I bought The Da Vinci Code as a new read during the holidays. There is so much hype around this book and the newly-released movie that i couldn't resist to set my hands on it. I read the previous installation of Robert Langdon's quest of mystery revelation in Angels and Demons but the Da Vinci Code is just as good, if not better, as the former.
The book transpire the alledged cover-ups in Christianity history and mysteries which dwelled among the secret societies which guard the ultimate truth. The story evolved around the works of the revered artist, architect and philosopher of the 15th century, Leonardo Da Vinci. With his creativity and ingenious intepretation of Da Vinci works, Dan Brown really had the readers spiralling down an abyss of confusion between fact and fiction. His assumptions that there were clear indication of metaphors of the biblical character Mary Magdelene in Da Vinci's work and that some historical monuments around Europe manifest some hidden secrets was mind-blobbing. Incessant episodes of code breakings and more code breakings added much suspense to the already intriguing book.
As a buddhist myself, i read this book for mere entertainment and i had no interest in historical facts. I knew there were debates about the authenticity and credibility in Dan Brown's work all around the world. Some Christians were left in tears of disbelief as some theories had shaken the very foundation of their inner faith. Some Christians held strongly to their ground and branded the book heretic and blasphemous. So Dark the Con of Man, and so Smart the Business Man. So smart of Dan Brown. What drew more attention and concerns emotionally than religion itself? With little creativity and some parts and pieces of research of past historians, he produced a fictitious novel which makes his one of the richest and influential writers after JK Rowling.
Then, i thought of another recent controversial book called 1421: The Year China Discoverd the World. The author Gavin Mendes proposed some theories about Zheng He finding the world before Christopher Columbus which caused a stirrup among historians, East and West. But his findings have loose ends and not strong enough to support his argument. Thus, in a documentary by National Geographic, he fell victims the masterful interrogation of the interviewer and his theories fell into parts, one by one. It left Mendes grasping for air, desperately concealing the flaws his ambiguous claims and theories which was quesionable for their credibility. Since then, his book was branded as more of a lie to earn attention and business ventures.
But you can't blame a former sailor and seafarer who had little training in writing like Dan Brown, a graduate of Amherst College and Phillip Exeter Academy for creative writing. With a little more craftmanship and some innovations, he could have made a much more interesting story of Zheng He playing tennis with King George, of Zheng He playing mahjong with the Timbaktu Chiefman, of Zheng He's rendezvous with Red Indians, ec cetera, ec cetera... With a pinch zest and some fabrications, he could have turned a boring book into a money-making machine. Whenever people find faults in his theories which question his credibility as an historian and claiming him as a fake, he could easily flip his book to the back of its hard cover, directing his readers to an inconspicuous corner with a punny statement:
"Work of Fiction".
Then, i thought of another recent controversial book called 1421: The Year China Discoverd the World. The author Gavin Mendes proposed some theories about Zheng He finding the world before Christopher Columbus which caused a stirrup among historians, East and West. But his findings have loose ends and not strong enough to support his argument. Thus, in a documentary by National Geographic, he fell victims the masterful interrogation of the interviewer and his theories fell into parts, one by one. It left Mendes grasping for air, desperately concealing the flaws his ambiguous claims and theories which was quesionable for their credibility. Since then, his book was branded as more of a lie to earn attention and business ventures.
But you can't blame a former sailor and seafarer who had little training in writing like Dan Brown, a graduate of Amherst College and Phillip Exeter Academy for creative writing. With a little more craftmanship and some innovations, he could have made a much more interesting story of Zheng He playing tennis with King George, of Zheng He playing mahjong with the Timbaktu Chiefman, of Zheng He's rendezvous with Red Indians, ec cetera, ec cetera... With a pinch zest and some fabrications, he could have turned a boring book into a money-making machine. Whenever people find faults in his theories which question his credibility as an historian and claiming him as a fake, he could easily flip his book to the back of its hard cover, directing his readers to an inconspicuous corner with a punny statement:
"Work of Fiction".
No comments:
Post a Comment