One of the questions that comes up in talking about this film: is why bother talking about this at all? After all I don't think too many people got upset over the inaccuracies and false portrayals of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade or Monty Python and the Holy Grail. So what makes the da vinci code different?
The problem is the quote on page 1 [emphasis is mine].
"All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."This statement is a masterpiece. By making this statement, before the novel begins, Brown sets the story in a different class than Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade or Monty Python and the Holy Grail. And, at the same time, enables him to say - "It's just a novel."
What a wonderful tactic - you can use truth, falsehood and everything in between to present your view of history and reality, and never have to defend your beliefs. You can claim it is fiction and claim it is rooted in "truth" [that is, Brown's version of truth] all at the same time. In this sense it is truly post-modern.
Why bother with an accurate view of history if you can create your own view?
Why settle for what is documented, when you can create your own documents?
That said how do we respond to the da vinci code?
Over the next few posts, I'll post some thoughts and resources.