Da Vinci
I recently went over to the Tecumseh branch of the ACPL and picked up a bookmark that looked interesting. The top line reads: GUYS READ, FOR GUYS ONLY. The description on the next line is: "Are you a guy? Are you tired of reading what everyone else tells you to read? Read what you want, when you want and talk about it with other guys!" I thought that actually sounded kinda cool, maybe I would drop by sometime. Unfortunately, I got home and kept reading: Ages 9-12. D'oh! :_(
So, I finally borrowed The Da Vinci Code (by Dan Brown) from the library to see what all the fuss is about. I will admit, it reads quickly and is pretty engaging. I got a small paperback version, but also reserved an illustrated copy which included pictures of all the artwork -- that was pretty cool, it was interesting to actually see what he was describing when sculptures or paintings were involved. Some of the theories are interesting, but most are way off.
It's especially irritating when Brown modifies church history to make things more exciting. In particular, the portrayal of the Council of Nicea is very distorted. First off, he claims that the vote was about whether Jesus is actually divine, which is patently false. The debate was regarding Jesus' exact relation to the Father, whether he is the same or a similar "substance." Arius, whom the controversy is named for, still believed Jesus was divine but that maybe he wasn't quite part of the "one God" described in the Old Testament. The final vote, which Brown claims was "relatively close," was actually a landslide -- only two bishops out of 250-318 (the exact attendance is unknown due to varying accounts) sided with the Arians. (See article on this subject by Bart D. Ehrman.) Brown also claims this is where the formal decision was made by Constantine and the bishops to discard Mary Magdelene's role in the church. Now, there are some earlier writings by the Apostolic Fathers (the generation after the original apostles) that take a rather derogatory tone towards women. However, these were all widely known and accepted leaders of the faith, not fringe elements who started claiming "secret knowledge" in Gnostic writings. None of these leaders mention Mary Magdalene as having special status or being the actual head of the church. It's a little hard to believe that all of those church leaders would be predisposed to disregard Mary M. within one generation, isn't it? Even Origen, considered fairly wacky by today's theology and Christian philosophy, does not even hint of such things.
More oddly, Brown claims that Constantine was an ardent pagan who wanted to fuse the old traditions with this new fast-rising faith. If that were the case, wouldn't he exert all of his will to make sure the traditional goddess symbols did become incorporated into Christianity, not excluded? The theory is that Constantine needed to "make" Jesus divine by elevating him above earthly concerns, that siring a child with Mary Magdalene would be seen as making him a mere mortal and not worthy of worship. And yet, it is because Jesus supposedly did have a child with Mary Magdalene which makes her the object of suppressed reverence! How is it that having a child together detracts from his divinity and adds to hers? Why does she then become the essence of the sacred feminine?
The greatest irony of this book is that Brown claims the Roman Catholic Church denies the "sacred feminine" and will do anything to suppress the role of women in religion -- has he ever noticed the other Mary? Mary Magdelene has traditionally gotten the short end of the stick, even the Vatican has officially repudiated the whole convoluted theory that she was a whore. However, Mary the mother of Jesus is very much a revered part of the church and its traditions. Brown neglects to mention that Pope John Paul II was this close to declaring Mary to be "Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate for all Christians." Depending on your point of view, this may or may not be considered gross heresy. The point being, it doesn't sound like the church is trying very hard to suppress reverence for a woman. So, all his arguments fall pretty flat when you take 1.3 seconds to remember this fact. Oops!
Overall, it's an interesting read and I am glad I can converse intelligently about it now. Even Newsweek debunks basic premises of the book (like noting that scholars overwhlemingly agree it's St. John in The Last Supper and not Mary M.), this is not the work of some fanatical Christian publication trying desperately to maintain a grip on "the masses." If you take the story in the vein of "The CIA is trying to take over the world" or "Fluoride is a form of mind control," you will be OK. If you think this is an accurate depiction of history that mistakenly got shelved in the Fiction section somehow, you're in trouble.
I also read Serenity: Those Left Behind, which is a graphic novel by Joss Whedon and a couple others. It fills in the gap between the end of the Firefly TV series and the Serenity movie, with details such as why Shepherd Book left the ship and what happened to the blue-handed fellows. My only real complaint was that it could have been longer! It feels a little thrown together, some plot points suddenly seem to resolve in a few frames or the action doesn't quite jive. Given how thoughtful Whedon usually is about his characters and their actions, it's slightly disappointing. Still, it's a good read and it's nice to fill in those gaps if you are a fan. If you are one, I recommend it; if not, you will survive without picking it up.
By the way, I watched Last Comic Standing this week and thought it was pretty good. I thought the only irritating part was that they had a bunch of "next stage" envelopes for L.A. (about a dozen), and only 2-4 for other cities like Tempe and Miami. Now, I am willing to concede that maybe the editing had something to do with the fact that some of the L.A. people who got through didn't seem as funny as some comics from other cities. However, wouldn't they be showing the best lines from each of their acts? I guess there's a chance some of the West Coast comics might have been more consistent overall rather than just a couple good lines, but still -- I have my doubts. Are they trying to save money by giving out a bunch of envelopes in L.A. and then only having to fly the minimum number of people out for the show? WTF?! That really sucks, I hope that is not the case. Well, it was still funny and I plan to watch tonight. Something a little different, I like that. Odd to watch it without Jay Mohr, but I think it will still be a good show.
So, I finally borrowed The Da Vinci Code (by Dan Brown) from the library to see what all the fuss is about. I will admit, it reads quickly and is pretty engaging. I got a small paperback version, but also reserved an illustrated copy which included pictures of all the artwork -- that was pretty cool, it was interesting to actually see what he was describing when sculptures or paintings were involved. Some of the theories are interesting, but most are way off.
It's especially irritating when Brown modifies church history to make things more exciting. In particular, the portrayal of the Council of Nicea is very distorted. First off, he claims that the vote was about whether Jesus is actually divine, which is patently false. The debate was regarding Jesus' exact relation to the Father, whether he is the same or a similar "substance." Arius, whom the controversy is named for, still believed Jesus was divine but that maybe he wasn't quite part of the "one God" described in the Old Testament. The final vote, which Brown claims was "relatively close," was actually a landslide -- only two bishops out of 250-318 (the exact attendance is unknown due to varying accounts) sided with the Arians. (See article on this subject by Bart D. Ehrman.) Brown also claims this is where the formal decision was made by Constantine and the bishops to discard Mary Magdelene's role in the church. Now, there are some earlier writings by the Apostolic Fathers (the generation after the original apostles) that take a rather derogatory tone towards women. However, these were all widely known and accepted leaders of the faith, not fringe elements who started claiming "secret knowledge" in Gnostic writings. None of these leaders mention Mary Magdalene as having special status or being the actual head of the church. It's a little hard to believe that all of those church leaders would be predisposed to disregard Mary M. within one generation, isn't it? Even Origen, considered fairly wacky by today's theology and Christian philosophy, does not even hint of such things.
More oddly, Brown claims that Constantine was an ardent pagan who wanted to fuse the old traditions with this new fast-rising faith. If that were the case, wouldn't he exert all of his will to make sure the traditional goddess symbols did become incorporated into Christianity, not excluded? The theory is that Constantine needed to "make" Jesus divine by elevating him above earthly concerns, that siring a child with Mary Magdalene would be seen as making him a mere mortal and not worthy of worship. And yet, it is because Jesus supposedly did have a child with Mary Magdalene which makes her the object of suppressed reverence! How is it that having a child together detracts from his divinity and adds to hers? Why does she then become the essence of the sacred feminine?
The greatest irony of this book is that Brown claims the Roman Catholic Church denies the "sacred feminine" and will do anything to suppress the role of women in religion -- has he ever noticed the other Mary? Mary Magdelene has traditionally gotten the short end of the stick, even the Vatican has officially repudiated the whole convoluted theory that she was a whore. However, Mary the mother of Jesus is very much a revered part of the church and its traditions. Brown neglects to mention that Pope John Paul II was this close to declaring Mary to be "Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, and Advocate for all Christians." Depending on your point of view, this may or may not be considered gross heresy. The point being, it doesn't sound like the church is trying very hard to suppress reverence for a woman. So, all his arguments fall pretty flat when you take 1.3 seconds to remember this fact. Oops!
Overall, it's an interesting read and I am glad I can converse intelligently about it now. Even Newsweek debunks basic premises of the book (like noting that scholars overwhlemingly agree it's St. John in The Last Supper and not Mary M.), this is not the work of some fanatical Christian publication trying desperately to maintain a grip on "the masses." If you take the story in the vein of "The CIA is trying to take over the world" or "Fluoride is a form of mind control," you will be OK. If you think this is an accurate depiction of history that mistakenly got shelved in the Fiction section somehow, you're in trouble.
I also read Serenity: Those Left Behind, which is a graphic novel by Joss Whedon and a couple others. It fills in the gap between the end of the Firefly TV series and the Serenity movie, with details such as why Shepherd Book left the ship and what happened to the blue-handed fellows. My only real complaint was that it could have been longer! It feels a little thrown together, some plot points suddenly seem to resolve in a few frames or the action doesn't quite jive. Given how thoughtful Whedon usually is about his characters and their actions, it's slightly disappointing. Still, it's a good read and it's nice to fill in those gaps if you are a fan. If you are one, I recommend it; if not, you will survive without picking it up.
By the way, I watched Last Comic Standing this week and thought it was pretty good. I thought the only irritating part was that they had a bunch of "next stage" envelopes for L.A. (about a dozen), and only 2-4 for other cities like Tempe and Miami. Now, I am willing to concede that maybe the editing had something to do with the fact that some of the L.A. people who got through didn't seem as funny as some comics from other cities. However, wouldn't they be showing the best lines from each of their acts? I guess there's a chance some of the West Coast comics might have been more consistent overall rather than just a couple good lines, but still -- I have my doubts. Are they trying to save money by giving out a bunch of envelopes in L.A. and then only having to fly the minimum number of people out for the show? WTF?! That really sucks, I hope that is not the case. Well, it was still funny and I plan to watch tonight. Something a little different, I like that. Odd to watch it without Jay Mohr, but I think it will still be a good show.