Had a terribly long argument with a friend of mine who felt that Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code needs to be banned as also the movie. His reasons were 1. Dan Brown is being insensitive to the faith of millions of Christians by writing a work of fiction about Jesus. 2. He is being dishonest in presenting fiction as facts and thereby misleading his readers.
I can accept point 1 partially in that people of faith are tender and can be ticklish to barbs at them and do not take them well. The argument that writers or film-makers cannot attempt to do the same thing for other religions (remember the Prophet Cartoons) and take for granted the Christians is also sort of true. (A similar argument has been used by Tam Brahmins whenever they are depicted in movies, need I say abominably)
As for his second point, while I accept that for someone ignorant of the true history of Christianity, whatever Dan Brown has written reads like the 'truth and nothing but the truth', thereby misleading them and misrepresenting Christianity, I am not sure if it is a bad thing. I mean, if he succeeds in getting people to accept a concocted story as naked truth, then he has succeeded as a writer, right? Is there dishonesty involved? Doesn't the writer explicitly state in selling his book under 'Fiction' that it is not entirely about 'Historical Facts'. Is he responsible for the readers' gullibility?
One of my favourite books is Kalki's Ponniyin Selvan. A historical fiction that took the little information we had from Rock-Edicts and palm-leaf inscriptions and went on to weave a classic of epic proportions. I swear that Vanniyathevan was the most charming man on earth, Arulmozhi Vermar, the most regal of men, and they walked thus and talked thus. Did they really? We don't know. It was so credibly portrayed that you begin to believe that it is true. And that is where the writer shines.
And I must add that Dan Brown has tried hard (and blatantly at that) in not taking an anti-church stand. So why all this hullabaloo. On an aside, would all these organisations squeal even a meek protest if it wasn't such a successful book.
P.S. Watched Da Vinci Code yesternight and I must say it wasn't very satisfactory. Could have done better.
11 comments:
As a writer of fiction, Brown had every license to write a purported alternate history; After all, it is clear that the Good Book was compiled some three centuries after the so called event, and that it is a compilation and description more than anything else.
What is at issue here is whether people can question dogma, doctrine or accepted versions thereof.
Why can't they?
Why should organised religion and administrators thereof fear explorations of claims?
I don't understand the rationale for banning books or films, however bad they are. May be I am stupid.
Same here! I tried real hard to understand his point of view but even after two hours debating I cudn't agree with him.
I asked him (for he is a profound student of philosophy and theology) if wat Jesus christ stood for wud change if he was a married man. and his response (and I was shocked) was tht it wud. Jesus is no man, he says, he is the Saviour, the One God. he can't indulge in mortal trifles like marriage. it was as if His teachings wud become null and void if he had been married.
long ago i had a conversation and again i felt even in Hinduism, Bhagavad Gita wud still be a gr8 religious work even if Krishna hadn't said any of it. or if Krishna did say it and he was jus a prince and not an incarnate.
And ppl think i am simply crazy.
Priya hits the nail on the head.
Is Dan Brown and his bad novel worth all the breast-beating that is going on?
By banning the movie or trying to ban the book, our government is just displaying its lack of moral fibre.
No wonder, that spine they never possessed requires thinking beyond pleasing vote banks and that is a trait eminently lacking in our so called leaders.
More shame on us that we elected them.
Yup! Priya. Brown rides the wave of controversy and Lalitha, yes his book doesn't merit breast-beating.
Bad writing... I am not sure. I feel Dan Brown uses a very visual and slick style with a lot of action and suspense which is sickening to many and spectacular to some. So lets assign it just as a matter of taste.
But it does bring to question the fickleness of faith. The true believer is not affected in the least by other's opinion on his beliefs. and here we see them insecure at a mere book.
It's banned in TN....talk about religious tolerance! Even in most conservative Catholic countries it's not banned & not the Vatican city asked against this film. They only wanted the followers of the faith to boycott it.
The fact that it's being banned makes people want to see it more.
Its well known that Mr. Brown is a bad writer. However, I must admit that his books were quite gripping and 'unputdownable'. He does have a racy style that keeps you turning the pages, and he makes people think they're reading something very profound and intelligent. Those books are thrillers for those who don't read thrillers, novels for those who don't read novels.
And here we see them insecure at a mere book
Forget about the book, there are 'true' believers who are offended by a harmless cartoon!!!
Siva is raising the lid off a whole new cauldron.
I submit my take.
Write a book; okay, base it on researched info; give a false statement that most of the assertions and premises are true. (You can always claim it is part of the book, not real acknowledgment.)
No problem of suspending disbelief . The problem is that people are too gullible and believe and take as gospel whatever they read.
So how do we deal with the morons who believe everything they read?
Siva
You are absolutely right. That the movie is banned in TN (and Andhra too I guess) simply shows intolerance and I should imagine that that is an indicator of what the government is doing - dictating every single facet of our life. We don't want the govt to tell us wat to read or wat to wear.
Taking offence at an harmless cartoon is 'not taking a joke' which we see often even among ourselves. (my frenz got offended real bad at Dan Nanian's comedy show). but with DVC, this is not having enuf faith.
Lalitha
People are extraordinarily gullible if they believe everything that is said in the book. I guess it is due to the respect we give to the written word. Haven't we seen shops with a No Bargain board and the shopkeeper wud point at it if we tried bargaining. And we wud stop. Same with price. Write it. it is final.
Of course if they do believe, is it also the responsibility of the author to be clear abt wat is fact and wat is fiction?
If people can't seperate fact from fiction... The average reader is lazy, maybe.
hers is a link about the movie, you might enjoy this.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/07/opinion/07morton.html?th&emc=th
LOL! Lalita. That was great.
Post a Comment