--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mar 21, 2006, at 6:44 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > I'm not a fan of Dan Brown or his writing style. Reading > > the DaVinci Code, for a writer, is a lot like pulling > > your own teeth. :-) That said, it was as much of a page- > > turner for me as for anyone else. It may have been a > > formulaic, badly-written and even more badly-researched > > piece of shit, but it kept you reading. > > > > What I'm looking forward to is the movie version, which > > is almost certainly going to be better than the book. > > And I'm looking forward to its social impact here in > > France. There was already a backlash to the popularity > > of the book -- many, many publications writing articles > > dumping on mysticism and esoterisme from on high, trying > > to portray such things as the interest of children and > > the brain-damaged. (I'm not kidding.) But, all this > > rationalist backlash only *increased* sales, which > > pissed off the nay-sayers no end. I'm expecting the > > same phenomenon to happen with the movie, but on a > > bigger scale, because the film will be more popular > > than the book, and reach a much larger audience. > > > > I think it'll be fascinating to watch the backlash > > effect around the world. Who will get their buttons > > pushed by the themes in the movie? > > My reaction to the book, which I've only skimmed, was 'oh, > another rehash of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_'. And indeed > years after it's initial publication the authors of that > work are suing Dan Brown. I hope they win, because it's a > fairly clear ripoff in one sense, but in another not so > much.
There is not much chance of them winning. The authors of 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail' have absolutely ZERO credibility in the academic world that studies the period they wrote about, because *they* did exactly what they're claiming Dan Brown did. They "pulled a Castaneda" and interviewed legitimate scholars in the field, and then ripped off their work without credit- ing them. Their name is MUD among medieval scholars. Not to mention the simple fact that Dan Brown DID credit them in his book. He mentioned the book, by name, and gave credit where credit was due, something that the authors of HBHG did NOT do when dealing with their own sources. It's an obvious attempt by a couple of sleazeballs to drive up sales of their books by suing Brown just as the movie is about to come out. Don't get me wrong; I don't think all that much of Dan Brown, but this suit is completely without merit. A funny comment on Brown's *own* research style came from a review of the DaVinci Code in a Paris newspaper. It was only one line long, because that's all they needed: "The bestseller from the author who believes that when American college professors come to Paris, they stay at the Ritz." :-) That's a hilarious line if you've ever been to the Ritz and know how much it costs to stay there. From what I can tell, Brown himself didn't even stay there, because if he did he would have known enough about the street layout of that area of Paris to have been able to write the scene of his two main characters fleeing from the Louvre as if it could acutally have happened. :-) ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
