posted on March 17, 2005 07:13:48 AM new "All I posted was a review against the book. I said I don't read fiction, because authors try and turn fiction around to sound like truths so that the reader doesn't know the difference."
Libra, if someone doesn't know the difference between truth and fiction, they haven't learned how to read. Such people are often easily confused by Fox News.
Without having read the book, on what basis did you decide to post a review against the book.
posted on March 17, 2005 07:16:23 AM new
Diane - How in the heck you came up with this statement......
Linda and Libra -- So in other words, we should go back to the days of censorship and book burnings because The Vatican and a few other Christians are afraid that certain books may change the beliefs of the faithful?
.....when I have said over and over....
Possibly another book that might interest all those who have read Da Vinci Code....
...is beyond me. But obviously you only read what you wish to read.
----------------
Libra - You got that right.
-------------
Then crowfarm says: bizzy, I get "playful" not nasty and do so whenever linduh has to take everything so seriously. Just proving that she can lie so easily....the lies just roll off his/her tongue. Playful is, in her/his opinion wishing death and illness on others.....yea right. Told you she was/is a very sick person who needs help.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Mar 17, 2005 07:28 AM ]
posted on March 17, 2005 07:31:24 AM new
libra says, ""All I posted was a review against the book. I said I don't read fiction, because authors try and turn fiction around to sound like truths so that the reader doesn't know the difference.""""
Those darn book thingys they invented are sure scary !!!!!!!!
linduh accuses ME of "Playful is, in her/his opinion wishing death and illness on others.....yea right. Told you she was/is a very sick person who needs help.""
linDuh , do you really think if you just keep calling me sick it'll change the fact that I have proved you wrong and backed you into a corner SO MANY TIMES ?????
YOU approve of TORTURE.....isn't that sick?
You approve of death for no reason...the war in Iraq.
You hate the poor especially poor children...how sick is that.
Why don't you quit hiding from the truth by saying, oh, crowfarm is so sick......what a wimp out ! for not ever having a right answer.
posted on March 17, 2005 07:35:21 AM new
Again more and more lies...all for attention. You are worse than 'nasty'. And no, you probably won't seek the help you need. But when you try and project yourself as something your not, deny that you've been much 'nastier'...I WILL point it out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 08:04:25 AM new
I read the book and found some of Brown's ideas as well as some of the historical and biblical issues to be interesting. But I found the actual story to be almost un-readable in terms of its silly plot contrivances and total lack of character development. I didn't care one iota for any of the characters and found most of the scenes and dialogue to be written on the level of, say, a James Patterson novel - which is to say, written by a second or third rate hack (no offense if you like Patterson stuff). If you are someone who likes well crafted fiction, then I think this book will be painfull to read. I finished it more to read the historical ideas presented rather than finding out how the story concluded.
posted on March 17, 2005 08:08:59 AM new
The real sign that someone is losing the argument and knows it.....when they resort to Libra's famous and weak line....
""...all for attention.""
Since this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever .....I've asked before....do YOU post so no one will respond ? ....and have gotten no answer.
So the rules of "COMMON SENSE AS SEEN BY lINDUH AND lIBRA are:
A: If you're right and linduh or libra are wrong then YOU are posting for "attention".
B: LinDUH and libra post hoping to be ignored because THEY never post seeking attention.
posted on March 17, 2005 08:13:09 AM new
I was referring back to my original post. I'm trying to spur a discussion, not a name-calling back and forth he said she said thread. I came here with this topic because I know, after having lurked on some topics, that this is a group of intelligent people and to discuss a book that has spurred controversy.
Libra -- If all you did was post a negative review of the book, then why did you call an author, whom you have never read, a "scumbag"? As for picking the Bible back up again, it wasn't due to religious confusion. It was due to the fact that I realized, after reading this book, how far away I had gotten from my religion (NOT my faith -- that has never waivered).
Libra, if you don't read fiction, do you watch any movies other than documentaries?
posted on March 17, 2005 08:17:05 AM new
fiset -- I think that is what draws so many to this book -- the historical references as well as biblical issues. Did you find yourself looking up some of the issues in the book, such as The Last Supper? Of course, I don't believe the bunk surrounding the Chalice. But, that is what has The Vatican so up in arms!
Diane
Edited to add: Fiset -- Do you have any good books to recommend?
[ edited by bizzycrocheting on Mar 17, 2005 08:36 AM ]
posted on March 17, 2005 08:26:35 AM new
I think a lot of the hubbub comes from the church wanting to present their religion as all "lightness and goodness" when in reality there is a lot of darkness, nastiness, and secret intrigue involved and some can't face that reality.
posted on March 17, 2005 08:36:15 AM new
Diane - I didn't spend any time looking stuff up but I did have some conversations with a few religous people I know to get their opinions, specifically on the subject of Mary Magdelane. I am not a religous person but was interested in learning more about Magdelane as a result of reading the book.
posted on March 17, 2005 08:51:54 AM new
If you like a good mystery
If you enjoy solving puzzles
If you like a good treasure hunt
If you enjoy suspense
If you enjoy opening your mind and thinking outside of the box
If you love twists and turns at every turn of the page..
And if you really like fiction sprinkled with enough truth to make you explore and rekindle your beliefs... then you will love this book.
Fiset..I am sorry that it wasn't your cup of tea.. at least you gave it a read. I didn't
have a problem with getting to know his characters, in fact I saw them vividly. Perhaps it is because I met Robert Langdon in Angels and Demons, before reading Da Vinci Code.. I have to disagree with your comparison of Dan Brown with Patterson's style.. I can't read Patterson's books, they bore me.. but as so many have said about The Da Vinci Code it is a page turner and most had to devour it in great gulps! LOL
Bizzy.. I see that the movie is in the making.. Tom Hanks will play Robert Langdon.. I have mixed feelings about a movie version.... I don't see how they will be able to put the puzzle pieces together, step by step..or go into any depth within a 2 hour movie... But that's my opinion.. I have never preferred a movie version to a book.. And although I adore Tom Hanks.. he isn't how I pictured Robert Langdon..LOL.. I guess My Robert Langdon was more like Harrison Ford..
Thank you Bizzy for posting this topic.. for all of us fellow Code Heads.. it is something we will be talking and thinking about for a long time to come.
posted on March 17, 2005 09:20:00 AM new
Maggie -- I agree with you. I don't think Tom Hanks is the right Robert Langdon. I pictured Harrison Ford, too. Whenever I've read a book prior to seeing the movie, I am inevitably disappointed in the movie.
posted on March 17, 2005 09:26:35 AM newI think a lot of the hubbub comes from the church wanting to present their religion as all "lightness and goodness" when in reality there is a lot of darkness, nastiness, and secret intrigue involved and some can't face that reality.
I'm up to my elbows (literally) in babies here, so I probably won't be back for a while, but this is one of my favorite topics so I'll chime in.
Crowfarm: That's it in a nutshell.
I've read both of the books in question, as well as Brown's "Demons and Angels". I've also read most of the source material Brown used, including "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", "The Hiram Key", "The Gospel of Mary Magdalen"and quite a few others.
First of all, I don't think DaVinci Code is going to shake anyone's sincerely held faith, anymore than I thought Mel Gibson's movie was going to convert anyone to Christianity who wasn't already looking for faith beforehand, so I really don't see what the big deal is. I will say, that the evidence presented in "Cracking the DaVinci Code", does little to refute the actual source material of Brown's book. It comes off as a fairly lame defense of the standard Mary-Mother-of-God viewpoint held in one way or another by most mainstream christian churches. The very idea that somebody would feel threated enough to write a refutation of a work of fiction is almost laughable to begin with. Remember how incensed the whole world was when Ayatollah Komeini or whoever it was put a death sentence on Salman Rushdi because of his book?
What's interesting to me is the fact that there is literally tons of historical source material, lots of it primary (first hand) source material, which when put together coherently, presents a far different view of the history of the modern bible and church than the one the church would like everybody to swallow. Dan Brown has managed to interest the world in this viewpoint for the first time by putting some of the key ideas of that source material together as the basis of a fictional novel. I guess that's what is threatening the churches so much. If that's the case, I say well done Mister Brown!!
Most of you already know that I consider myself a religious person, but I make a huge distinction between personal faith and the dictates of an all too human institution called The Church.
On another note, the count so far is 5 goatlings, 3 foals, and 27 lambs, and still counting. Thank god the girls and their mother are here. They've handled the horses and goats. Sure glad I have lots of sick days stacked up!
Now I'm going to finish my beans and Guinness and head back out.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on March 17, 2005 09:28:54 AM new
one more thing:
You people are all catfighting over books that hardly any of you have read. As my younger daughter would say "what's up with that???"
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on March 17, 2005 09:36:35 AM new
Maggie - I see what you're saying and maybe had I read Angels and Demons I would have felt like I knew the character with more depth. But in the end, good fiction leaves me with a sort of guilty feeling - like I've been a voyeur looking into the characters lives. The scenes and dialouge all ring true and natural. Bad fiction on the other hand, leaves me with the feeling that scenes were made up purely to move the plot; dialouge comes off as corny and/or unrealistic and I never find myself "teleported" (if you will) into the scenes. Stephen King wrote in "On Writing," his excellent book on the craft of fiction writing, that stories are already there and its the authors job to show it to the reader - much in the way an archaeologist brushes the earth away from ancient bones at a dig site. As someone who reads roughly a novel a week, I find that analogy to be a very good one.
In "The DaVinci Code," I found too many of the scenes were written as if Brown was thinking, "hmmm, I want x,y and z to happen later so how can I set that up now?" Many people don't have any problem with that sort of thing (obviously, as the book is still a best seller) but I get frustrated with fiction when obvious plot devices are used and dialogue seems forced or contrived soley for the purpose of moving plot. Of course I understand that the plot must move, its just that the best writers get us there without us even knowing how they did it.
All the above is just one man's opinion, however, and as Dennis Miller used to ssay, "I could be wrong."
posted on March 17, 2005 10:20:30 AM new
Bizzy I don't go to movies. I haven't been to a movie in years. I will not pay the price so that I can inhance someones pocket book. i.e. movie stars.
I do read or listen to book reviews to see if there is something I would like to read. As I said I don't read fiction so therefore that leaves non fiction. I enjoy reading the truth. I enjoy reading biographies.
Tell me is Dan Brown an atheist? That is one question I would like to know. I have found a hint of it but nothing substancal so I will say no more.
I also believe the Catholic Religion in some of their teachings is way off the beaten path but they will never change. I am not Catholic.
posted on March 17, 2005 10:22:05 AM new
Fiset... I have to agree with you that some scenes were contrived and forced.. I suppose I was willing to forgive and ignore the bad taste left by some of the less sophisticated or unrealistic scenes for the mouthwatering delectable morsels of brain candy scattered throughout.
posted on March 17, 2005 10:29:34 AM new
Libra:Tell me is Dan Brown an atheist? That is one question I would like to know I have found a hint of it but nothing substancal so I will say no more.
Reply by Dan Brown
ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN?
Yes. Interestingly, if you ask three people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must accept the Bible as absolute historical fact. Still others require a belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal savior are doomed to hell. Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious--that is, that we are all trying to decipher life's big mysteries, and we're each following our own paths of enlightenment. I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.
posted on March 17, 2005 10:55:56 AM new
Well maggie I found something different. So I guess it is how and why a question is asked.
Now I am not lumping all artists in the same category but they do have different opinions on subjects. Some artists are far out.
Now does the yes mean he is a Christian or does he mean yes there are different approaches to Christianity and he is looking at all of them. By his response He doesn't answer that question fully but with a question mark that should have been after the yes in my opinion. See we all see things differently.
I found another article he wrote on atheism so maybe he is a fence sitter, and really won't say what he is definately...
posted on March 17, 2005 11:31:28 AM new
Libra - So have I and it's my opinion that's why we don't get links to where their info comes from in the first place. Don't want us to even think that a 'person who studies different religions' and then calls himself a Christian is to be taken as 'gospel'. Even he admits...not a Christian in the traditional sense of the word. Yea....make up your own form of Christianity.
They're also incorrect in belittling us about what's truth and fiction in this book also. Surprise, surprise.
---
Q: This novel unearths some surprising Christian history. Are you a Christian?
DB: I am, although perhaps not in the most traditional sense of the word. If you ask three people what it means to be Christian, you will get three different answers. Some feel being baptized is sufficient. Others feel you must accept the Bible as immutable historical fact. Still others require a belief that all those who do not accept Christ as their personal savior are doomed to hell. Faith is a continuum, and we each fall on that line where we may. By attempting to rigidly classify ethereal concepts like faith, we end up debating semantics to the point where we entirely miss the obvious-that is, that we are all trying to decipher life's big mysteries, and we're each following our own paths of enlightenment.
I consider myself a student of many religions. The more I learn, the more questions I have. For me, the spiritual quest will be a life-long work in progress.
[i]and then no wonder so many reviews are claiming this author has presented a lot of fiction as facts.....in several interviews he, himself does exactly that.
Q: How much of this novel is based on fact?
DB: All of it. The paintings, locations, historical documents, and organizations described in the novel all exist.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on March 17, 2005 12:18:36 PM newI suppose I was willing to forgive and ignore the bad taste left by some of the less sophisticated or unrealistic scenes for the mouthwatering delectable morsels of brain candy scattered throughout.
I agree Maggie. I finished the book even though I thought the plot was lame, mostly because of the historical theories Brown was presenting. I don't know that I agree with everything he wrote but it was interesting to think about. I just wish the story would have been better written because I think he had a good idea but just didn't deliver.
posted on March 17, 2005 12:21:19 PM new
Well said Prof!!
Libra, I don't understand why you have to categorize the author as being religious or athiest. What difference does it make? Hopefully, everyone is a fence sitter regarding religion so you're always open to new ways of thinking. Unfortunately, open-minded people aren't appreciated by organized religions. Does that mean it's wrong?
posted on March 17, 2005 12:27:40 PM new
I have to wonder what difference Brown's personal religion makes?
Linda and Libra, if Brown had answered simply "yes. I go to church every sunday, and believe everything my pastor tells me." What would your response be then?
I suppose it's unimportant to you that the power behind "Cracking the DaVinci Code" is an outfit called Cook Communications Ministries. Couldn't possibly be any bias in their research. Nope. None at all.
The book is a work of fiction, based upon historical theories that have always been around. It's just a book. If it shakes anyone's faith, then as far as I'm concerned, their beliefs were built on sand to begin with.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
posted on March 17, 2005 12:39:02 PM new
KD it makes a lot of difference in the approach how someone writes a book. If you are a christian you look at christanity different than an atheist does. In fact an atheist doesn't believe in christanity so why would anyone write on christanity. That is what I was getting at.
posted on March 17, 2005 12:58:32 PM new
Linda -- The book is based on fact. BUT IT IS A WORK OF FICTION. Unless you READ the book you don't understand what those of us who have already read it are saying.
.......
