Sunday, May 21, 2006

So dark the con of Lee Harvey Oswald?

I actually saw the Da Vinci Code movie today, having never read the book. But, I do like a good conspiracy theory, even if it is just that. I have several conspiracy theory books. I was also intrigued by all the codes and symbols, plus the idea that symbols can change over time.

For those who are still clueless about the Da Vinci Code, or, you're bothered by the religious symbolism of the story here's an analogy that might help explain the story:

The year is 3963. The area we know as the United States, at some point, has collapsed and gone through 700 or so years of dark ages, and later re-emerged as several successor countries that each speak a vaguely English-sounding language, but just different enough that the different countries still has to translate each other's language. The ideas that are regarded as "liberal" in our time have coaleced into a religion that revolved around the man we know as John F. Kennedy, and this religion is the majority religion of the successor states.

Suppose however, that a great council was convened at one point before these dark ages to settle the matter of a holy book for this religion. Obviously such a book would include all sorts of writings on doctrines the founders agreed on: equal rights, freedoms, feminism, and so forth. But when it came down to writing the history of Kennedy himself, the same debate that has puzzled historians since November 22, 1963 comes up: Was Kennedy shot by a single assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, or was there a group of people who conspired to kill him?

The faction that believes in the single assassin theory wins out, and the history section of the holy book is framed around this theory. The resulting religion goes to great lengths to conceal any evidence contrary to the single assassin theory

The losing faction that believes that Kennedy was killed by a grand conspiracy does not give up, concealing themselves in a secret society and the proof of their theories over time in a mixture of symbols and codes.

Anyway, in 3963 a leading university professor, along with the help of the granddaughter of the head of the secret society somehow stumbles on to these codes and symbols and unravels the mystery of the conspiracy that killed Kennedy, all the time being pursued by another secret society dedicated to eliminating any evidence that contradicts the accepted single assassin doctrine.

That's basically the Da Vinci Code in a nutshell.

Anyway, I didn't see the point of the whole "controversy". Maybe it's because I'm a non-Catholic Christian, maybe my theology's off, but the whole idea of Jesus marrying and having kids doesn't change the central message of Christianity: that Jesus, the Son of God, died for all our sins to atone us to God and re-establish the relationship between God and humanity. Besides, it's a work of fiction.

As for the actual movie, my biggest complaint is that Tom Hanks barely showed any emotion throughout the film. His acting was kind of stiff and robotic.
Post a Comment