The DaVinci Code (1 Viewer)

[Ninjerk]

I was wondering if anyone here had read any appreciable amount of TDC. I read the first chapter and the factoid was interesting. However, I get the impression from the controversy over the book that Dan Brown has made inaccurate/misleading claims about historical events and it seems that the religious and historical communities both are in agreement that TDC's seeming "fact-based" story is in fact not factual. I have one friend that I know read the book through and he, like many in the religious community, use claims within the book to support the book itself! I don't remember the name of the argumentative fallacy that is, but I do remember it being one.

I was wondering if anyone has read the book and formed opinions or have opinions about Dan Brown/TDC or his/its fans. I have another friend who may have read it in its entirety, but at least read enough to tell me that the writing itself was poor and this lead me to wonder what you guys think about it.

 

[SamDusky]

I bought the book (haven't read it yet), because I heard that it was poorly written and am intending to study it so that I can learn the secret of poor writing (I'm sure many would probably say I already must know), so that I can sell 40 million copies; just as he did. As a publisher, I've seen a lot of pure crap felling trees while other, worthy works never see the light of day (on this point, I differ with Buk who says there are no undiscovered geniuses). Buk dedicated "Pulp" to bad writing, so he knew more than the rest of us.

On the "facts" contained in the book, the author, in interviews everywhere, is adamant about reminding people that what he wrote is pure fiction and makes no claims to any authenticity. The beauty of taking on religious subjects is that people get so up-tight when having implications put forth about their sacred cows and belief systems (that may be his greatest accomplishment). Tempests and teapots come to mind; and I'm intending to write a book that holds the Pope dresses in a leather bustier and high-heels while sporting a long, black whip.

On your fallacy question, from my last book (dealing with religion, appropriately enough):
The logical fallacy, circulus in probando, is called so because of its originator engaging in "vicious circle" logic, circular argument or reasoning. The conclusion that is reached is included in the premises that are being taken upon and stated as the validity of the proof of the argument; and is tantamount to the invalid argument form given as self-referential proof. This is called a self-referential proof in that, also, the very conclusion that one is drawing is being proven and validated by cited references taken from and pointing to the very object about which one is attempting to draw one's final and completed conclusion. It should be pointed out here that this, in itself, does not make them untrue or invalid a priori because its conclusions are based on a linguistic slight-of-hand; it simply means that the argument for its validity is not proven.

SD

 

[zoom man]

I liked it for what it was-> a fun, fast well-told piece of fiction aching to be made into a movie.
Angels and Demons, the same thing.
I appreciate an author that can keep his audience, and both books kept me reading to the end. Like reading a good screenplay->
Boom Boom Boom, ala any Patterson novel, certainly not character driven etc.,
(Like one of my fav today, Arthur Phillips' Prague...).

I'm not a big fan of popular/best-selling fiction
But for a quick jaunt in a plane/etc. they're perfect.
And now with so many DVC knock-offs,...well, I've read 2 for fun because all the others are rec'ing negative reviews.
Sierra's Secret Supper is a good one, wordier tho, and not as cuddly with the characters. You can tell Brown was having fun writing.
DVC I would never re-read, but I'm glad I read it....

 

[hoochmonkey9]

read it, fast, fun, forgettable.

 

[bmcg]

Originally Posted by SamDusky
I'm intending to write a book that holds the Pope dresses in a leather bustier and high-heels while sporting a long, black whip.


damm Sam

I thought it was only us uber RC's that knew about the pope's fetish for leather, heels and whips - suppose he wasn't known as the vatican's rottweiler for nought.
lookin forward to your book.

 

[SamDusky]

I literally 'Laughed Out Loud' when I read your rottweiler comment to my comment (so much so that I feared awakening my wife, blissfully sleeping in the next room [it?s 2:32 am here]). And, yes, when done, I will most likely announce it here. Thanks,

SD

 

[Melissa Sue]

it kept me turning pages for a few nights, but it didnt blow my mind or anything. as far as i knew everything controversial and scandalous that's in there was stuff that's already been known for quite some time. that and he makes it fairly clear in several passages that the extremists he writes about are not the norm, so i dont know why everyone's panties are in a bunch. while silly and anti-climatic, it's at least more interesting than lolita, which is currently boring the hell out of me.

 

[oneiros]

The Da Vinci Code novel is naturally a great piece of literature. It is one of the most selling books of all time, has caused tremendous controversy and even law suits. I read the thing about two years ago, and I found it very entertaining. Not all books have to be fundamentally deep, metaphoric and subversive. Novels as entertainment are perfectly fine by me.

Now, that being said, the book has very limited language, lots of logical errors (why not simply put the damn keystone in a freezer so that the vinegar freezer and pry the damn thing open? etc) and a very silly personal gallery. But entertaining and lots of very nifty ideas.

The movie, The Da Vinci Code breaks my balls. Not only have they changed the letter a in Da to the greek letter llambda because they think it looks cooler (the film thus reads The Dllambda Code), they have raped the entire book.

They have kept way too much of the dialoge (the film literally consists of people chatting like mad while they run, drive, fight, fly etc) from the book, and they have ADDED pointless details. The acting is horrible, to say the least, the production is poor, the script terrible. The only good thing about the movie is Ian McKellan (Gandalf) as Leigh Teabing. A fantastic performance worth almost the entire movie. Tom Hanks' performance would be pulled off better by a lepra ridden five year old girl. No joke.

 

[Slobodan Burgher]

The Da Vinci Code novel is naturally a great piece of literature. It is one of the most selling books of all time, has caused tremendous controversy and even law suits. I read the thing about two years ago, and I found it very entertaining. Not all books have to be fundamentally deep, metaphoric and subversive. Novels as entertainment are perfectly fine by me.

Fair enough. I read it a few years ago and I was hooked for a day or two just as I may be sold on, say, an action movie. So, I admit reading the book can be entertaining.

But "great piece of literature"? That is going too far. Would you say TDC equals Crime & Punishment, Journey to the End of the Night, Mysteries, Rememberance of Things Past, Finnegans Wake, etc etc? I'd say "a great piece of populist bullshit". I admit it was entertaining for awhile -and while I don't want to be a literary snob, I think that something like The Diceman (also a populist entertaining book, as opposed to literary) is far more rewarding than TDC.

And I am not saying so just because the ending was so crass (actually on second though, the whole book was crass).

 

[mjp]

The Da Vinci Code novel is naturally a great piece of literature.

Naturally?

That book (or the phenomena of that book) kind of reminds me of Camille Paglia's Sexual Personae - back in the early 1990's everyone carried a copy of that around too, but no one read it.

Do people actually read The Da Vinci Code? It seems to me that most of those massive multi-million sellers are just used as props.

 

[cirerita]

haven't read the book, but watched the "movie" a few days ago. It was soooo bad that I felt like crying. What a fucking shame.

 

[hoochmonkey9]

It seems to me that most of those massive multi-million sellers are just used as props.

I do some visual display work and on one project a designer wanted to find a bunch of hardcover books and take the dustjackets of and wrap the books in a plain beige paper so the books in the bookshelves wouldn't stand out and take away from the rest of the room.
fuck. me.

 

[ClassIntellectual]

haven't read the book, but watched the "movie" a few days ago. It was soooo bad that I felt like crying. What a fucking shame.

I've read and seen it. Only saving grace of the movie was Ian McKellen. But I did like Audrey Tautou more with the long hair, not that strangely short haircut she had in Amelie.

 

[cirerita]

what about Tom Hanks? He seems so out of place throughout those neverending 153 minutes...

 

[mjp]

I do some visual display work and on one project a designer wanted to find a bunch of hardcover books and take the dustjackets of and wrap the books in a plain beige paper so the books in the bookshelves wouldn't stand out and take away from the rest of the room.
fuck. me.

Ha, I'm not surprised. There are places in Los Angeles where interior decorators buy books by the yard. Heh.

 

[Slobodan Burgher]

I think I'd see the movie if it was for free, but then only to see that hot French chick.

:)

 

[riverrat]

oneiros
great? literature? good grief!

rrat

 

[Brother Schenker]

...But "great piece of literature"? That is going too far. Would you say TDC equals Crime & Punishment, Journey to the End of the Night, Mysteries, Rememberance of Things Past, Finnegans Wake, etc etc?

First of all, as Strother Martin said in C&C's Up In Smoke, "We're not gonna have a goddamn family brawl!"

Not here to pick a fight, just felt impelled to point something out.

I dug The Dice Man and The Book of The Die. Fuck yea, by Luke Rhinehart. I think he's fulla shit, but I enjoyed both books.
I like his spirit.

But your list, good sir, reeks of academia/college/university-approved & applauded books. The highbrow & pretentious college crowd usually praise the worst slogs in literature, and with the exception of the Celine book, all those other books are tricks & traps that would only be endured by someone who needed to be able to honestly say they had redd those "classics".

I tried to read them and either fell asleep or realized quickly the book in question was meant for those into puns & decoding & deciphering obscure words and phrases. Fucken word games, not linear storytelling. And that's fine for those who like such things. I bless them with flowers & rainbows. I really do.

I'm only speaking out, Slobodan, because you jumped on our good buddy oneiros with the line about "populist bullshit" as if you were somehow above him with your stale, ancient, college-approved list of "great pieces of literature". And I don't think you are. But I don't think bad of you, either. You obviously like Bukowski, so how bad can you be?;)

 

[riverrat]

brother schenker
you seem stuck on sharps - you speak (write) of 'pick' and 'impelled' and 'point' as if the mention of same lends substance to your position -
you offer a fragment of king's english: 'good sir' -
and mug the attainment of literacy in '...approved books.'
brother schenker - i doubt any (censor) approves the books of choice chosen by any bukowski fan -
your axe is indeed dull - i have but one wish - please grind it upon the ass cheek of a member devoted to the following (of the masses)...

peace brother - peace good sir! for you are well met!

mr. river rat, a.a., b.a., etc., etc. (smiles)

 

[SamDusky]

First of all, as Strother Martin said in C&C's Up In Smoke, "We're not gonna have a goddamn family brawl!"
...
But your list, good sir, reeks of academia/college/university-approved & applauded books. The highbrow & pretentious college crowd usually praise the worst slogs in literature, and with the exception of the Celine book, all those other books are tricks & traps that would only be endured by someone who needed to be able to honestly say they had redd those "classics".
...
I tried to read them and either fell asleep or realized quickly the book in question was meant for those into puns & decoding & deciphering obscure words and phrases. Fucken word games, not linear storytelling.
....
You obviously like Bukowski, so how bad can you be?;)

I don't thimk hits vary fare fore hew 2 putt dawn those of U.S. whoo aire into righting in pins and obscene palaverings, lexemes, morphemes, ipsissimis verbis, & verbatim et litteratim. Whee diserve a plate hat the table of intelexual disconcussion, Oslo. Sew Hiff hugh don mine, whell just? the capitan?s away, slow sailors will play?kelp hawn dewing whet weeeeee dooo.

Hace un ice daye,

SD

P. S. I lika da Bukowski; and sometimes imitate the shit out of him, but sometimes not. I like a book that mixes it up a little so as to take a reader on a trip. I just ask that an author not bore me to death, that's all.

i.e.:
puns & decoding & deciphering obscure words and phrases. Fucken word games, not linear storytelling.

 

[Brother Schenker]

brother schenker...
...your axe is indeed dull

Ah yes, dull...and yet the glint of said dullness caught your eye and drew you out of your lethargy and caused you to express your wit and...jealousy.

It's good to be the king.:p

 

[Slobodan Burgher]

First of all, as Strother Martin said in C&C's Up In Smoke, "We're not gonna have a goddamn family brawl!"

Not here to pick a fight, just felt impelled to point something out.

I dug The Dice Man and The Book of The Die. Fuck yea, by Luke Rhinehart. I think he's fulla shit, but I enjoyed both books.
I like his spirit.

But your list, good sir, reeks of academia/college/university-approved & applauded books. The highbrow & pretentious college crowd usually praise the worst slogs in literature, and with the exception of the Celine book, all those other books are tricks & traps that would only be endured by someone who needed to be able to honestly say they had redd those "classics".

I tried to read them and either fell asleep or realized quickly the book in question was meant for those into puns & decoding & deciphering obscure words and phrases. Fucken word games, not linear storytelling. And that's fine for those who like such things. I bless them with flowers & rainbows. I really do.

I'm only speaking out, Slobodan, because you jumped on our good buddy oneiros with the line about "populist bullshit" as if you were somehow above him with your stale, ancient, college-approved list of "great pieces of literature". And I don't think you are. But I don't think bad of you, either. You obviously like Bukowski, so how bad can you be?;)

I assure you firstly that I do not think that I stand above anyone with my stale bleeding eyes. No sirre.

But no worries kid, think so if you like. For the sake of "objectivity" I added the two last ones on my list of examples of "great literature". I can assure further, however, alas and hence, that I sincerely dislike Finnegans Wake, I read about 15 pages and then though "fuck this shit". And, Proust, well I would probably try to read more of him but I don't have any time. Anyway, I know many people who feel that Journey to the End of the Night is a nightmare to read...because of the...dots...and...the crazy dream sessions...that are too much!...too cryptical...etc. So, where does that put anything? I don't know. But nor do I care.

But to be serious, I think the "college-approved list" is a red-herring. It's the reverse notion popular by literary-snobs that, say, would argue that Bukowsky was just a drunk who couldnt write, that Kerouac wasn't an proper author and that he just wrote everything that came to his head etc etc. In my experience, the academia / college approved stuff etc is more the dirty rotten dozens of Ibsen, Shakespeare, Dickens et al. But anyway, sorry if I offended oneiros or anyone else.

For the sake of rational discussion I stand by my claim that i'll watch the TDC film to see that lovely woman, longhair shorthair whatever.

Yeah, and I do like Buk. :)

 

[oneiros]

What is great literature?

Is it that of which the higher educated academics all agree are of 'high literally quality'? Is it that which sell in high numbers? Is it totally up to the individual?

As far as saying TDC is a great piece of literature; I still stand by that. I am of the firm belief that anything written that causes such turmoil must have great qualities to it. Much as the same way Martin Luther pinned his theses on a church door in Germany is a great piece of literature (although only simply a list).

You should do well to remember one thing as well:

Bukowski was considered lewd, populist, sexist, illiterate (they thought his language was bad) and not to be considered great literature in the sixties and seventies by many many scholars.

What is so horrible about TDC? mjp, you question my use of naturally. Have you read the book? You ask if anyone have actually read the damn thing. Well, I can assure that I read it, and I read it with much enthusiasm.

I also read The Dice Man with great enthusiasm.
I also read The search for the Dice Man with great enthusiasm.
I hate, repeat, HATE Crime and Punishment. I think it is the dullest book written by the dullest writer in the history of time. Fjodor Dostoyevski my fat ass.

I also read The Lord of the Rings with great enthusiasm.
I saw Kill Bill one and two and thought they were great pieces of filmography (although they were simply action movies).

Just my point of view.

 

[zoom man]

I hate, repeat, HATE Crime and Punishment. I think it is the dullest book written by the dullest writer in the history of time. Fjodor Dostoyevski my fat ass.

WOW, Sorry Oneiros,
Go ahead and vote me off this Island,
But I won't read another post by you b/c of your FD impression.

Yeah,
That makes me equally discriminatory too, I guess,
But I think FD is the BOMB
(Brothers K blew my mind away)
Ok,
You were extreme,
So was I,
But I'm sticking to my stand, sorry,....
FD Is Awesome

 

[Bukfan]

What is great literature?

Is it that of which the higher educated academics all agree are of 'high literally quality'? Is it that which sell in high numbers? Is it totally up to the individual?

As far as saying TDC is a great piece of literature; I still stand by that. I am of the firm belief that anything written that causes such turmoil must have great qualities to it. Much as the same way Martin Luther pinned his theses on a church door in Germany is a great piece of literature (although only simply a list).

I have?nt read TDC but I have seen many tv programs on the subject. There seems to be a general consensus that the book is popular only because of the religious theme. People are hungry for that kind of stuff in our modern times. Furthermore it is said that the book is not that well written, technically speaking.
Mind you, I am only quoting. I have read many bestsellers like say, The Godfather for instance. They were all greatly entertaining, but not great literature. The authors just new how to put an exciting novel together. And there?s nothing wrong with that.
Now, FD is great literature, everybody agrees. You don?t have to belong to "academia" to hold that opinion. I have only read "Notes from the underground" by FD, and I think that book is great literature. Of course there are books of great literature that is not in my taste, but they are great literature all the same. Just like Picasso or Leonardo da Vinci are great painters whether I like them or not.
Just because a text stirs things up or even causes a revolution, does?nt make it great literature. If that were true, Karl Marx?economic theories should be considered great literature. Then how come nobody reads them?
In deciding who is a great painter for instance there are some parameters such as how he uses the colors, how he balances the picture, does he master all the techniques of his profession etc.etc. And the same goes for writers of course.
And just as it is foolish to be a snob in these matters, it is equally
foolish to snob downwards.
Just my two cents...

 

[Slobodan Burgher]

Actually I think there are many people who consider Karl Marx as great literature. Likewisely I think there are many people who +still+ read him. (Someone gave me K.Marx complete works in multi-volumes and they help stack up my kitchen table.)

Bukfan, that was my point exactly way up on the tread: snobbery works up-down and down-up.

On one level, I think the discussion on what constitute "great literature" is pointless. Anything can of course be great literature and everyone can decide for him/herself. I think there's a lot of comics that can be considered great literature, I also think that for e.g. GG Allin should be seen as a great poet (some of his lyrics and the musical presentation is poetic), I think that a rotten alleyway full of garbage makes a perfect picture and a piece of art, and all these examples are very individual and many people would completely disagree with me.

That said, I am not arguing that the word literature should lose all its meaning and that is should be used indiscretely to everything.

Basically forget it.

 

[oneiros]

There seems to be a general consensus that the book is popular only because of the religious theme.

Seriously MJP, do not judge a book by what others say. It will only make you look ignorant. To judge anything by hearsay is pointless. It would be like me going 'Leonardo Da Vinci is a poor painter. I say so because that dude over there happens to be a curator at the London Museum of Modern Art, and I think everthing he says is true. Not that I have actually seen the picture myself, mind you.' Do you see how foolish that looks?

Now, FD is great literature, everybody agrees.

No. One, I don't agree; thus making it not everybody. Also, comparing the absolute values of painted art versus the absolute values of written art is pointless. Several persons believe Odd Nerdrum is a shitty artist. But he paints far better (technically) than for example Michaelangelo (who was mainly a sculptor). Written text is always subjective. I think FD is a shitty writer. He writes far to obsessively about the interior of, say, a common house. He over uses repetition, the characters lack depth and, well, he is BORING. In my
view FD is viewed by many (not everyone) academics as great simply because FD was one of the first people to write in novel form.

If that were true, Karl Marx?economic theories should be considered great literature. Then how come nobody reads them?

Here you speak against yourself. You ask why nobody reads them as a way to justify something as being great literature. In that sense you have already agreed on my point of TDC as great exactly because many people read it. Further on, Das Kapital (by Marx) IS great literature. It has created Communism for crying out lout. The Bible is also a great piece of literature, but it is not especially well written technically. You have the endless repetition of who is related to who, the tiresome archaic language, the poor logic (god is love, god is hate, god is vengeance etc etc) and so forth. But it is a piece of great literature.

Well, sorry for rambling on, but I do feel strongly about this.

 

[hank solo]

Seriously MJP, do not....

Err.. I think you mean Bukfan.

Obviously people don't always agree about this sort of thing. My own view is that anyone?s personal opinion of art, be it a painting, a sculpture or writing or any sort is always subjective.

I've read TDC - and my opinion is that it is badly written but that it is still a fairly entertaining read, although it did infuriate me much of the time I was not put off from finishing it. Round here it seems that its popularity is really a mixture of word of mouth and all the media attention it has received, much of which of course is down to the supposedly controversial religious themes and the plagiarism charge that was bought in the London courts.

I won't rush to watch the movie. Although, to quote British comedian Paul Whitehouse

"Aren't movies brilliant. Even bad movies are good, because at least they tried."​

Whether that applies to books too, well I'll let you decide.

 

[dermaface]

Spend your book money on How to Make Love to a Negro-not The Da Vinci Code-Ok-Deal

The Da Vinci Code novel is naturally a great piece of literature.

I would not know if it is good or bad. The fact that it is so popular means I would rather have someone jab a pencil in my eye than buy it. I have a hard time reading most books on the New York Times best seller list. Not because of snobbism but the incest the Times and book publishing houses practice so most books are predetermined to be best sellers. I try to save my money and buy lesser known books from lesser known authors (you know the way Buk used to be). I also do not plan on going to the movie so I can sit with a glazed look on my face when "The Da Vinci Code " is mentioned and say, "Uh ha" , "absolutely" , "a classic" " the book was so much better than the movie" , "could they cast someone worse than Tom Hanks" and nod my head to reinforce all the bullshit being spewed.
The best book ever written to elicit looks and wonderment when you carry it is the fine novel by Dany Laferriere, "How to make Love to a Negro". It is funny and hard hitting and worth the price just to carry it around different venues and watch the looks. Your local bookstore probably does not have it but have them send for it. If you are on this link you will like it. Dany also wrote, Why Must a Black Writer Write about Sex?"-not as good as How to make Love to a Negro but better than 98 % of the shit on book shelves at corporate booksellers like Barnes and Noble.Most of you probably do this anyway but try to buy books from independent booksellers. Sorry if that sounds preachy.

 

[cirerita]

B looked up to Fyodor, as he used to call him. Is that hearsay as well? :D

 

[oneiros]

Sorry MJP! I of course meant Bukfan. And I did not mean what I wrote as an insult, I am just debating here.

 

[Slobodan Burgher]

Just to clarify, I am not sure I agree that solely because a book has provoked lots of so-called controversy (TDC) or has produced a real factual difference (good or bad) in the world (ComManif) would make said book a great piece of literature.

In the case of TDC I would go as far as say that it was a great book because it provoked debates about religion but most importantly it seems to have influenced people to seek out other books (and this goes for other books of dubious interest and value such as Harry Potter).

The universal consensus seems to be that it was a good book with a crap ending and that it promises so much and that people inevitable was disappointed with it afterwards. And that this (in my own dubious argument that don't seem to lead anywhere) made readers of TDC realise that reading books is actually quite fun and that there must be better ones out there. In short, after TDC more poeple are reading (again). If this is true I think it is a remarkable achievement even if it was an accidential one.

But back to what I wanted to say :). I still don't think that TDC is a great piece of literature because I feel very strongly that art cannot and should not be judged on its effect on the world, or on how many read the book, or how many copies sold etc.

In short, art can be great even if nobody have noticed it. Most great writers that I love to read weren't even published in their lifetimes.

Would you suggest that John Fante's books weren't (great) literature because he did not reach popular mainstream during his life (or after)?

ps. It is all in the interest of rational discussion so no need for anyone to get hot-tempered or take anything personal etc. keep them egos in check and rein in your hormones! :) ds

 

[oneiros]

Would you suggest that John Fante's books weren't (great) literature because he did not reach popular mainstream during his life (or after)?

No. I never said anything about a books sales being the only qualification for great literature. I do, however, claim that huge sales implies great literature. But Fante's work can surely be great without many readers. A tree that falls in the forest DOES make a sound even if nobody is around to hear it!

 

[SamDusky]

I do, however, claim that huge sales implies great literature.

I do believe somebody's jiving here; you no serious, oneiros, are you? Sure your name?s not ?onerous? as in troublesome (stirring up the shit, so to speak). I?ve got a comparison for you; there was once a song called ?Yummy, Yummy, Yummy, I?ve Love in my Tummy?; it sold a few million copies; did that make it a better song than, say, ?Chimes of Freedom?; I don? think so.

To paraphrase a master: ?There?s enough stupidity in humanity on any given day to cause your brain to hiccup and your ass to gas a gargantuan fart of insociotude and credulity.? So let it be written....

SD

 

[oneiros]

Okay. And what am I to draw from this? Did I say anything about music? Hm? Did I? No. I wrote about literature. There is a difference. And I did say 'implies'. Not 'huge sales MAKES it great literature.' I did read the book and found it to be good.

That last paragraph of yours... what the hell am I to read into it? Are you calling me stupid? Are you boasting of your own flatulence?

And why do you say I am stirring up trouble? I'm just saying TDC is a great piece of literature. If that is so terrible to you, just the more reason to stick to my claim.

And my name is Oneiros as in the greek word for Morpheus, or the more commonly known Sandman if you will.

 

[mjp]

I don't think SamDusky would say or imply that anyone was stupid. But if we must duel at dawn over books, I reserve the right to videotape the whole thing and add it to cirerita's extras DVD.

 

[SamDusky]

Well, mjp, I did laugh my ass off on that one, for sure! Good on Ya! Ha!

No, Mr. Oneiros, I was not starting a flame, just pointing out that popularity is a dubious yardstick (meter-stick, for the metrically inclined). Now, being a card-carrying member of the logistics brigade, I'd have to say (and this is meaning no disrespect, sir) that, by definition, the word "makes" has, as the 43rd definition "Considered as being" and the word "implies" has, as its 5th definition, "Means"; and, it could be construed, that these two usages do have a certain overlap (so you can understand how one would draw, perhaps, erroneous assumptions about your implications).

And on the paraphrase, no personal indications at all; I was sort of looking to show that the "public" (not anyone in present company), must be considered as an unfair judge of what is good (sometimes, by dumb luck, they, the crowd, do stumble upon a true talent, and it gets celebrated; but often, the truly talented [and it has been said by others elsewhere, herein] are overlooked until after their demise). The metaphor that Buk?s life offers has served to bring a ray of hope to many of those so afflicted (with, alas, the curse of true genius?ha! [cough]).

And, no, I was just shitin? you about the ?trouble? remark; thought you would find it funny (admittedly, my sense of humor leaves a little to be desired). Hey, we Norskies, got to stick together (or something like that). I hope this explanation throughly obfuscates the matter properly,

SD

 

[cirerita]

mjp,
sure, videotape them in HD -I want ALL the details- and send the tape over. It'll make a nice companion DVD to the extras DVD #2... if it ever happens, that is.

 

[dirtbird23]

I read the book and watched the movie.The book was ok but had been too hyped up for me to ever like it.The movie however.Dont go there!It sucks dicks in hell.Tom Hanks's casting as the leading light of the movie was the biggest mistake EVER.He was so unconvincing he should burn in hell.All the contraversy stirred up was great.
The fans of TDC are really wanting to believe all the speculative historical facts so much,I find there is no point in debating with them. Its like trying to talk to a priest about darwin's evolution! pointless

 

[poptop]

Sequel Of No Equal

I'd like to see Dan Brown do a follow-up
to his mega-blockbuster, and have it edited
by John Martin. Call it Da Vinci on Rye!