Saturday, December 03, 2005

Do you know anyone who takes "The Da Vinci Code" seriously?

I admit it...I borrowed Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code about a year ago. A friend thought I might be interested, given my interest in puzzles and all.

It was a disappointment, to say the least.

Oh, well, I knew beforehand that it was a bash on Catholic doctrine, and that it was filled with fallacies about the Church. So I figured I was forewarned and tried to concentrate on the enigmatic storyline, being, as admitted, a puzzle lover at heart.

What a waste. I wasn't even clever.

The title should've tipped me off.

But the error, irritatingly, repeated itself throughout the book. The characters kept referring to works like the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper as "Da Vinci" works. Nobody does that! They're known as "works of Leonardo."

"Da Vinci" wasn't Leonardo's last name, for Pete's sake...he was from a town called "Vinci." I kept thinking: gee...if I wrote a book or created a painting, what would this guy have called it? I'm originally from Detroit, Michigan. I live in Boston. Would my opuses be known as "Of Detroits" or "Of Bostons?" Duh. I couldn't figure out what all the fuss was about.

Others — more learned than I — feel differently.

Amy Welborn, for example, wrote a book called De-coding Da Vinci.

And my good friends at Tradition, Family, and Property are alarmed enough at the upcoming movie (and video game!) to have produced a book called Rejecting the Da Vinci Code.

If you know anybody who has, or may, take this ridiculous novel as historical fact, I urge you to arm yourselves with the information these books have to offer.

Thank you.

And thanks to new friend Patte for the nudge ;-)