Archive for The Da Vinci Code
I’ve had a very long and busy week, so anything I’m now posting is already old news . . . but I’m going ahead anyway.
Last Tuesday afternoon, May 2, I went to a special event at the Tribeca Film Festival — a panel discussion called “What would Jesus . . . Direct?” All the people on the panel were Christians involved in the film industry. They discussed how Hollywood is waking up to the fact that there is a huge Christian audience out there, but they really don’t know how to reach us.
The talk soon turned to the upcoming Da Vinci Code movie. Cuba Gooding Jr. seemed to get the most microphone time — but then he is an Academy-award -winning actor (and does ever know it!) He made some good points. Among them, that the Christian audience does have a good sense about movies that would be worthwhile from their viewpoint. Back in 1981, when Chariots of Fire came out, Christians and others turned out for a film no one had heard of and made it a hit. Now with the Da Vinci Code, he said “they will have it on their radar — and if they sense it isn’t something they want, they won’t come, and the film will flop” (or words to that effect).
This made things a bit difficult for another panel member, Jonathan Bock, president of Grace Hill Media, who was working with Sony on the marketing campain for The Da Vinci Code. He declined to say much about his work on it, but insisted the film was a great opportunity to “engage the culture” and get “dialogue” going. “After all,” he said, “when was the last anyone cared about what happened at the Council of Nicaea?”
It’s hard to blame him for defending his work — which is one of trying to minimize the damage that the book and movie are causing, engaging in dialogue and debating the very real issues involved. But forgive me for being a little dubious. Of course, any of us who are able to and who have read the book, should by all means engage in dialogue with those who want to. I’ve done so myself. Just the other day, a young colleague at work, who had just recently returned to the Catholic Church, asked me about the truth of the “historical” claims in it. She had not read it, but was certainly curious. I gave her the straight dope, and she seemed satisfied.
But there is a whole other group of people, the Da Vinci Code “true believers,” who cannot be brought to engage in dialogue. When they listen to our explanations of the truth, they tend to reply “Oh, you Catholics are brainwashed — you’ll believe anything your Church tells you,” or “the Church is afraid — anything they say is just more lies to maintain power.” Most of them are led not by belief in Dan Brown so much as anger against the Church. Many don’t care about truth, but cling to the book because it’s what they want to believe. It’s very hard to debate when one side is interested in truth, and the other is wandering in a crackpot fantasyland. The claims in the DVC are, to borrow one of my favorite phrases from C. S. Lewis, nonsense that has not even risen to the dignity of error. Discussion here is not going to do much good — and the movie is going to fuel the fire.
Certainly there are issues that need to be cleared up - the reasons for believing in the divinity of Jesus, the truth of the Gospels, the too-negative attitude of some Christians toward sex, the Church’s treatment of women — but if you are going to seriously tackle these things, it would be best to leave The Da Vinci Code out of the discussion altogether, since it only spreads error and confusion.
Above all, the main reason not to go see the film continues to be the fact that we would be putting money into the pockets of people who are defaming Christ and insulting the Church. Let’s not let Sony sucker us in to get our money to support blasphemy. If you want to read the book in order to be prepared for questions, please do — but borrow it from the library, or, as I did, from a friend.
And the “Othercott” is gaining steam — more than 16,000 hits on Google as of today! Also an article in the New York times on Thursday.
See you at Over the Hedge on May 19!
Filed under: Film, The Da Vinci Code, Writing | |No Comments
Though I’ve blogged about The Da Vinci Code, I haven’t yet described the strange experience of actually reading it. It’s so hard to give the 2 or 3 people left in the world who haven’t experienced this wonder of a book a proper idea of the superior cheesiness of its dumb thriller plot, the sublime wackiness of its bug-eyed “secrets” and “revelations,” the . . . well you get the idea.
Above all, they have missed the fever of its author’s enthusiasm for the “sacred feminine” — though this is certainly very widespread in culture today. But nowhere will you find it as you do in DVC. We not only learn, as everyone knows by now, that Jesus was really just the hanger-on, that Mary Magdalen is the real divine figure, the religious link to the goddess in every woman - the feminine principle the male-dominated church has been oppressing for centuries. We also learn that the hero, Robert Langdon, wears a Mickey Mouse wrist watch — in honor of the divine Disney figure of Sleeping Beauty, made so drowsy by patriarchial oppression — or maybe just by the droning nature of the prose. This particular revelation is where I finally lost it, and gave in to the giggles.
I don’t want to give the impression that I think that patriarchal oppression is a laughing matter. Particularly when it comes to the very real sins of the Church towards women in the past - part and parcel of what society has done to them, and the Church, holy though she may be in her essence, is always part of a sinful society (Hey, did the author even realize that the Church he sees as so oppressive of women is actually always described as feminine?).
But surely inquiring minds (at least 2 or 3 of them) want to know: what does the religion of the goddess and the “sacred feminine” offer that is so much better than what the Church has given women? What exactly does The Da Vinci Code’s goddess stand for? What does she do? Darned if I know, and, as I’ve said, I’ve read the book. The closest I can come to an actual answer is that she stands for the principles of tantric sex. Yep, that’s it. The divine earth mother sexuality in every woman is the means for the male partner, as the moment of greatest pleasure, to experience the divine - what women get out of it isn’t mentioned. Oh, I forgot, they’re already divine. Is this all the revelation we’re going to get? That’s what a goddess woman is for? To give men pleasure? Well, they certainly have for centuries, but what’s so liberating for women in it?
Now I believe, and the best writers in the Church, starting with St. Paul, have always believed that the physical love of man and wife should be a divine mystery of self-giving, like the relationship between Christ and the Church. But it’s not likely to come about through tantric techniques, or we women imagining that we’re already divine. It comes about through the effort to overcome the self, through mutual self-sacrificing love, which isn’t very popular with Da Vinci Code devotees searching for an easy fix religion. Nor will such a religion give any cure for the real source of oppression, one which Langdon and crew don’t seem too eager to search for — inside the human heart and its sinfulness.
Most of all, this feeble and impoverished conception of women conceals from them their real greatness. Some of the greatest women in history have a divine aura of a quite different kind about them — the saints, not imagined “goddesses” pasted over the image of saints like Mary Magdalen.
This brings me to the reason I haven’t blogged for almost a month. I’ve been given an assignment by Minister General and Vicar General of the Franciscan Third Order in Rome, to revise my doctoral dissertation on St. Elizabeth of Hungary and to translate some of the earliest sources on her life in time for the eighth centenary of her birth in 2007. This is going to keep me very busy for some months, but for me, it’s a glorious and longed-for opportunity to let people know more about one of the strongest and most compelling women in history.
Elizabeth, the daughter of King Andrew II of Hungary, was brought up in Germany and married to Landgraf Ludwig IV of Thuringia. At one of the most glittering courts in Europe, with a husband and children she was devoted to, she became aware of the suffering and misery outside the walls of her castle. She founded a hospital, cared for the poor, and comforted lepers in person. When she became aware that much of the suffering was due to unjust taxation, she refused to eat any food taken from the poor peasants in this fashion — perhaps history’s first boycott. Though her husband supported her, she became a scandal among many at the court. When her Ludwig died, Elizabeth was cast out with her children. She gladly accepted suffering with the poor as one of them. Devoting herself to God, she donned the habit of the Franciscans and worked for the rest of her short life in a hospital for the destitute. She went from being her country’s Princess Diana to its Mother Teresa. She is still loved and remembered and celebrated 800 years after her death as an example of courage, love and selfless dedication.
.jpg "St. Elizaberth of Hungary by Hans Holbein the Elder")
If an “oppressive” Church can produce a woman like that, what kind of woman would a truly liberated society produce?
Forgive me, though, for thinking that real liberation is going to come from somewhere besides the teachings in the Da Vinci Code.
Filed under: Dan Brown, Myths and Mythology, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, The Da Vinci Code | |No Comments
The news is spreading about the Da Vinci Code “Othercott.” This past weekend I attended a seminar in New York for aspiring Christian screenwriters hosted by Act One. Many of those attending had already heard of the plans for attending a film other than DVC on the weekend of May 19. Many were giving the news to those who had already heard it. So far the plan has been publicized on blogs, podcasts and Christian radio stations.
It has also just made the pages of one of America’s premier Catholic publications, Our Sunday Visitor, in an article titled “The Da Vinci Code Wars.” Reporting on Janet Batchler’s “Othercott” initiative, author, Colleen Carroll Campbell, writes:
It’s not a bad idea. America’s movie moguls may be insenstive boors when it comes to religion and morality, but they are acutely aware when it comes to the bottom line. . . In the week before the [Oscars], a poll from MSNBC.com and Zogby International found that 60 percent of Americans believe Hollywood’s values are at odds with those of most Americans. Had Hollywood producers been listening, they might have discovered a reason for our declining interest in our work. But movie moguls are a tone-deaf lot, and in the end, the ring of the cash register may be the only message they can hear. (OSV, April 9, 2006, p. 17).
This initiative is already becoming popular. Stay tuned . . . and don’t forget to go to the movies on May 19!
Filed under: Film, The Da Vinci Code | |No Comments
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail, are now suing author Dan Brown for plagiarism over his book The Da Vinci Code.
On one side, the authors of the 1982 (supposed) non-fiction best-seller claiming Christ isn’t divine and that the Church is a fraudulent murdering institution, say that Mr. Brown not only stole the conclusions reached in their book, but also copied whole passages. Brown and his lawyers in turn insist that “you can’t copyright history.”
Here’s a snippet of Mark Shea’s DVC blog:
One of my readers astutely pointed out that the authors of Holy Blood Holy Grail seemed to him to be tacitly acknowledging they had written fiction with this suit. After all, nobody sues a World War II historian for stealing the idea that Hitler invaded Poland. That’s because historical events are facts and nobody can lay claim to them as intellectual property. So if it’s an historic “fact” that Jesus was a dead rabbi with a pregnant girlfriend, then what’s the point of suing somebody for saying so? But if it’s a fictional conceit, then the authors of HBHG have every right to sue Brown for stealing their idea.
That’s right — if Baigent and Leigh stick to their claim that their book is non-fiction or history, they are unlikely to get a dime, but if they would simply admit, “all right Dan Brown stole our TOTALLY FICTIONAL concept and plot,” then the Da Vinci Code author could end up paying them a hug amount of money.
Come on guys, you know you want to. . . Think of all the money - and if you do, the world’s Christians will get satisfaction.
Will greed win out over bigotry? Stay tuned . . .
Filed under: Film, The Da Vinci Code | |No Comments
It launches on May 19. Not the invasion of Europe, but the storming of theaters by the film version of The Da Vinci Code. Some of my Christian friends online are debating whether to go to the movie — or even read the book.
On one hand, we have to be informed. When we discuss the ludricous historical errors, distortions and blasphemies in the book with those who have read it, as soon as they find out we haven’t read it, it’s likely to stop the discussion right there. Nobody wants our opinion on something we’re ignorant of. But reading the book or seeing the movie will put money into the coffers of the publisher and filmmakers.
Now Sony has put up a web site so that Christians can “discuss” and ‘”respond to” upcoming film. The publicity team for The Da Vinci Code have long been making it known that they are seeking some “Passion dollars” for their film. They’re referring of course, to the over $300 million earned by The Passion of the Christ, much of it contributed by Christians, Hollywood’s newly-discovered audience.
One thing is clear to me. Every person who has read and believed the book or at least has become interested in it is a soul for whom Christ died, someone who deserves and needs to know the truth. Many people who have wandered far from Him over the years may have become interested again. Many who left the Church long ago, still have some respect for the person of Jesus. Some who know little about Him have become interested for the first time. We don’t dare not be informed; we don’t dare not respond. Here’s a free way to get yourself better informed.
But at the same time we have to send a clear message to those who promote and stand to make money off the Christian audience through something that is an offense to all Christians. We need to state loud and clear that we aren’t playing along with them.
That’s why I’m very glad to spread the word about this initiative, started by Jan the Maven. In short, let’s vote with our feet, with our box office dollars and see a movie on the weekend of May19 - any good movie EXCEPT The Da Vinci Code. You see, Hollywood is still hoping that the Christian audience is a small one. Yes, at first they thought the Christians who went to The Passion were just a few people dredged up from under rocks in the Bible Belt — people “who otherwise never go to the movies.” They’ve eventually learned they can’t exactly ignore us, but they still hope we’re not that important. Staying home won’t prove how big an audience we really are (80 percent of the country, actually). Staying home won’t send the message that Christians can make or break a film at the box office.
And if anyone knows of a way to advertise and promote this initiative in the media, let’s do it. Because we should let them know why.
Filed under: Film, The Da Vinci Code | |No Comments
||Next Entries »
