Gentle reader Tony has made the request, so we will oblige, sort of.
What is the SWNID take on the upcoming release of the Da Vinci Code film?
Short answer: we aren't bothering with this very much.
Here are our reasons, in order of importance:
1. We have the luxury of many colleagues who are wrong as seldom as we are. Our beloved brothers in Christian higher education--Drs. Thatcher, Smith and Roadcup--recently presented on our scenic campus a trenchant seminar on the Da Vinci Code phenomenon. DVDs are available at low cost from CCU. Here's the info. SWNID defers, lazily and happily.
2. There are a bunch of books debunking this subject. As usual, we urge gentle readers gently to read things printed on the dismembered corpses of trees. We recommend the book by fellow Aberdeen alumnus Darrell Bock, basing said recommendation not on our reading of the book but our high regard for Dr. Bock's meticulous scholarship.
3. We make it a point not to read bad books, especially those that are popular. All reviews of this book that come from sources we trust have labeled it bad. We also don't go to bad movies.
4. Dave Barry has already offered the definitive analysis of The Da Vinci Code. Update: Promised kudos go to assault-reference librarian Scott for finding the column here.
5. We do make it a point to read good books. Anything by Unberto Eco is good. So those with an interest should read Foucault's Pendulum, his wry chronicle of a publishing house that specializes in author-subsidized books that set out massive conspiracy theories involving the Templar Knights, the Rothschild family, the Holy Grail, the Vatican, the progeny of Jesus, and other arcane figures. Among other things, this book will remind readers or viewers of The Da Vinci Code that nutty allegations of heretofore undiscovered and entirely unproven, massive conspiracies to redirect the history of Europe and the world have been around for a long time, and that the stories, though false, can take on enormous power.
6. Recent experience suggests that the movie release of The Da Vinci Code will have less impact than some might expect. This falls into two categories:
(a) Remember The Passion of the Christ? It was hailed by some as the evangelistic opportunity of the century (of course, so far it's been a short century). Lots of people saw it, but the impact seems to have been shallow overall.
(b) Remember Cinderella Man? Neither does anyone else. Ron Howard may be off his game right now. It remains to be seen whether The Da Vinci Code or Snakes on a Plane will be this summer's big blockbuster.
7. The best testimony about The Da Vinci Code is on the book's back cover, where for the convenience of booksellers who stock it, its genre is labeled "FICTION."
8 comments:
There's nothing wrong with being informed so that a person can discuss intelligently with the unchurched, those we are trying to evangelize.
I agree with most of what is said here, but one wonders whether or not SWNID has actually seen Cinderella Man before passing judgement on it. It was, in this humble reader's opinion, one of the better movies of 2005. Unfortunately, it was released around the same time as Star Wars III and the new Batman movie (also one of the better movies of 2005)and was completely eclipsed at the box office by the aforementioned films.
My comment is relative to the commercial impact of the movie, not its entertainment value. To wit: Ron Howard + Tom Hanks + bestselling novel might not equal blockbuster movie.
I feel that regardless of how good a movie the DVC ends up being, the hype and controversy that surrounds both novel and movie will help catapult DVC to blockbuster status, regardless of content. On the other hand what do I know, it could flop worse than King Kong.
1. To clarify with Tony, King Kong did flop at the box office. The only real problem with the movie was that it was too long a movie for a culture riddled with ADD, ADHD and wannabe ADD/ADHD persons. Other than that, the movie was truly a great piece of cinematography.
2. Richie Cunningham + Forest Gump may equal a blockbuster but the fall from the top will leave an echoing thud.
3. SWNID is informed as to the topic of "The DaVinci Code." Indeed, as an intellectual, he is well informed with the apologetical information needed to defend the faith at anytime against anything. However, SWNID already alluded that he has all the apologetical information that he needs to defend the faith concerning "The DaVinci Code." That info is one word: Fiction.
Why does being a woman allow you to say that?
Arnold who?
Just in case, to anonymous #1:
There is everything right about "being informed so that a person can discuss ..."
We simply defer to our colleagues in scholarship who have spent substantial time on this. We've chosen to spend our time on other issues. We are just one person.
And we draw attention to the fact that there's very little, really to which to respond in the DVC.
Note to all: when reading this blog, don't make the silly error of assuming that you must imitate the blogger in all things. It's your thing. Do what you wanna do. I can't tell you who to sock it to.
If we mostly ignore the DVC, you are blessed to go right ahead and get your fill of it and of informed responses to it.
Post a Comment