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.

(Some Guy)   Farker Bevets has some quotes about "The Da Vinci Code"   ( bevets.com) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2940 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 19 May 2006 at 2:26 AM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



151 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-05-18 10:39:27 PM  
The Jesus did it. I just spoiled it for everyone.
 
2006-05-18 10:43:18 PM  
So here you have Bevets refuting statements from a fictional book (DVC) by spouting off one-liners from another fictional book (The Bible).

Heh, I got a kick out of that.
 
2006-05-18 10:48:06 PM  
I don't see the issue here. It's an average book at best, made into a below average movie. It's fiction. Why are people acting like this is the long lost diary of Mary or something?
 
2006-05-18 10:50:35 PM  
Pick the farking stupidest topic related to religion and write dullardy. I respect people who study theology, but this drivel is embarrassing.

I suppose the more esoteric and nuanced religious arguments would be unassailable.
 
2006-05-18 10:51:15 PM  
So? Farker Bevets has irrelevant quotes about everything. Too bad he can't articulate an opinion on his own.
 
2006-05-18 10:52:42 PM  
Thrawn: Why are people acting like this is the long lost diary of Mary or something?

A need to immerse themselves in pseudo-intellectualism.
 
2006-05-18 10:57:04 PM  
I thought calling out people in headlines was frowned upon.
 
2006-05-18 10:59:30 PM  
SockMonkeyHolocaust: A need to immerse themselves in pseudo-intellectualism.


The great thing about the Da Vinci Code is that it let a lot of idiots feel as though they were partaking of a great work of literature.
 
2006-05-18 11:00:50 PM  
While the book itself is pretty damned mediocre, the story is more plausable and presented with much more "evidence" than anything in the Bible. That's why some religious people hate it so much, because it makes them think about how unlikely it is that the Bible is true, and just how much "faith" is actually required to believe in it.

And as an aside, I can't believe people are insisting on a "fiction" disclaimer for a story where one of the key pieces of the puzzle is written on the back of the Mona Lisa in invisible ink.
 
2006-05-18 11:00:53 PM  
There's a bevets.com?

Huh. I never knew that.
 
2006-05-18 11:01:15 PM  
Thrawn

I don't see the issue here. It's an average book at best, made into a below average movie. It's fiction.

All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.  The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 1

LAUER: How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that actually occurred? I know you did a lot of research for the book. 

Mr. BROWN: Absolutely all of it. Obviously, there are--Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies, all of that is historical fact.    The Today Show 6/9/2003

GIBSON: This is a novel. If you were writing it as a non-fiction book, how would it have been different?

Mr. BROWN: I don't think it would have. I began the research for The Da Vinci Code as a skeptic. I entirely expected, as I researched the book, to disprove this theory. And after numerous trips to Europe, about two years of research, I really became a believer.  Good Morning America
 
2006-05-18 11:02:15 PM  
I thought calling out people in headlines was frowned upon.

It is indeed- Submitter may be getting a time out.

And since this link will undoubtedly get axed by an admin anyway, I would just like to say that I enjoy masturbating with sandpaper while looking at pictures of Bea Arthur.
 
2006-05-18 11:02:26 PM  
Pocket Ninja: I thought calling out people in headlines was frowned upon.

It is. Maybe Bevets submitted this? I dunno.
 
2006-05-18 11:03:49 PM  
Pocket Ninja: thought calling out people in headlines was frowned upon.

Yeah, but this is Bevets. The Bevets!
 
2006-05-18 11:05:43 PM  
Edsel: The great thing about the Da Vinci Code is that it let a lot of idiots feel as though they were partaking of a great work of literature.

The thing is about literature is that the stock of books rises and falls through the decades. Theodore Dreiser was hailed as one of the greatest authors of his generation by critics and he was soon eclipsed as time went by Henry James.

The same goes for Hawthorne's Marble Fawn and Cooper's Leatherstocking series.

You really never know what is going to turn out to be one of the "greats". Would the Bronte sisters have been able to cut it today? Probably not. Could Brown potentially squeak through by having a marginally original premise? Maybe.

The awesome part about our culture is that we kill books like this and Bridges of Madison County by overexposing them. One of the most intriguing things my music composition teacher taught me in high school is that the great works of the last couple generations aren't going to be written by the mainstream artists and writers, they have already been written and are lying undiscovered but by a small number of people. It's only through time that their brilliance is going to be discovered.
 
2006-05-18 11:06:13 PM  
Pocket Ninja: I thought calling out people in headlines was frowned upon.

Not in this case. It's like "Check out these topless midgets on Farker Wil Wheaton's blog."
 
2006-05-18 11:07:41 PM  
Bevets: All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 1

Hi, Bevets, I don't really ever see you in TF so I don't ever get a chance to talk to you, but thank you for what you bring to the site despite whether or not I agree with you. You force people to think and that's a good thing.
 
2006-05-18 11:09:41 PM  
I love you, Bevets. You say what I wish I could.
 
2006-05-18 11:12:52 PM  
Brettster808: Huh. I never knew that.

i think we were all better off not knowing that.
 
2006-05-18 11:14:14 PM  
"2006-05-18 11:00:53 PM Brettster808

There's a bevets.com?

Huh. I never knew that."

You simply *must* read his whole site, my friend. It is comedy gold.
 
2006-05-18 11:19:18 PM  
Bevets
All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 1

I fail to see where you refute this statement.
 
2006-05-18 11:21:49 PM  
Action Replay Nick: I fail to see where you refute this statement.

Refute? Now you're just being silly.
 
2006-05-18 11:22:29 PM  
Action Replay Nick: I fail to see where you refute this statement.


Hi, I'm Edsel. You must be new around here.
 
2006-05-18 11:26:00 PM  
SilentStrider -

One man's pathos is another man's hilarity.

/that looks .. wrong
 
2006-05-18 11:27:15 PM  
My opinion is that The Da Vinci Code wouldn't have spurred so many people if it didn't have that little "fact" page in the beginning. Most of it is conjecture, but some folks see it as fact because they're set into that mode. Then people that believe in Christianity have to counter with what they regard as fact. Then it starts devolving into a bunch of monkeys trying to fark a football.

I am really surprised that Dan Brown went and said that, Bevets. He should probably stick to his fiction guns.

After I read it, I started looking into other books that support some of those theories, but I soon realized that a lot of the authors were pulling stuff out of their butt and that many of their sources were doing the same.
 
2006-05-18 11:30:19 PM  
No, I'm not new. I'm probably on his ignore list, I was just wondering how descriptions of real-life documents, things, and places have any bearing on the completely made up mystery.

I know Bevets means well and is "fighting" what he sees as "the Good Fight", and that's fine. But if he wants to convince anyone, he shouldn't be deliberately obtuse.

I mean, if I say:

My monitor's resolution is set to 1024x768.

1 + 0 + 2 + 4 + 7 = 14
6 + 8 = 14

Therefore my monitor's resolution is a communist conspiracy by Nvidia pushing the idea that all things should be equal and we need to overthrow the ruling class.


The fact that my monitor is indeed set to 1024x768 still remains true.
 
2006-05-18 11:30:24 PM  
The great thing about the Da Vinci Code is that it let a lot of idiots feel as though they were partaking of a great work of literature.
Who defines "great"?

/thinks this book is probably overrated
//not much of a reader
///read Moby Dick, decided to never read a "great classic" again
 
2006-05-18 11:32:11 PM  
Action Replay Nick: The fact that my monitor is indeed set to 1024x768 still remains true.

Dude, you can probably find a montior that will do much more than 1024x768 in a junk yard somewhere. Get one. :(

If not, you're a right wing commie left wing nazi.
 
2006-05-18 11:35:23 PM  
Zabbadizzat
I'd say the whole thing about Jesus is what's pissing people off.
Now, it may be more well known because of the "fact" claim... but I think any religious ubernut who found out about it would FREAK OUT. And they'd TELL people.

Remember, logical thinking goes out the window when we mention religious fundies. MOST religious people know better.
 
2006-05-18 11:41:51 PM  
Maybe, puffy999, but while I was looking into that subject, I found a whole bunch of books about Jesus. There were several of these books that I'd figure Christians wouldn't dig, but I hadn't heard of any of them before. So, it's probably more an exposure kind of thing.

By the way, SMH, I thought you made very good points in all of your posts.
 
2006-05-18 11:46:57 PM  
2006-05-18 11:30:24 PM puffy999
///read Moby Dick, decided to never read a "great classic" again


I read a lot of what I guess you'd term classic literature. Moby Dick is godawful IMO. The whale doesn't even turn up 'til the last 40 pages or so, and the rest (after the whaling village chapter at the beginning which I did quite enjoy) is filled with 7 page descriptions of a harpoon or a particular job.

I hated it.
/off topic
 
2006-05-18 11:50:37 PM  
One book I thought was awful was One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Holy crap, I couldn't finish reading it.
 
2006-05-18 11:55:21 PM  
Action Replay Nick
And as an aside, I can't believe people are insisting on a "fiction" disclaimer for a story where one of the key pieces of the puzzle is written on the back of the Mona Lisa in invisible ink.

I'm sorry, I have to correct myself there. It's written on the glass cover of the Mona Lisa in invisible ink.
 
2006-05-19 12:19:33 AM  
Come on Bevets, I get the feeling they'll give you your greenlight if you actually participate. Ignore the "fame of the name" trolls and answer the questions directed at you.
 
2006-05-19 12:25:32 AM  
All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate. The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 1

Action Replay Nick

I fail to see where you refute this statement.

What did you have in mind?
 
2006-05-19 12:39:25 AM  
Bevets
What did you have in mind?

Could you please give a quote from Da Vinci where he explicitly states that the figure to the right of Jesus in that painting isn't a woman? It's art man, it's up for interpretation.
 
2006-05-19 12:41:44 AM  
By the way, I just kind of had a head-exploding moment when I finally realized that you are pretty much defending the Roman Catholic Church.
 
2006-05-19 12:49:34 AM  
I don't read books...what is "The Da Vinci Code" about?

/How do I shot web?
 
2006-05-19 12:54:03 AM  
Action Replay Nick

I fail to see where you refute this statement.

Bevets

What did you have in mind?

Could you please give a quote from Da Vinci where he explicitly states that the figure to the right of Jesus in that painting isn't a woman? It's art man, it's up for interpretation.


Could you please give a quote from Da Vinci where he explicitly states that the figure of Jesus in that painting isn't a woman?

Along with trashing Christianity, Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code is a veritable museum of errors where Renaissance art is concerned. Art historians have been slow in responding, mostly because it is difficult to know where to start. The novelist's imaginative notions of iconography may make for best-selling fiction, but they are wildly at variance with what is known about the life and work of Leonardo. ~ Elizabeth Lev Art History Professor at Duquesne University

St. John was invariably represented as a beautiful young man whose special affinity with Jesus was expressed by his being seated at Jesus' right. Leonardo's St. John conforms to this type, and parallels for the absence of a chalice appear in earlier Italian examples. ~ Bruce Boucher Curator of European Decorative Arts and Sculpture at the Art Institute of Chicago

The best thing about the book is the imaginative and creative fiction he's created out of these paintings. You have to give the author some credit for that. But speaking as a historian, it's unacceptable. ~ David Franklin Chief Art Curator at the National Gallery

Vargas: "Isn't it possible that is a woman next to Jesus?"

Wasserman: "No, of course not."

Vargas: "It looks like a woman."

Wasserman: "No it doesn't."

Vargas: "Why don't you think so?"

Wasserman: "Because it looks like a young male. I see no breasts. The fact that he has long hair, so does Christ have long hair, so does James the figure with his arms stretched out, have long hair, so does that figure second from the left have long hair."

Vargas: "But all the other figures, their faces look distinctly masculine, while John's looks quite feminine."

"Yes, the matter of the fact in most representations of the Lord's Supper in Florence he looks like a, he's a very, very young man." ~ Jack Wasserman Professor of Art History at Princeton
 
2006-05-19 12:58:56 AM  
Could we all agree then that St. John was probably gay?
 
2006-05-19 01:00:50 AM  
Bevets
Along with trashing Christianity,

I'm curious, where in Dan Brown's lame ass book does he say Jesus did not work miracles and was not the Son of God?
 
2006-05-19 01:05:27 AM  
Action Replay Nick
I'm curious, where in Dan Brown's lame ass book does he say Jesus did not work miracles and was not the Son of God?

And furthermore, where does it say he was not crucified, dead, and resurrected? Is the idea of Jesus having relations with a woman so terrifying that so many people feel the need to produce all of this "evidence"?
 
2006-05-19 01:07:43 AM  
ARN

I'm pretty sure the book postulates that Jesus didn't die on the cross, and that he fathered children after he survived. But then again, I read it right after it came out, several years ago, so could be misremembering.
 
2006-05-19 01:09:52 AM  
BlueGargoyle

And since this link will undoubtedly get axed by an admin anyway, I would just like to say that I enjoy masturbating with sandpaper while looking at pictures of Bea Arthur.

Aaaaaand green.

Hope your mom's not a liter, or you're going to get a sob-filled phone call tomorrow afternoon.
 
2006-05-19 01:11:28 AM  
Edsel: The great thing about the Da Vinci Code is that it let a lot of idiots feel as though they were partaking of a great work of literature.

I just thought it was a fun read.

Not as fun as Calvin & Hobbes.

But, more fun than Garfield :)
 
2006-05-19 01:12:19 AM  
Oh, and how much, exactly, did you pay for this link, Bevets??
 
2006-05-19 01:15:04 AM  
SockMonkeyHolocaust: You force people to think and that's a good thing.

Actually, he makes me laugh.

He doesn't present a single thought of his own.

He just quotes things (usually the Bible).
 
2006-05-19 01:17:55 AM  
Judging from these comments, I believe Bevets may qualify as a persecuted Christian.
 
2006-05-19 01:19:13 AM  
Along with trashing Christianity,

Action Replay Nick

I'm curious, where in Dan Brown's lame ass book does he say Jesus did not work miracles and was not the Son of God?

"At this gathering," Teabing said, "many aspects of Christianity were debated and voted upon -- 'the date of Easter, the role of the bishops, the administration of sacraments, and, of course , the divinity of Jesus."

"I don't follow. His divinity?"

"My dear," Teabing declared, "until that moment in history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet... a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal."

"Not the Son of God?"

"Right," Teabing said. "Jesus' establishment as 'the Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea."

"Hold on. You're saying Jesus' divinity was the result of a vote?"

"A relatively close vote at that," Teabing added. The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 232-3

"What I mean," Teabing countered, "is that almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false." The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 235

Sophie looked skeptical. "My friends who are devout Christians definitely believe that Christ literally walked on water, literally turned water into wine, and was born of a literal virgin birth."

"My point exactly," Langdon said. "Religious allegory has become a part of the fabric of reality. And living in that reality helps millions of people cope and be better people."

"But it appears their reality is false." The Da Vinci Code (2003) p. 342
 
2006-05-19 01:22:02 AM  
What, did you read the book with a highliter in your hand?
 
Displayed 50 of 151 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  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.

Report