The Da Vinci Code (Part 1)

A coworker asked my opinion of the fanatically best-selling Dan Brown book, The Da Vinci Code. I qualified my negative remarks by stating that I had not read it. “Would you like to?” he asked. I told him that I was not going to buy the book but if he wanted to loan it to me I’d give him a full report. And so it is.

When reading a good book, I can’t wait to hit the hay. (The bed’s my place for pleasure reading.) This book was that book. Though surprised by shoddy scholarship, I found the tale quite a ride.

Brown’s got enough money not to be bothered by negative remarks, let alone mine. Besides, in his line of work, all publicity is good publicity. My one stylistic criticism would be the “Batman Factor”. I grew up watching the 60’s Batman TV show and you always knew when each episode was about to end because it followed the same formula: Batman and Robin — after lots of Kapows!, Blams! , and Zonks! — had once again been caught. By all indications they were moments away from certain death and, well … “tune in next week, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel.”

The Da Vinci Code follows the same formula — so much so that it began to be predictable by mid-read. Not, mind you, the plot twists so much as the commercial (sleep) breaks.

I commented to a colleague that Salmon Rushdie wrote one sentence dissing Mohammed and Muslims put out a contract on his life. Dan Brown writes a best-seller totally dissing traditional Christian beliefs & the Roman Catholic Church and … well, some churches are sponsoring discussion groups about his book. In a twisted way, I suppose, that’s the difference between the two religions.

In subsequent posts, I shall comment on Brown’s theological statements, errors, and, without a doubt, heresy.

Tune in next time …