Mark Steyn: The Da Vinci Code: bad writing for Biblical illiterates

Maxleans ^ | 05/10/06 | Mark Steyn

[JasonC]

"These Christianesque bestsellers surely testify to something, but God knows what"

lol. Priceless.

Everyone must instantly run out and find a book called the Asti Spumante Code. They should have made that one into the movie. Two or three scenes in particular, just rolfl stuff. And has the original's number, cold.

[AnAmericanMother]

Anarthrous theme of Steyn is simply the string upon which the pearls are hung.

But he does make a point with this - one that C.S. Lewis made before him. Bad writing (and this is TRULY bad writing) is often a smokescreen for fuzzy thinking and inability to express oneself.

[MHGinTN]

*sigh*

[AnAmericanMother]

Why are you sighing? (or was that a yawn?)

[gondramB]

>>It's a good rule in this line of work to respect a hit. But golly, The Da Vinci Code makes it hard.<<

Its a really well written book of fiction - enjoyable, compelling - its Harry potter class writing - .

[MHGinTN]

Not at all a yawn. The sigh is an acknowledgement of my own flaws in novel writing ... it's so hard to let one go after many edits, kind of like abandoning a child without reaching perfection in parenting. But Brown doesn't appear to care about editing for clarity or to make a smooth read.

[Brian Allen]

Thank you, Pokey.

Acclaimed wordsmith Steyn's genius knows no bounds!

[irv]

perhaps Dan Brown could try writing a revisionist biography of acclaimed prophet Muhammad

Nah. He's made too much money to commit suicide in such a messy, painful way. But it's a fine thought.

[D-fendr]

Yes, it's throughout. To read the NT and not see the Incarnation requires quite a bit of extra effort.

[Watery Tart]

Good material for the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest, "where www means Wretched Writers Welcome."

LOL! My first thought when I read about this novel! "It was a dark and stormy night..."

[Rummyfan]

A new photo of Mr Steyn:

[AnAmericanMother]

There's a difference between writing for love, and writing for money.

Don't feel bad about heavy editing. Charles Dickens and Rudyard Kipling, two of my favorite writers, were both heavy editors (and back in the days when you did it by hand, with a pen!). Their manuscripts look like somebody had an ink fight.

[Moonman62]

IMHO the church doesn't need to defend the faith against this since it is such an obviously bogus and temporary fad.

Even Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes was able to thoroughly debunk the Da Vinci Code.

[Steve_Seattle]

"And Jesus said to Philip, 'Have I been so long with you and you still don't understand that all you can see of the Father is what you see in me. For I am in the Father and the Father is in me.'"

Assuming this is an authentic statement of Jesus, my interpretation is this: "I am God's representative on earth, and what I am and what I do is the result of His power working within me. Because I do the will of the Father, I show you what the Father is like." This is not the same as saying, "I am God" or "I am the Father." An analogous situation in ordinary life (no irreverence intended) might be a sports agent going to a baseball team owner and saying: "My client has complete confidence in me, and I do only what he tells me to do. he has given me complete authority to represent him. There is no need to meet with him personally, because he and I are in complete agreement about how to proceed. He and I are one on this." No one would confuse the identity of the client with the identity of the agent.

[Steve_Seattle]

"I'm afraid that the publishing industry has hit a golden vein . . . "

Yep - Barnes & Noble has a whole table full of Da Vinci code stuff. And revisionist histories of early Christianity, translations of various Gnostic gospels, and Gnostic/Masonic conspiracy books come out on an almost daily basis. The strange thing is that the Gnostic gospels are incredible BS - overinflated pretentious mumbo-jumbo - and it would be very difficult very any modern person to read straight through them, much less actually believe them. I bet most of those books don't get read from cover to cover. But they sell. My bet is that in a few years, the dollar bin at Half Price Books will be full of them.

[bondserv]

Peter is my favorite example of a man who turned into such a great man after receiving the holy spirit at Pentecost. I would say my favorite man is Paul. He ushered in the new understanding of what had changed after Jesus Christ ascended into heaven. No small task indeed.

Amen to that!

I look forward to getting to know both of them better in eternity. i am sure they are cool dudes to hang out with.

[MHGinTN]

It appears that you have a problem acknowledging the authority of God and that He is Jesus Christ. Jesus didn't say to Philip, 'Phil, I'm like the Father, and the idea of His righteousness is something I'm living to show you how it could be.' And by the way, doubter, your starting with 'assuming this is an authentic statement of Jesus' shows you are looking desperately for exception clauses in a contract that depends upon God's integrity to maintain and not your integrity ... you have no integrity that even measures up to God so He doesn't depend upon your integrity. GIVE UP, dude/dudette. You can never accomplish by your efforts or your 'lawyering for authority' that which God offers in Grace toward you and guarantees on His integrity not yours. The scriptures were given for your edification not for your focus to argue with ... you show you don't want to accept His edification when you start comments with 'assuming this is authentic' and preface your opinion of scripture with 'my interpretation is' then proceed to turn the meaning of the passage on its head to support your opinion at the expense of learning of Him.

Look at the whole passage, the context in which the passage has meaning for the believer (because the Apostles were believers in Him but weren't too solid on how He was God on earth). Jesus said 'I AM in the Father and the Father is in me'. He meant what He said else He would have said -for the benefit of lawyering folks like yourself- 'I'm God's rep on earth and His power works in me by His authority not mine' ... because Jesus wouldn't try to trick anyone by taking credit for miracles accomplished by some external authority. We know this because when He left, He left the same authority that is in Him to indwell the disciples so that they would do similar miracles by the authority He placed within them! That authority IS the indwelling God of Creation in the person of the Holy Spirit. Of course, the Holy Spirit indwells the human spirit and while we yet contain also the nature we inherited from Adam which manipulates our soul (as differing from our spirit- see the construction of the Tabernacle for a clear exposition on this difference in soul and spirit), so we have but the earnest of our future inheritance. But indwelling the Christian IS the Holy Spirit. Jesus isn't 'the agent of God', He IS God, just as the Holy Spirit IS God. If you are a Christian then you are the agent of God in this time because GOD indwells you with His Holy Spirit.

[jess35]

Oh, lolol, I will have to use this line! ROFL.

Have you actually read the novel?

Some of the stuff I've seen on these threads remind me of the leftists and their memes.

[Antoninus]

Still, given the success he's had dismissing the premise of the New Testament as a fraud, perhaps Dan Brown could try writing a revisionist biography of acclaimed prophet Muhammad. Just a thought.

Ouch!

[fortunecookie]

Have you actually read the novel?

The entire novel? No. I did not enjoy his writing style. I've read sections, excerpts, and like some on the thread, tried to start at the beginning and read through the book. (And, yes, I enjoy reading and have read other books, fiction and nonfiction.)

Some of the stuff I've seen on these threads remind me of the leftists and their memes.

LOL, I hardly fall into the category of leftist, especially because my criticisms of the book are regarding it's treatment by some Christians as revealed Christian truth. It's not. It's fiction. My concern is that, Catholics/Christians are reading it as truth, instead of the fiction it is. And then sharing this error with those around them, insisting it's truth, and then teaching these UNtruths as truths to the schoolchildren they teach religion to in the Catholic schools, as people known to me have done.

Reading it as fantasy or pure fiction would be different. That is how I approached it when I attempted to read it. But many seem unable or unwilling to do that. Many, not all. And there seems to be a kind of hysteria over this book as truth finally uncovered, as longtime legends and rumors finally and completely confirmed.

So have you read the entire book? Do you regard it as fiction? Or truth? What is it, then, what point do you seem to feel I am missing about the book?