Harry Bosch

I just read The DaVinci Code, from Dan Brown, and loved it. I understand that it is being made into a movie starring Tom Hanks. What is your general opinion of the book? Specifically, how do you feel about:

1. Jesus being married to Mary Mag? Did they have children?
2. Opus-dei? {it’s a real group, and they sure seem evil}
3. The Catholic Church and how they have portrayed women, especially Mary Magedlin?

Diogenes the Cynic

1. There is no evidence for this and while it's not impossible that HJ (if he existed) might have had children, there is no evidentiary support for the Merovingian "Holy Blood" theory of a bloodline descended from Jesus and Mary Magdalene. There is no good evidence that MM even existed.

2. There is a real Opus Dei and it has some weirdness to it but the book exaggerates it and gets some things factually wrong (it's not a monastic order, for instance). Information about is mixed and contradictory but here is their official homepage and here are a couple of more critical looks at it.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionande...444/cover.html
http://www.americamagazine.org/artic...in-opusdei.cfm

3. The RCC, like most other western religious institutions, has a long history of male chauvinism, autocratic patriarchy and institutional subordination of women. However, that does not translate into a historical suppression of Mary Magdalene as a religiously or historically significant figure.

number3

Personally I thought the book was badly written, in fact it reads like it was written by a student. Its short chaptors and movie style show the authors true intentions - and it looks like he got 'em as the movie is being made.

1. I see no evidence that Jesus existed let alone MM so I don't swing with this
2. Don't know don't care, just another bunch of wackos.
3. Well why change the habit of a dogmatic religon?

Toto

I agree with you on the quality of the book.

Previous threads:

Was Jesus married?

CX on the Da Vinci code

You can find more by searching for "Vinci" in the forum search, or Magdalene, depending on your interests.

andrewcriddle

'Mary Magdalene' by Susan Haskins seeks to cover the image of Mary Magdalene in Christianity from the 1st century to the 20th century.

I have some reservations about the book, it is occasionally misleading and IMHO slightly too overtly feminist, but it is AFAIK the only single work to attempt to cover the whole field (in over 500 pages).

Andrew Criddle

Paranoid Marwin

I did enjoy reading the Da Vinco Code becasuse of the great thrillerlike suspense, but the depth of the characters portrayed is hardly skindeep, more sketchlike. The Da Vinci code isn't that original either. In the 80s Umberto Eco wrote a very similar book: 'Foucault's Pendulum' which I can strongly recommend!

Aquila ka Hecate

I concur with the Robot, there.

Eco's work is great.

There is yet another, though-Anno Domini by Barnaby Williams which, unlike most of the reading population, I enjoyed immensly.
Similar theme.

Terri in Joburg

Jack the Bodiless

Well, there IS a "Gospel of Mary Magdalene" which was suppressed by the church, and which describes some sort of "special relationship" between Jesus and MM (she was, allegedly, his closest confidant and favorite disciple). That's about as far as it goes.

We only have a portion of the Gospel of Mary, mostly from a copy in a cache of heretical texts at Nag Hammadi IIRC.

Of course, whether there was a historical MM (or even a historical Jesus) is still an open question.

renegade

I think what many people have not understood about this book (not necessarily the OP) is that it is a work of fiction, and it is presented as a work of fiction. I think that it is brilliant as a work of fiction despite the fact that it does not have literary merit, from the point of view of the writing style, structure etc.

It's brilliance lies in the fact that it has taken a whole lot of possibilities and half truths and puts them together into a comprehensive, somewhat believable (if you accept a lot of premises and evidence that is provided) and controversial conspiracy theory about something that almost everyone has an opinion on (i.e. religion). It packs it all together in a popular and thrilling format. I like the pseudo intellectual thing that he has going and I think that it is very enticing to the reader. The way he makes it believable by adding in heaps of factual stuff about the paintings, history and opus dei is cunning. It is very entertaining and I read it in the space of one night. The sad thing is that if you read his other novels it is just more of same (although not regarding religion) and it all gets a little boring.

However readers should keep in mind that not even the author appears to subscribe to the overall theory that he presents - as per the quote below he believes some of the theories have merit and he basically wrote it to get people talking. Obviously also to get a best seller.

Jaguar Prince

I wonder how much money the authors got from Jerry Falwell, John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople in order to write this vulgar novel. It is obvious to me that the book was published in order to completely discredit the serious Biblical researchers who were unearthing the real role and identity of the Magdalen in the Gospels. Now whenever you want to discuss the topic of the relationship between Mary Magdalen and Jesus seriously, people start laughing in your face and mentioning the Da Vinci Code, which is now fast becoming an empty word used to avoid debate like "conspiracy theory".