Tuesday, April 04, 2006


So, I lay in my bed awake last night thinking about all the things I could write in my brand new blog. I must have had a dozen or so of amazing articles written in my head on a multitude of topics. I would venture to say it was some of my best writing to date. Unfortunately, the thoughts quickly turned into visions and those visions turned into dreams, and suddenly I was Napoleon conquering Ghandi on the shores of India. I have been dreaming of Civilization IV a lot, and like to plan my next steps in my sleep. Needless to say all my great literary works were lost. I struggled for the better part of the day to come up with some sort of topic to write about. At one point I felt adventuresome and thought I would attempt to write a book report on Dan Brown’s, “The Divinci Code,” however it dawned on me that I haven’t read the book yet and the report may be a little lacking in content. I still would like to strike a critical conversation over books climb to fame. I wonder, should it be classified as fact, fiction or the greatest publicity stunt of the decade? Has anyone read this book yet? Is it worth the read? Are any of the claims in the book worth a closer look? Who created the Gnostic Gospels, of which much of the theories were pulled from, and where were they found? I do intend on reading it soon. I may even possibly get past the first few chapters. Well, I guess you can never be 2qurios.

~Challenge of the day~
Who can tell me what medium was used to create the image above?
Hint: The answer is in the code! - and now in the comment section. No Cheating.

6 Comments:

  • I also haven't read the book, The Da Vinci Code, and I don't discount that it may be a great suspense story. On Dan Brown's web site, he states, "The Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction." He then says, "My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and a springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion, and history." I don't know if he expected the book to be on the forefront of current literature as much as it has, but here we are. I think that, instead of provoking the "intended" discussions about faith, religion and history, it will serve as "evidence" for people who had a beef against Christianity in the first place and who are too lazy to do the research for themselves. As brilliant as the novel may be, I think it has so much potential to do more damage than good to Christianity and the public's perception of Christ; intended or otherwise.

    By Blogger Christina, at 8:56 AM  

  • oh, and is your Mona Lisa made out of dominoes? Neat...

    By Blogger Christina, at 8:57 AM  

  • Ahh frig, read the book 2q. It's a good novel, so is Angels and Demons (better I think). And Digital Fortress is fun, though, I have more then a passing interest in technology so I think there was room for improvement. And Deception Point... ha, the US is not slick enough to pull that off - fun story though.

    But Da Vinci, he did his research sure, but a lot of source material comes from eras where people thought the world was still flat and bleeding was an acceptable form of medical treatment. People need to be even a little judicious in their response to the story. At least Darwin put some science behind his theories, Dan read what other people wrote, made a story around it...$$$. If you really want to get riled up, look into his research and source material... read The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail.

    Not that any of this matters, the grail was in fact a real cup. Indiana Jones found it a few years back, lost it during a cave in though. True story, they caught the whole thing on tape.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:35 AM  

  • I read it. And Angels and Demons. Both have interesting theories but the "suspense" is cheesy and formulaic. Worse than Stephen King or Clancy in fact. Really lame. But no one talks about that. It's the theories that he gets credit for, even though they aren't even his. As for Angels and Demons being better, I've heard many people say that- however the ending is like something you'd see in a Jean Claude Van Damme (did I spell that right?) movie and for that reason, the Da Vinci Code is better. But still not great story telling. I think it's a combination of clever marketing and the world just being ready for the theories- probably due to all the Catholic controversies in the past decade or so.

    By Blogger John Mutford, at 7:41 PM  

  • Hi, I'm an old friend of Christina's, so I found your blog and thought I'd comment here.

    I have read "The DaVinci" code and like a previous poster, I wasn't impressed. In fact I was impatient for it to be over. I was just bored with all the supposed twists and turns. I wanted to scream "Just get to the point already!" For a suspenseful read, I much prefer the work of Jeffrey Archer than this.

    I agree a lot with what Christina said about how people are responding to this book. So many people are accepting it blindly, without realizing what is true and what isn't. I've watched a Christian DVD by Chick Missler about the book and he does a great job at refuting it. When you read the book, one of the introductory pages has a list of "facts". I don't have a copy of the book with me, so I can't say off the top of my head what they are, but Missler quickly disproves these "facts". The whole thing is based on lies, but people are just believing it all. Remember people, you picked it up from the "fiction" section!

    However, I think that we, as Christians, need to read it, so we can be informed and be better able to discuss it with people.

    By Blogger Sue Matthews, at 1:01 PM  

  • I have read a great article in MacLean’s April 3rd magazine regarding the whole debate and the law suit that in the end Dan Brown won. I couldn’t help but notice the two guys who filed the lawsuit, were just as happy with the loss. I guess they made enough money off the all the dust covered copies of their books that sold because of all this stink. I don't like jumping on any old band wagon, and had thought that I would not read the book. However, I realised I started this blog, like the Maple Leafs, and had a mullet (Newfie bandwagon), so I think my excuse doesn't hold up under scrutiny. I do agree with you Darcy's Mama, and think I should read it instead of offering ignorant judgements on a book I haven't read.

    By Blogger Qurios, at 11:37 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home