The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown

 The Da Vinci Code, published in 2003 by Dan Brown is primary based on the symbolic reading. How a murder of Jacques Sauneire has occurred in Louvre, which was actually committed by Silas an Albino Monk but Robert Langdon, a professor of symbology is tried to entrapped by Bezu Fache, policeman. Having sensed if Langdon would be really entrapped then, he is thwarted by Sophie Neuve and both the protagonists are eloped away from the Louvre.

From here the journey of solving various symbols is started and the entire story of the novel is exposed through these many various symbols and lastly also ended at the scene, where the symbol of Sarcophagus(Mary Magdalene) is confronted by Robert Langdon, perhaps giving some scope to explore more on.

1. Brown states on his website that his books are not anti-Christian, though he is on a 'constant spiritual journey' himself, and says that his book The Da Vinci Code is simply "an entertaining story that promotes spiritual discussion and debate" and suggests that the book may be used "as a positive catalyst for introspection and exploration of our faith."

Yes in a way, it doesn't suggest anything as such that Brown is anti-Christian or talking in favour of Christianity. But it seems from the novel and the revelation  of mystery that it is giving a free space for exploration, actually what spirituality is/how one can explore a human journey by not reaching on destination but just keeping on travelling through the journey. Where it will engulf many debates, encounters and discussions as these and through this only a new theory can be invented.

Although it is obvious that much of what Brown presented in his novel as absolutely true and accurate is neither of those, some of that material is of course essential to the intrigue, and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman has retained the novel's core, the Grail-related material: the sacred feminine, Mary Magdalene's marriage, the Priory of Sion, certain aspects of Leonardo's art, and so on[1].” How far do you agree with this observation of Norris J. Lacy?

1. (If)You have studied ‘Genesis’ (The Bible), ‘The Paradise Lost’ (John Milton) and ‘The Da Vinci Code’ (Dan Brown). Which of the narrative/s seem/s to be truthful? Whose narrative is convincing to the contemporary young mind?

Three of these are fictionalized, it can't be retained as something based on reality. John Milton has portrayed "God" in this novel as a human so another human can be given room to investigate upon God, actually what is there that constitutes an embodiment like God. Therefore here Eve is given that space.

1. What harm has been done to humanity by the biblical narration or that of Milton’s in The Paradise Lose? What sort of damage does narrative like ‘The Vinci Code’ do to humanity?

In Milton's Paradise lost, the story of Adam, Eve, Satan and God is narrated, which seems to be the descend of genesis. In this novel, Adam portrayed as an obedient Son of the God, while on the contrary as Eve shows her curiosity towards unknown things, she is portrayed as a fallen woman. As she is portrayed so, she and Adam are forced to leave the garden of Eden.Therefore in this way, event after event takes place in the novel.

From the very beginning, one is to see, how the differences regarding gender identity is created. Noone knows what actually was going into the mind of God. If he was literally discriminating/by discriminating trying to establish an entire new frame-work for existence of men-women together on Earth(can be seen through interdependancy/Yin-yang like concepts, where the existence of anything is seen through halves, and thus halves make any incomplete thing, a whole, that is of man & woman both. Where Osho's Hindi poem can also be taken as an example: Ardhnaarishwara, where similar characteristics regarding interdependancy are emphasized).

This is one point, thought by the God. But how it is imbibed by humanbeings that one can't see literally, only can see such impacts through human actions on society, that is from men's side as well as women's side. If given reaction through the former identity, one will consider/observe with shock, frightening and wonder as the submissive identity is further being suppressed and it is her very naturality that she can't speak up/voice against any mishappenings. Thus someone who is altogether a competent personality would appear as a Messiah, and probably be providing her a voice, that is where 'the theory of subalternity-Gayatri Spivak' comes to rescue of unvoiced humanbeings. But are these approaches really potential in providing them voices? It can't be said, it can only be observed.

One can probably conclude that it is treatment to any prospect of the society, contributing in creating an entire seen and we humans are so immersed in our own problems, that we can't see clearly a variety of aspects encircling one idea, thus becoming subjective we may be living our entire life.

In this way, through binaries one can see one's entire life. If suppose binaries aren't existing, what would be the life having to offer, 'all happiness'? No.(Then probably the society would be an anarchist one{doing as one like-Mathew Arnold: Culture & Anarchy}) There may be some different struggle, awaited for a humanbeing and in real manner, noone can escape from struggles of life. One has to confront and gradually overcome.

Therefore what is given by the life, one should accept. Be as 'true to life' rather than comparing, envying on others.

1. What difference do you see in the portrayal of 'Ophelia' (Kate Winslet) in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, 'Elizabeth' (Helena Bonham CN) in Kenneth Branagh's Mary Shelley's Frankenstein or 'Hester Prynne' (Demi Moore) in Roland Joffé's The Scarlet Letter' or David Yates's 'Harmione Granger' (Emma Watson) in last four Harry Potter films - and 'Sophie Neuve' (Audrey Tautau) in Ron Howard's The Da Vinci Code? How would justify your answer?
2. Do novel / film lead us into critical (deconstructive) thinking about your religion? Can we think of such conspiracy theory about Hindu religious symbols / myths?
3. Have you come across any similar book/movie, which tries to deconstruct accepted notions about Hindu religion or culture and by dismantling it, attempts to reconstruct another possible interpretation of truth?
4. When we do traditional reading of the novel ‘The Da Vinci Code’, Robert Langdon, Professor of Religious Symbology, Harvard University emerges as protagonist and Sir Leigh Teabing, a British Historian as antagonist. Who will claim the position of protagonist if we do atheist reading of the novel?
5. Explain Ann Gray’s three propositions on ‘knowability’ with illustrations from the novel ‘The Da Vinci Code’.

a.       1) Identifying what is knowable 
b.      2) identifying and acknowledging the relationship of the knower and the known
c.      3) What is the procedure for ‘knowing’?