Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NY Press)   Corporate Mofo explains "The Da Vinci Code"   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

22130 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Jul 2004 at 3:38 PM (13 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

97 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

2004-07-13 07:08:06 PM  
Screw that, I want to hear more about this guy shooting off his own testicles with a shotgun.
2004-07-13 07:09:16 PM  
he did what? link???
2004-07-13 07:14:02 PM  
Bet this is one of those books that 62% of American men didn't read last year.

/Waiting for the Classics Illustrated version.

//Finally got that one in. Huzzah!
2004-07-13 07:15:18 PM  
ADMIT IT: You've read The Da Vinci Code.
There's no denying it. I saw you with it last week on the subway, your finger stuck in the spine to keep your place. You were plainly pissed off that you had to put the book down just as you were about to learn the secret connection between the Knights Templar and the murdered museum curator, but there were no seats on the train, and trying to read under the watchful gaze of Dr. Zizmor while hanging on to that lurching center pole feels kind of like trying to ride the Coney Island Cyclone after drinking half a bottle of tequila.
Look, I'm not here to judge you. You don't have to defend yourself to me. I believe you when you say you usually only read serious literature. I'm sure you bought the new David Sedaris the day it came out.

This COMPLETELY summarazed my paranoia while reading this book. Except the Dr. Zizmor thing... haven't seen his ads in a while... I think he lost his medical license.
2004-07-13 07:15:46 PM  
Ponderous farker lost me when he said, "irregardless." I didn't read the book and, after reading Dave Barry's funny synopsis, don't intend to.
2004-07-13 07:16:06 PM  
Bet this is one of those books that 62% of American men didn't read last year.

Meh, ill just read the cliff notes...

/really I will....
2004-07-13 07:17:03 PM  
It's not a bad book, actually. Little silly in places, but easily more intelligent and worthwhile than your average summer blockbuster.
2004-07-13 07:20:45 PM  
Only 62% of American men didn't read "The Da Vinci Code" last year? That's kind of creepy.
2004-07-13 07:23:09 PM  
I read it, im only 15 and it kept my attention up.

I'm more of a Crichton fan myself, but Brown has some pretty good stuff. Right now im reading the Dune series by frank herbert, and I like it (:
2004-07-13 07:27:40 PM  
Da Vinci Code was a good read. I've since read a couple of other books on the subject of the Templars/Masons/Merovingians/etc, and essentially it comes down to they think there's some secret about Jesus' true nature (married, fathered a child, really just a radical member of a Jewish sect, etc), but the evidence for most of this (as far as they know, and which was in turn dug up by Templars at various places in Israel) is buried under Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland. And the curators of Rosslyn won't let anyone excavate, so we'll never know for sure exactly what's what.

Although it's interesting to speculate about it all, and some authors have drawn some interesting conclusions based on what little circumstantial and historical evidence does exist.
2004-07-13 07:27:48 PM  
2004-07-13 07:29:30 PM  
Ugh. Irregardless. I stopped reading after that.

And I see I'm not the only one.
2004-07-13 07:39:15 PM  
Disjointed article, and I too was put off by "irregardless". The book was an interesting read for the most part, except the part where the hero "symbologist" jumps out of a helicopter at something like 3,000 feet using a tarp as a pseudo-parachute, lands in a river, and lives because the river was choppy, thereby breaking up the surface tension of the water. That part really screwed up my suspension of disbelief, and almost ruined the whole thing for me. Or maybe I'm thinking of another Brown novel. I forget. Fark it.

/shouldn't be a grammar Nazi with run-on sentences spewing from my every orifice.
2004-07-13 07:39:35 PM  
Didn't read the book or the article...

But all I keep hearing about is this ridiculous theory on how one of the people in the Last Supper is actually a woman. It's not. It's Saint John. It was very commmon to portray young men with very effeminate (sp.?) features. See Da Vinci's painting of John the Baptist.

/tired of people who keep reading that book and thinking they're a) art curators and b) theologans
2004-07-13 07:44:47 PM  
I read Richie Rich comics as a kid. An dats y eyem SMRT.
2004-07-13 07:47:46 PM  
It was very commmon to portray young men with very effeminate (sp.?) features. See Da Vinci's painting of John the Baptist.

Wasn't DaVinci was a Homersexual? So maybe he liked to portray biblical characters as effeminate to piss off the establishment. Sort of doing his own subtle Photoshop thang.

/Just bloviatin'
2004-07-13 07:48:38 PM  
It was a fun book until the Scooby-Doo/Harlequin Romance ending.

Saunire (the museum guy's namesake) was in fact quite real, but he was a con man. Planchard, named as a leader of the Priory of Sion, was in fact a leader of the Priory of Sion. But he created the organization brand new back in the 1900's. And planted forged documents in the library blah blah. Do I invoke Godwin by asserting that Planchard was a Vichey sympathiser, a fraud, and wanted to "purify" France?

I'm confident that D. Brown knew all this and planted the allusions as clues so that people would realize this is fiction and lighten up.

Besides, everyone who's studied this knows the Grail was stashed in Ft. Knox for safekeeping during WW2 and was since moved to Area 51 where its power has been exploited further.
2004-07-13 07:49:48 PM  
Correction..."Wasn't DaVinci a Homersexual?"
2004-07-13 07:52:31 PM  
Holy Blood, Holy Grail is exactly why I haven't picked up The DaVinci Code--for pretty much the same reason. Been there. Seen it. Got the BBC series that these fellas did later on with their super sized Pentagram of Templar Temples that's supposed to link Jerusalem to a Scandavian temple, and back to Rome.

I put it up there with Timecode which was perhaps the worst piece of garbage that I've ever thrown down in disgust...not to be confused with Sphere which runs a close second with a few others.

For real fun, I suggest The Red Queen and much more fun fodder for conspiracies's the genes man, they're out to screw us all over...
2004-07-13 07:53:28 PM  
I hated, hated, hated Da Vinci Code. It's a good story if you liked Last Temptation of Christ, and I'm sure it'll film well, but reading it was like reading farkin' Scooby Doo. "Zoiks! There's a clue behind the painting! Now we'll see what this really means!"

Kept waiting to hear about "those meddling kids".
2004-07-13 07:54:56 PM  
Irregardless fatuous idiot! He sounds like a professional Sceptic (which is fast turning into a fundie religion in the US, for some reason). As you probably noticed, he's using the same technique as the people he's attacking - quoting sources which none of his readers can be bothered to check.

The Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction, and isn't presented as anything else. The style is basic airport-book; undemanding and good for helping you to get through the night, as your flight picks its way between the thunderstorms and meteorites. The puzzles are quite fun.

Holy Blood, Holy Grail? It's a different thing altogether.....
(in chorus)It's a different thing
It's presented as serious research, so it merits a fair amount of justification. The trouble is that it's difficult to check the primary sources (no, the internet won't cut it). I think there's evidence of some kind, but it's far from clear exactly what it's about. (I don't think it's in the Bermuda-Triangle-complete-balderdash category, though).
Fascinating stuff.
2004-07-13 07:57:59 PM  
They said irregardless in the article. IRREGARDLESS!!!
2004-07-13 07:58:39 PM  
it was a fun story, thats it. i think comparing it to indiana jones (only with a slightly overweight middle aged man) is a great comparison.

i enjoyed the book a lot, it read really fast and made me go back and check out some art books that i had. but seriously the whole thing about the bloodline of Christ is a myth and the templars were destroyed and excommunicated (although a later pope did forgive them in an unissued papal bull).
2004-07-13 07:59:48 PM  
Read it just so people would stop telling me I HAVE to read it.

Reads like a bad Tom Clancy novel without any of the
cool technology bits. I guess the religious conspiracy
was supposed to replace that aspect, but failed miserably,
probably because a lot of Clancy's ideas are loosely based
on some kind of research, this guy just makes his up.
2004-07-13 08:00:32 PM  
i read the davinci code, and actually read the book in question in the link. i thought both were pretty good, even thought the latter was boring as hell
2004-07-13 08:01:06 PM  
Well, whaddya know. Told ya I shouldn't attempt to be a grammar Nazi...

(From Merriam Webster)
Main Entry: irregardless
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'grd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
2004-07-13 08:02:08 PM  
Did anyone else read the PREACHER comic books. Great stuff and talks about the "Holy Grail", or the bloodline of Christ preserved through incest. Quite fascinating.
2004-07-13 08:06:37 PM  
This book was originally written in the 1930's

I've read it, and I've been telling everyone who read the Code to read it. It is much more interesting and in depth.
2004-07-13 08:07:34 PM  
"The Da Vinci Code" was exactly what a good book should be: easy to read and intriguing. I loved every minute of it. Now I'm reading "Angels & Demons" which is a bit sillier, but captivating, nonetheless.
2004-07-13 08:10:22 PM  
Tillmaster: Stop calling me Shirley!
2004-07-13 08:13:45 PM  
ADMIT IT: You've read The Da Vinci Code.

I'll admit that this is the first time I've learned anything about The Davinci Code other than the title of the book.

2004-07-13 08:14:55 PM  

Wrong Dan Brown book. That was Angels and Demons...or was it Demons and Angels. Irregardless I thought it was a good work of fiction.

/Irregardless.......had to do it...
2004-07-13 08:16:28 PM  

Yeah, I read it. But only because I'd already read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and a lot of other realated books.

It's an amusing, light read. The truth behind it is a lot more interesting.

2004-07-13 08:18:00 PM  
The book was an interesting read for the most part, except the part where the hero "symbologist" jumps out of a helicopter at something like 3,000 feet using a tarp as a pseudo-parachute, lands in a river...

Uh, Meatsack? That happened in "Angels and Demons" by the same author, not "DaVinci Code".

[Ahem,] Regardless, I thought A&D was a better book, 'til that preposterous point in the story.
2004-07-13 08:19:38 PM  
Sorry, az! I was composing and missed your correction.
2004-07-13 08:20:26 PM  
Just started it and it has caught my attention.

The writing is pure New York Times Bestseller. I found myself laughing out loud at the description of the police officer at the beginning of chapter 4. Something about his widow's peak being like an arrow cutting its way through the air...

For another thriller about codes and secret societies try Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco
2004-07-13 08:29:02 PM  
The DaVinci Code read like an episode of Batman from the '60s. They knew the answer to the puzzle before they started to figure it out. Like so:

Batman: "Why, that's a *whale* of a riddle, Robin!"
Robin : "It sure is, Batman!"
Batman: "And what else lives in the ocean, besides whales?"
Robin : "A penguin!"
Batman: "Exactly! To the Batmobile!"

TDC had the same cheesy logic. That "so dark the con of man" scene was so stupid it hurt me physically. The hero goes on and on about the text and how it's exactly what he's been talking about, with the feminine god thing, to the point of assuming that it's the end of the puzzle. And the heroine comes in with, "Wait! It's an anagram!" Like we didn't already know what it was.

The characters know exactly as much as the author does, and it's painfully obvious in this book. It's almost like they willfully keep themselves from realizing some pretty obvious answers just to keep the plot moving. Plus the puzzles were easy where the logic wasn't stretched thin to the point of transparency.

The part where they translate an English blend -- ph for "f" or something -- into the literal characters of another language, Latin I think -- so that it's P and then H instead of the F sound in Latin was so, so stupid.

/didn't like it, could you tell?
2004-07-13 08:30:22 PM  
_Angels and Demons_ is ruined by the compressed time scale and "silly" impossible bits - true, there are some extraordinary people lying dormant on the planet, but they don't do James Bond-scale epic solutions to impossible problems over and over and over and over....

.. Regardless, I find the notion of a book full of info about the Illuminati, masonry and other *real* things that traditional history has looked over intriguing on that basis. That the mainstream populace is reading it is even better - except that the significance relative to today - most of our leaders being masons, members of secret societies - is being lost on the sheeple.
2004-07-13 08:33:04 PM  
Da Vinci Code = dumbed down Foucault's Pendulum.

Both good pieces of fiction though...but Umberto Eco was way more interesting.
2004-07-13 08:34:11 PM  
Da Vinci Code is ass, pure and simple. The writing is high-school level, at best. My thinking is that Dan Brown decided he wanted to write another book "corroborating" Holy Blood, Holy Grail, but he realized there was zero market for it, so he wrapped it up in a juvenile "thriller." He can't write dialogue, he can't write narrative fiction. The whole thing reads like a group of people reading liberal arts textbooks to each other.

And, worst, the "flashback" scenes of the protagonist explaining Fibonacci sequences and the Golden Mean to his stultifyingly ignorant Harvard students read like a Jack Chick tract. "But I'm a biology major, and I've never heard of the Golden Mean in nature!" Come the fark on. Public school kids learn about the Fibonacci sequence and the golden mean in fifth grade.

Zero stars!
2004-07-13 08:36:43 PM  
I do enjoy everyone's attempts to denounce this book's worth, but the fact of the matter is, it's a good book. It is popular for a reason. Granted, yes, the author does act like he isn't writing fiction. How is a fictitious book convincing if it is written like it's merely a story? The more believable, the more enthralling a book becomes. As much as everyone seems to like pretending they are the ingenious minds of today, (even though their nobel prize is still missing from their trophy case) not all the facts in this book are well known by any means to the average joe. We all know the average joe is a dumbass, but even to the above average joe, the information still isn't that well known. It was just out of reach enough to convince. The answers in this book were constantly just out of reach enough to keep a reader's attention.

It just annoys me that someone would attempt to call this book anything other than wonderful, simply to sound smart.

It also annoys me that this many people give a rat's ass that he used the word "irregardless." It's been around for over a century now people. Wether or not it makes sense, it's here to stay, and it will be used. The logic of many words in the english language and all it's grammatical exceptions, are downright farked up.

Bring me a critic that starts using something outside of the dictionary, such as, "Fo' shizzle my nizzle this book really suxx0r3d!" And I'll go ahead and go on a rant.
2004-07-13 08:37:35 PM  

1960s Batman, no question.

And how bad are stories where the protagonists are right about everything all the time? "There has to be significance to writing this down!" "Why, of course, it must mean [insert least unlikely conclusion among dozens of others]!"
2004-07-13 08:38:36 PM  
Or is that, "go ahead on a rant?" fark if I know.
2004-07-13 08:39:31 PM  
"insert least unlikely conclusion "

I clearly meant "least likely."
2004-07-13 08:43:10 PM  
Read it, enjoyed it, don't believe a word of it, though.
2004-07-13 08:43:58 PM  
Eric of Doom

I was about to post something about how all the armchair intellectuals posting here can go back to nit picking episodes on the history channel for minor inaccuracies, but you pretty much did that for me.

2004-07-13 08:44:18 PM  
Uh, Meatsack? That happened in "Angels and Demons" by the same author, not "DaVinci Code".

Yeah, I thought I might be mistaken, as I stated in that post. I have to agree with RubensHakkamacher in this regard; the James Bond-ish crap is what tarnished the books for me. It was an interesting topic though, and I read both novels completely, which says little about my choice in literature. But I'll read almost anything while sitting on the crapper. Except that Dirk Pitt crap. I hate that smarmy bastard, and his hirsuit little friend too.
2004-07-13 08:47:24 PM  
I felt the Da Vinci code was specifically written for stupid people and I find that offensive.
2004-07-13 08:47:28 PM  
Or is it "hirsute"? Maybe "Hairsuit"?
2004-07-13 08:54:26 PM  

I thoroughly enjoyed Preacher (though I still need to get the last bit, a friend introduced me to it but did not have quite all of it), and couldn't help but think about the decendant of christ running around pissing on everything. Sad, in a way, but I'm easily amused.

As for the book in question, it was a decent read, but dear god someone needs to tell Brown that once someone buys the book, he does not need to force them to read each three page chapter by ending it with an irritating-as-hell cliffhanger. It read like it was being published as a serial in a magazine, and he had to convince people to buy the next issue. I wish someone had just pointed me to the source material instead of the book.

And for the people defending the use of irregardless, lists it as nonstandard, along with the likes of ain't. Good company.
Displayed 50 of 97 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.