‘The Da Vinci Code’ (Dan Brown). Which of the narrative/s seems to be truthful? Whose narrative is convincing to the contemporary young mind?
Here would like to say that if we talk about the truthfulness of the narrative of ‘Genesis’ (The Bible), ‘The Paradise Lost’ (John Milton) and ‘The Da Vinci Code’ (Dan Brown), then no one narrative seems to be truthful. Because we can't be reliable on the one way of looking at the story. If we talk about which narrative is convincing to the contemporary young mind. As such any story is not convincing the young minds, because each and every story has blind Faith and lots of lying. But John Milton's Paradise Lost is more convincing than the other two. Because John Milton gave a voice to the Minor characters like Eve ,Adam and Satan. Whether in the Bible they all discriminate by the character of the God. In the Da Vinci Code we find a situation like what to believe or what not to believe that is the big question. Because the lying also comes up with accurate figures and faulty evidence.
Milton gives a voice to Eve but that through he tries to say it should not be done. If women are speaking for herself then that will be a disaster for mankind.
To some extent we can see that Milton's The Paradise Lost is a story of god's punishment to the women So it keeps people in fear while The Da Vinci code tries to prove Jesus as a man in a logical way. So probably the Da Vinci code is more convincing in this era. Because it's tried to prove it's point, only not telling that this is this or that but instead of that in the Da Vinci Code tries to prove some of the process which leads us towards knowledge.
What harm has been done to humanity by the biblical narration or that of Milton’s in The Paradise Lose? What sort of damage does narrative like ‘The Vinci Code’ do to humanity?
According to me, if I considered these three books as creative arts then there would be no problems. But stuck with the book for a very long period of time and following the rules and regulations bliendly then, that is the dangerous thing. Then that definitely does damage to society. In the majority it's damage to the identity of women. Because of this type of text women suffered a lot.
The Da Vinci Code is the religious narrative. So there are many of the complaints centered on the book's speculations and misrepresentations of core aspects of Christianity and the history of the Catholic Church.
If we talk about Mary Magdalene being labeled a prostitute by the Church. But in other references we also come to know that Mary, who was considered a saint to whose honor churches were built. She is also respected as a witness to Christ's resurrection as written in the Gospels. So that is how it damages the mind of the people who are religious. Those who rational think they can understand in a better way.
Let see what the Christian response to the novel is. Archbishop Angelo Amato, the secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a Vatican curial department, specifically called for a boycott of the film version of The Da Vinci Code, characterizing the film as "full of calumnies, offenses, and historical and theological errors." The film was rated as "morally offensive" by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
(Paul Maier)
What difference do you see in the portrayal of 'Ophelia' (Kate Winslet) in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, 'Elizabeth' (Helena Bonham Carter) in Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein or 'Hester Prynne' (Demi Moore) in Roland Joffé's The Scarlet Letter' or David Yates's 'Harmione Granger' (Emma Watson) in last four Harry Potter films - and 'Sophie Neuve' (Audrey Tautau) in Ron Howard's The Da Vinci Code? How would you justify your answer?
Generally If we see the women Character in the movie then we come to know that they are treated women as an object. Camara is mostly focused on the women's body, more attention given to sensual body parts.
So here I am comparing the character of 'Ophelia' (Kate Winslet) in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, 'Elizabeth' (Helena Bonham Carter) in Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein or 'Hester Prynne' (Demi Moore) in Roland Joffé's The Scarlet Letter' or David Yates's 'Harmione Granger' (Emma Watson) in last four Harry Potter films - and 'Sophie Neuve' (Audrey Tautau) in Ron Howard's The Da Vinci Code. So the character of Ophelia is portrayed in a traditional manner. Like not to speak against anything or anyone else. Living for others or do whatever they Father and brother wants. In a way the director portrayed her in traditional sensual women. In the movie we find the sexual scene of Ophelia Weather in the play Ophelia is not like that. Hester Prynne and Elizabeth also in the same way as traditionally focused on the body. Whether in the character of Hermione Granger and Sophie Neveu portrayed as an intellectual and intelligent woman. In the character of Hermione we can sometimes see the camera rounding the body intentionally. But in the movie The Da Vinci Code we couldn't find any single shot where Sophie's body part shows intentionally. And she was looking more bold than other women characters. Her portrayal in the movie was very good and effective.
Work cited :-
Ford, Marcia. "Da Vinci Debunkers: Spawns of Dan Brown's Bestseller". FaithfulReader. Archived from the original on May 27, 2004. Retrieved April 29, 2015.
"New novel from Dan Brown due this fall". San Jose Mercury News. Archived from the original on June 4, 2011. Retrieved January 4, 2011.
Maier, Paul L. "THE DA VINCI CODE: TOOL FOR EVANGELISM?". Christian Research Institute. Retrieved July 31, 2011.
Wyat, Edward (November 4, 2005). "'Da Vinci Code' Losing Best-Seller Status" Archived October 12, 2013, at the Wayback Machine. The New York Times.
Post a Comment