*looks back and forth between pictures*... I don't see the resemblance... And the Mona Lisa totally does not look masculine! Well maybe besides her nose. I guess her nose is similar to Da Vinci's, because they both droop down. Her left side looks slightly bigger though, I guess. But why doesn't she have eyebrows? Da Vinci definitely has big bushy eyebrows! Maybe because the Mona Lisa would look weird with busy eyebrows...
I have an idea: Next time we finish the rest of the book! Why read 50 pages when all of us want to finish the book anyways? I'm kidding, but you know you want to! :)
And there are a few things I'd like to say as my intellectual part of this. As Kalie said before, there is something wrong with Langdon when he has flashbacks with conversation, like when he was talking about PHI to his students. Something seemed sit-com-ish, almost unrealistic, and this happens again when Langdon is thinking about his talk about the Mona Lisa to the prison people. Sure, the prison people swear and act way more realistic than the college kids that say "No way!" and "This is amazing!" to Langdon talking about PHI being everywhere. Sure, I thought it was cool, but really? I'm not going to get excited about a math proportion. And back to the prison people (I keep spelling prison like "prision" and I have no idea why), I don't think a convict would gasp at an anagram. Or speak in complete sentences with correct punctuation. Or "heartily laugh." Maybe chuckle, or chortle, or howl, roar, snicker, guffaw (my personal favorite), etc. but not heartily laugh. I'm pretty sure they use that when describing audiences in plays after a character said something funny enough that everyone in the audience laughs, not one of those jokes where one or two intellectuals that understand subtle innuendo laugh silently to themselves, and the one obnoxious person that laughs when a character says more than two words.
But I keep getting off topic.
I just wanted to say that I think Langdon has problems with interacting with other people. It seems like he only remembers what he said in his lectures, and fills in the blanks for what everyone else said with television-like scripts. He is too wrapped up with figuring out what happened long ago that he doesn't pay attention to the present. At this time I'd like to point out Vittoria too. She was apparently a big part of his life a year ago, and then suddenly they don't talk anymore? What happened to their "playful promise that every six months they would meet again at a different romantic spot around the globe?" They haven't talked since? Why am I talking in questions? Langdon spent his last year completely engulfed in his work. Poor Vittoria. I bet she's been waiting for him for 6 months at Niagara Falls and now can't wait to push him off the edge in a barrel if he ever shows up. All this to say that Langdon has a distorted sense of reality and needs to focus more on the present than the past.
Now to questions!
1. Would you like to refute/support my somewhat-intellectual-but-mostly-off-topic ranting?
2. I'm going to throw the Silas question out there again. I mean, come on, he is a great Catholic, and then beats a nun to death with a candle stand? Do you think he has really changed?
3. Is Fache's obsession with catching Langdon a little over the top? Does Fache have a secret that he is hiding?
4. Does science have a part in religion? And vice versa? Look at Aringosa's attitude.
5. Do you think Sophie's family members were part of P.S. with Sauniere?
6. To go along with question 4, Sophie is convinced that her grandfather was not religious, right? Well then why would the keystone make Aringosa the most powerful man in Christendom?
7. Why is the room that holds the Mona Lisa called "Le Salle des Etats?" Translated that means the room of the states. Is the United States somehow related to this?
8. Who thinks that Langdon and Sophie would have amazingly smart genius babies?
9. "So dark the con of man." What is your take on this? Is man naturally good or evil? Does the church do more harm than good?
10. What was Madonna of the Rocks really depicting?
The questions on the other blog post are up for grabs too, of course!
And that's all I have left to say! And I apologize in advance for any spelling and grammatical mistakes. And my poor attempts at humor, though if anything makes you slightly chuckle or even smile I'm counting that as a point for me! Okay Bye!
-Brianna
Hey Bri.... in regards to 7... states could also mean like a formal way of doing something. I can't explain it well so I used some resources (aka a dictionary) and it said... "ceremonious style: a very formal, dignified, or grand way of doing something in which all the appropriate ceremonies are observed." If there are such great works of art in that room, that would be appropriate.
ReplyDeleteAbout 4- I feel like we've had this fight in Mr. Cheney's class last year haha :)
8) Lol Brianna :D
9) Isn't that just an anagram....?
2) (sorry I'm jumping so much) Silas. What an odd character. It's as if he's been brainwashed by the stupid church. I truly feel bad for him. He believes he is doing the right thing and see's no problem with anything (sorry for the redundancy). In these few chapters (I believe... I read a few ahead by accident, so if you haven't come across this yet... Sorry!), we learn that he has been told that being albino was God's way of telling him he has a great purpose. Silas himself thinks, white like a pure angel. So going back to the question, I do not know if we can say he has "changed," for we do not really know what he was like prior to his rebirth, but he definitely has "found God" in his own way and believes he is just doing good things and following orders as he should.
About 3- Anyone think Fache is the Teacher by chance??
In response to Brianna's comment about Langdon's flashbacks. The flashbacks may be simply Dan Brown's ways of adding information to the original plot of the story. As it is established that the plot of this book is about the mystery behind the killing of Sauniere, people would not fully understand the novel if they do not have some historical background. Unfortunately, many people in the world are not as educated or have the necessary knowledge to comprehend the thoughts of Langdon and the interwined connections between historical facts and figures. Thus, Brown resorts to flashbacks about Langdon's lectures which is almost like a history class as the audience is being taught certain facts that they have never learned about. As in "The Grapes of Wrath", John Steinbeck breaks away from the plot of the story and writes about other families moving West to portray a sense of realism into the story. The flashbacks have a similar effect as the factual information that is presented to the reader makes him or her believe that this novel is in reality a true story, or the connections between certain facts are real. Though some may argue that the flashbacks are fake or have no true contribution to the mystery of the book, Langdon's flashbacks still add a sense of realism to the story and fills in certain gaps that readers would normally not know about.
ReplyDeleteTo be continued...
I have another question to add to your list. Why did Sophie freak out when she saw the ritual her grandfather and the rest of P.S. do? She said that she felt betrayed and even horrified (Brown 186). I understand that whatever was in the center of the circle of people set Sophie up, but what could possibly be so bad that she would never want to speak to her uncle again? Also, it said that there were about 30 people in that circle (Brown 185). Though, there were only four in the secret society left. Were the rest of the individuals in the group killed? Were they killed by the Teacher or by people from Opus Dei? I'm confused as to who is actually in charge of the murders. I think we all have the idea that Sophie's family were intentionally killed, and that the car crash was a cover up. This coincides with your fifth question Brianna. It seems too coincidental that her entire family dies in just one car crash. But even if they all were killed, why was Sophie not killed?
ReplyDeleteAt this point I feel as though I have more questions than answers. Do you have any guesses as to where the object that can be opened by the key is? Is it just me or do you find it weird that Brown made everything fit together so perfectly. Everything seems to be so closely related, even though at first there seems like no connection can be made.
Anyway, I feel terrible for Sister Sandrine. Her only job was to contact the men from P.S. if anyone was looking for the fake keystone. By the way, I found the Bible verse to be hilarious. It was so perfect that Silas was humiliated by a Bible verse. Anyway, the nun did everything she could do but Silas still ended up finding her on the phone. My guess is that he killed her. I doubt he would have wanted to have any witnesses left. Then again I love crime shows, and that is what naturally came to my mind. Well anyway, I was curious as to why Sister Sandrine was helping out P.S. I understand that she does not agree with the ways of Opus Dei, but P.S. came way before that. It is not like P.S. was trying to counteract Opus Dei. Is the nun therefore a part of the secret society? There is just so much to think about. Who knows, maybe by the next 50 pages I will get some answers!
8. YES.
ReplyDelete7. Like Brianna stated, the Salle des Etats translates into "The Room of States". I believed it is named this because the room holds a variety of artwork in it. To exist in multiple states means to exist as multiple conditions or modes of being. The Mona Lisa, one of the most famous paintings in the room, appeals directly towards the idea of coexisting "states". Langdon claims that "'...her[Mona Lisa's] name is an anagram of the divine union of male and female'" (Brown 121). The painting has elements of both genders, working in harmony.
...The room is also home to another of Da Vinci's great works; the Madonna of the Rocks. This painting also exemplifies the idea of "states". The painting was intended to portray the blessing of John by Jesus, but Da Vinci had a skewed intepretation of what the Confraternity of the Immaculate Conception wanted (Brown 138). In his own quirks, Da Vinci made the painting resemble something demonic. Da Vinci's version is the one that was placed in the room, thus showing the different "states" a single idea can be interpreted (or misinterpreted).
ReplyDeleteIn response to one of Brianna's questions about the "so dark the con of man." The phrase that Sauniere is double-sided because in the eyes of Sophie it is another anagram, but for Langdon it proves that Sauniere was a member of a secret society. The "con of man" refers to "Constantine and his male successors successfully converted the world from matriarchal paganism to patriarchal Christianity by waging a campaign of propoganda that demonized the sacred feminine, obliterating the goddess from modern religion forever" (Brown 133). As modern society has proven in the past few centuries, female status in society was once referred to be inferior to males,and this prejudice continues to remain in society today. Overall, the phrase is stating that man is innately evil as "he" changed the world into a male-dominated society, where in reality, females should be considered equals. Sister Sandrine's involvement with the Priory of Sons and her obvious distaste of Opus Dei as she says, "the Catholic Church was gradually moving in the right direction with respect to women's rights, Opus Dei threatened to reverse the progress" 46). It proves that in history, the Catholic Church has done more harm than good as women are still considered inferior to men. Even Langdon mentions in a previous chapter, "Mr. Sauniere dedicated his life to studying the history of goddess, and nothing has done more to erase that history than the Catholic Church' (Brown 51). It again proves that in the past the Catholic Church had done more harm to people's view of women and it is still in effect today.
ReplyDeleteThe constant mentioning of "sacred feminine","goddess" and the Catholic Church's violent past with demonizing the status of women seems a little repetative. One reason would be the involvement of the Priory of Sons, but as a secret society, what secret are they holding that would get Sauniere killed? Because the Teacher and Silas are obviously looking for something that is of great value to the Church.
In response to Jena. Silas killed them all because he says "I've found them. All three of them" (Brown 4).
The taxi driver mentions something about the Bois de Boulogne. Why does Sophie say, "We can shock the visiting American" and "She could think of far less scandalous routes"? I have been to Paris, and I have never heard of this place.
ReplyDeleteWell Ben, you must remember that this is a fictional book, so the Bois de Boulogne is not necessarily a real place. And Bois means wood, or maybe forest, and as we know all forests are evil and you are a devil child if you go there so...
ReplyDeleteAnd I have to agree with Jena, I have so many questions that I would love to ask everyone, but they would be pointless to ask because we're all still in the dark. And the only thing I can think of that would be in the middle would be like some kind of sacrifice, though it might be something different that I won't say because I think I accidentally read it somewhere.
This is just a quick comment that will hopefully answer Jena's question of who is actually behind the murders, I think that the Teacher is the one in command. Bishop Aringarosa and Silas are part of the Opus Dei and they know each other well. The Teacher, however, seems to be separate, but is working with the Opus Dei so that they can both get what they want. In an earlier section of the reading Aringarosa thinks, "The Teacher seemed an exceptionally careful man. He had not revealed his own identity to Aringarosa, and yet he had proven himself a man well worth obeying" (Brown 59). This shows that the Teacher is actually the one in command and by uncovering the keystone for the Opus Dei, he will receive 20 million euro which Aringarosa says is "a pittance for something so powerful" (Brown 59). This just shows that while the Teacher may not be interested in the keystone himself, he is working with Aringarosa and in control of Silas with secret information of the brotherhood that no one else knows.
ReplyDeleteAs to the other members of the society, I think they are still there but the book mentions that only the top four members, the leaders, of the brotherhood knew the secrets regarding the keystone which may be why only the four were mentioned. Even if Silas and the Teacher were able to track down other members, it would not be of any use since they don't have the information needed. Those are just my thoughts.
Also, I want to point out that I do not think everyone in P.S. is dead. There are the four senechaux, or there were, but they were only the leaders of P.S. There are many more members of the Priory, but only the senechaux knew the top secret secret, so when they were all killed, the secret died with them. So, again, there are other members of the Priory, they just did not know the secret the senechaux knew.
ReplyDeleteAnd I totally agree, I hope the next 50 pages have more answers!
Just to correct Brianna (Dan Brown), the secret didn't really die with them. Sauniere has past it on to Sophie because in the moments before he dies, he says that he must pass on the secret. Though Sophie may not know exactly what it is, it her job along with Langdon to discover and protect the secret.
ReplyDeleteAbout question 2.. I agree with Nicole. It kind of reminds me of how Hitler gained control. Silas had no life. He must have been miserable beyond anything that we can imagine. And suddenly, he finds somebody that may actually care about him. Can't you see why he would want to totally devote himself to the one thing in his life that could give him any hope? It's sick how these people have control over him but I can see why he submits to it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't see why Langdon trusted Sophie in the first place. He's in France, all alone, and suddenly he's caught up in this murder case and he decides to trust the crazy girl who tells him to try to escape the French police. I feel like I would trust the police more than the girl, simply because the police have a more prestigious title. But maybe that's just me.