Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 04/21/2009 8:48:34 AM PDT by kellynla
Ron Howard, director of “Angels & Demons,” the movie version of Dan Brown’s book by that name, attacked Catholic League president Bill Donohue yesterday on the Huffington Post.
Referring to a booklet on the movie that Donohue authored, “Angels & Demons: More Demonic than Angelic,” (click here) Howard wrote: “Mr. Donohue’s booklet accuses us of lying when our movie trailer says the Catholic Church ordered a brutal massacre to silence the Illuminati centuries ago. It would be a lie if we had ever suggested our movie is anything other than a work of fiction….” Howard also said that “most in the hierarchy of the Church” will enjoy his film; he denies being anti-Catholic.
Donohue responded today:
“Dan Brown says in his book that the Illuminati are ‘factual’ and that they were ‘hunted ruthlessly by the Catholic Church.’ In the film’s trailer, Tom Hanks, who plays the protagonist Robert Langdon, says ‘The Catholic Church ordered a brutal massacre to silence them forever.’ Howard concurs: ‘The Illuminati were formed in the 1600s. They were artists and scientists like Galileo and Bernini, whose progressive ideas threatened the Vatican.’
“All of this is a lie. The Illuminati were founded in 1776 and were dissolved in 1787. It is obvious that Galileo and Bernini could not possibly have been members: Galileo died in 1647 and Bernini passed away in 1680. More important, the Catholic Church never hunted, much less killed, a single member of the Illuminati. But this hasn’t stopped Brown from asserting that ‘It is a historical fact that the Illuminati vowed vengeance against the Vatican in the 1600s.’ (My emphasis.)
“Howard must be delusional if he thinks Vatican officials are going to like his propaganda—they denied him the right to film on their grounds. Moreover, we know from a Canadian priest who hung out with Howard’s crew last summer in Rome (dressed in civilian clothes) just how much they hate Catholicism. It’s time to stop the lies and come clean.”
Of course, the characters and plot are fictional, I believe it is obvious that Dan Brown believes, and claims truth, for a great deal of the 'historical' material in the book.
Some excerpts attributed to Brown from his website illustrate:
While the book's characters and their actions are obviously not real, the artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals depicted in this novel all exist (for example, Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings, the Gnostic Gospels, Hieros Gamos, etc.). These real elements are interpreted and debated by fictional characters. While it is my belief that some of the theories discussed by these characters may have merit, each individual reader must explore these characters' viewpoints and come to his or her own interpretations.If you read the "FACT" page, you will see it clearly states that the documents, rituals, organization, artwork, and architecture in the novel all exist.
Since the beginning of recorded time, history has been written by the "winners" (those societies and belief systems that conquered and survived). Despite an obvious bias in this accounting method, we still measure the "historical accuracy" of a given concept by examining how well it concurs with our existing historical record. Many historians now believe (as do I) that in gauging the historical accuracy of a given concept, we should first ask ourselves a far deeper question: How historically accurate is history itself?
The ideas in this novel have been around for centuries; they are not my own. Admittedly, this may be the first time these ideas have been written about within the context of a popular thriller, but the information is anything but new.
Two thousand years ago, we lived in a world of Gods and Goddesses. Today, we live in a world solely of Gods. Women in most cultures have been stripped of their spiritual power. The novel touches on questions of how and why this shift occurred…and on what lessons we might learn from it regarding our future.
Revealing that secret would rob readers of all the fun, but I will say that it relates to one of the most famous histories of all time…a legend familiar to all of us. Rumors of this conspiracy have been whispered for centuries in countless languages, including the languages of art, music, and literature. Some of the most dramatic evidence can be found in the paintings of Leonardo Da Vinci, which seem to overflow with mystifying symbolism, anomalies, and codes. Art historians agree that Da Vinci's paintings contain hidden levels of meaning that go well beneath the surface of the paint. Many scholars believe his work intentionally provides clues to a powerful secret…a secret that remains protected to this day by a clandestine brotherhood of which Da Vinci was a member.
I first learned of the mysteries hidden in Da Vinci's paintings while I was studying art history at the University of Seville in Spain. Years later, while researching Angels & Demons and the Vatican Secret Archives, I encountered the Da Vinci enigma yet again. I arranged a trip to the Louvre Museum where I was fortunate enough to view the originals of some of Da Vinci's most famous works as well as discuss them with an art historian who helped me better understand the mystery behind their surprising anomalies. From then on, I was captivated. I spent a year doing research before writing The Da Vinci Code.
Most of the information is not as "inside" as it seems. The secret described in the novel has been chronicled for centuries, so there are thousands of sources to draw from. In addition, I was surprised how eager historians were to share their expertise with me. One academic told me her enthusiasm for The Da Vinci Code was based in part on her hope that "this ancient mystery would be unveiled to a wider audience."
Note the careful wording...never implicating the Church but merely saying that the ‘secret societies’ exist. They may not have anything to do with the Church...they may have existed in a different century than the events in the book take place...but it could have happened! Sounds like a marketing gimmick to me. Anyone who takes this stuff seriously should find a hobby.
"A prankster and genius, Leonardo da Vinci is widely believed to have hidden secret messages within much of his artwork. Most scholars agree that even Da Vinci's most famous pieces—works like The Mona Lisa, The Last Supper, and Madonna of the Rocks—contain startling anomalies that all seem to be whispering the same cryptic message…a message that hints at a shocking historical secret which allegedly has been guarded since 1099 by a European secret society known as the Priory of Sion. In 1975, Paris's Bibliothèque Nationale discovered parchments known as Les Dossiers Secrets, identifying numerous members of the Priory of Sion, including Sir Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo, Botticelli, and Leonardo da Vinci.All of this is woven up in DVC. Brown believes it is real - and claims truth for it.
“Most scholars agree” Man, if I ever used this phrase in one of my term papers back in Grad school I would get a big fat F.
Thanks for the quote though. His smoke and mirrors routine deserves no more attention than the Celestine Prophecy.
From Brown's website's section "Bizzare TRUE Facts from Angels and Demons":
Galileo's middle finger (photo on left) was detached from his right hand in 1737 by scientist Anton Gori and the "Cult of Galileo." Many historians now believe these "fanatical and cult-like" scientists swore a vendetta against the Catholic Church in retribution for the Vatican's crimes against the great astronomer. Although the Church actively hunted these men, few were found, and it is now believed that many took refuge deep within the secret brotherhood of the Illuminati.
I apologize.. it was Galileo that was put under house arrest for developing and understanding the math of a solar system versus an Earth-centric system.
Da Vinci never really came out "against" the church but hid some of his scientific findings so that they wouldn't conflict with RC teaching.
I'm sorry that I made the error.
I actually find that the Church was a force for good and advancement of the Western Civilization, however some of the men in charge were typical bureaucrats and possessed some of the failings of current politicians and clergy. Vice knows no single generation or era.
Respectfully, you are changing the point. His "marketing ploy" is to portray this as true. To then hide behind "but it's fiction" is spurious - both on his part and on Ron Howard's.
As did many 18th and 19th century novelists like Horace Walpole and Wilkie Collins...to the point where their novels were framed with epistolary evidence from the alleged parties ‘involved’. No one took them seriously either. Or rather they took them at their worth as novelists. I think the key difference between us is that I look at this with literary/historical context in tow.
I appreciate your point and how you take it, however this “history” which Brown took from other books such as “Holy Blood: Holy Grail” are promulgated as true, they do attack the Church, they are cited by others, they are taken as real by many who read or hear of them. They have a significant following that is fed by Brown and Howard and others.
Of course their history is false, the Sion of Priory has been falsified by it hoaxster himself.
But, we cannot condone those who spread these false histories, who claim them as real and then popularize them - only to say it’s just a movie. It does real harm, as does the Protocols, a top seller in Islam.
Whether we are Jews or Catholics or Christians or Agnostic or whatever, vicious lies about a group or religion are harmful, and must be decried, debunked and its promoters shamed and ostracized for their actions.
If only in the name of truth.
I appreciate your discussion and replies.
I go to Mass but don’t do the sign of peace. Nor do I pray with hands raised like the oracle or hold hands, nor do I say the Protestant part of the Our Father. The priest’s eyes always get as big as saucers when I open my mouth and stick out my tongue to receive Communion. The Church was infected by modernity as a principle in the 1960s. I will resist in my small ways.
Because "crap" like this give YOU the finger. And that what's they're trying to do
Bravo!
>>> Do you think all fiction is propaganda if it involves historical events? One can make that claim. Remember ‘The Name of the Rose’? Do you think that was anti-Catholic propaganda? <<<
No, but I do think that fiction CAN be “propaganda,” and that it probably IS if it systematically distorts history in one direction (as _Angels_ and _Da Vinci_ do; in both cases, a negative direction).
>>> Remember ‘The Name of the Rose’? Do you think that was anti-Catholic propaganda? <<<
_The Name of the Rose_: saw the movie, didn’t read Eco’s book. Don’t know if it was anti-Catholic propaganda. Certainly a caricature of late Medieval europe. I thought MPATHG was better (and much, much funnier).
It still dissed the Catholic Church — not worth putting it into my brain!
The difference between Brown’s work and the Name of the Rose is quite massive.
Brown’s thesis is that the death and resurrection of are false, the Church knows they are false and will go to any length to maintain the fiction to continue its power.
In other words, the whole foundation of Christianity is a trick of oppression on the unknowing followers.
Eco, while portraying bad men in Catholicism and exploring post-modernism, goes nowhere near this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.