altajoe

First, I agree with Starrsville, reading is reading. In this day and age where video rules, its good to know that there is something out there that can get people curled up in front of the fireplace, instead of in their barcolounger with the built in cup-holders.

Secondly, as far as the fact vs fiction aspect. My personal opinion is that the buzz created by the book has lead DB, his publisher and his publicist to spend more time and effort into hinting at the possible validity of the premise than was originally planned. After all, this is a commercial enterprise, not a religious recruitment white-paper.

Thirdly. the debunkers are themselves working from "works" that may have less validity to them than anything that DB will ever write. Again, JHMO

JJ5

I didn't re-read the entire thread. If people read just cereal box backs I would be happy, but there is something that REALLY bothers me, not about the book, but about the REACTION to the book.

You have no idea how many twenty somethings here (USA-walking around, discussing in class, and writing articles in college newspapers etc.) who believe that this is true or semi-true. They have absolutely no context on Jewish law or tradition, sexual mores anything-but are swallowing this tale whole. It is not historic, and it is fiction.

Robespierre

"I got the impression that is was writing a work of fiction that 'connects the dots' of theories, legends, etc. that gives a possible situation."

"As an educator, I am thrilled..."

Wow.

JJ5

Yes, what does that say about where the education process has headed. Good observation.

Where can the imperative, definitive, or scienctifically proven fact stand within that expressed context of what "truth" is and how it is to be attained, idealistically or not? Yipes!

starrsville

Wow is right. Do your own little experiement and ask adults you respect how many books they have read in the last year. It is shocking to "readers" how little reading adults - including very successful ones - actually do.

Whether or not a person can read, MAY have something to do with the educational system. Whether or not a person CHOOSES to read when they can read is due to far, far many more variables than the educational system. JMHO of course

starrsville

Sorry for the "inventive spelling" of experiement. Should have previewed before posting.

starrsville

Now, how could I possibly do that twice in a row? Experiment!

AyQuehago

I read both books and I could not put them down. I don't know much about great writting but they sure kept me entretained...I read TDVC first and then read A&D, I loved them but and I honestly felt like I was reading the same story twice....only minor changes. I was not happy when I heard Tom Hanks was cast for the role...I really can't see it!

sweetpea15

I actually listened to the De Vinci Code on tape, when I went on vacation to San Diego. I LOVED it. Me and my family would find our selves leaving the hotel early just so we could hear more of the book! I'm a big fan.

starrsville

AhQuehago, I totally agreed with you. I was dismayed when I heard he was cast - just could not "see" him in that role.

But, I did see an excerpt of the film on TV recently, and enjoyed it. They were able to film in the Louvre and the segment I saw was absolutely amazing. They had to use a stand-in for the Mona Lisa though

BTilke

Opinion on the novel's quality aside ;-) , I am just amazed that this book continues to sell in such large numbers. Why on earth would anyone still pay retail prices for it? Every one of the charity shops where I live has at least half a dozen to a dozen paperback and hardback copies on their shelves, most in pristine condition and priced under £1.

SAnParis

It is total escapism so I guess it depends on what you are looking for. I preferred The Da Vinci code simply because I am more familiar w/Paris, & it evoked some good memories as well. I would love to hear what the critics read for pleasure. I like the 'Doc Ford' (by Randy Wayne White) novels as well (try his "Last Flight Out" for some good travel reading). As well as Peter Mayle. But when in the proper frame of mind, I also like a little Hemingway or Sartre. It depends, you know ?

karens

I have an aside on readers v. non-readers. I am a HUGE reader - I read fiction and non-fiction about almost everything I am interested, from travel to art, the NBA to cooking to whatever. My husband doesn't read at all (except for Newsweek).

When my kids were young, we made many trips to the library for books for them and me. We would always go in the late morning, when most people are at work. One day my son, then 4, saw a middle-aged man in the library. He thought that was odd and said, "mom, there's a man at the library!". My first thought was, well, uh, men CAN read, you know. He just was not used to seeing his dad read, or seeing any men at library and he thought that remarkable. Sigh.

My son's school stresses reading and makes the kids read books of their own every quarter. Each of my sons has a huge bookshelf in their room stocked with used books sale findings - all sorts of non-fiction and fiction. They've barely look at 75% of the books. Sigh.

JJ5

I too, karens, a constant reader among men who read when they HAVE too. No one role modeled it better. Read to them constantly. None like to read as much as I, all are math/numbers people even within their jobs. Only my daughter will read some fiction.

But that any poster liked DVC, or that you rec it, is not my objection at all. There are two separate issues here. Totally separate. It's the acceptable "opinion" interpretation of what this story represents that bothers me. And the people who categorize that that assumption is acceptable and part of some learning process. Fiction is fiction. Historical fiction is based on some historical facts. This is not culturally historical. It's like having Jesus look at his wristwatch.

Minimally the person who writes about a time in history should have some grasp of the gender and cultural roles and strictures of that time.

Regardless of how little some people read, when they do, they still should never believe that fiction is fact or that because it is in print it is a scholarly or truthful measure of an historic period. They aren't educated until they know context of reality in what they read. Not just because they do read.

Young people are walking around quoting this social context as if it had some basis in Jewish reality.

altajoe

JJ5, I have a problem with your base premise, ie. that what we believe is history is indeed fact. Much of the western belief system is based on writings by a closed society of individuals that had a vested interest in their writings being taken as "believe or burn in hell" fact.

I look at most of the passages in the old and new testaments as fiction. Their message is what is important, not the validity of the sequence of events.

I don't think that DB wrote the DVC or A&D to be message pieces. I don't believe that he intended them to re-write history. But, if today's youth believe that women's position in society has been unjustly diminished by religious leadership, and it leads to a change, then I'm all for it.

If it points out that giving yourself over, mind body and soul to a small group of individuals pretending to be following the will of god, is dangerous, then again, I'm all for it.

karens

I'll never forget one of my favorite college professors telling me about how SHOCKED her freshmen classes are when she tells them that she disagrees with something that was in a book she assigned them to read. They ask her: you disagree? - but it's in a book! (b/c if it's in a book - it must be true!) And if she disagreed, why did she have them read it?

Maybe more critical thinking classes are needed at the high school level.

I know we've gotten off topic, but I am enjoying reading all the discussion here.

JJ5

I did not say all recorded history was truth. Yes, it is always tinted through the eyes of the recorder, especially economically and socially tinted. But then again there are also archeological and historical relics telling their own tales as well. Some now are time frame provable scientifically. And this is not about the Bible at all- but about the area that is now Israel and surrounds circa the 1st Century.

And I would have no problem with your two queries. But that's not what I'm objecting to or what I'm hearing.

A female who wrote better than Shakespeare could have lived in 2 B.C. and all humanity would have missed her work because she was too busy carrying water 4 hours a day and was never physically alone at any time or had any space to write during her entire lifetime. But if she did or could learn to write, she would not have written in Shakespearean English. That's the kind of jump in logic that is being made.
We "are" of our time and place.

People are not seeing the context. The context for Jewish law, mores, sexual/social roles in this book is incorrect. And they are assuming that it is possible. And then going on to premise all kinds of modern agendas from that assumption. As if they followed.

starrsville

Just found this website. Maybe helpful for those who may be reading the book (not the illustrated version) and want to see some of the locales -

http://www.danbrown.com/secrets/davi...de/louvre.html

AnthonyGA

It is a work of fiction and the things it says are not necessarily true. But it doesn't really matter, because the things it talks about aren't really important, either, except to a few specialists. The world continues to turn either way, and people who read it are entertained by it (although I didn't see much entertaining about it myself—I read DVC only because it took place largely in Paris and France).

starrsville

From the Broadway play, Wicked, soundtrack =

ELPHABA(spoken) So you lied to them.

WIZARD
(spoken) Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."