Well, this is the end... -sigh-... And I know Ben already made a post, but I figured that since there are plenty of 1. As a symbologist, Robert Langdon has a wealth of academic knowledge that helps him view the world in a unique way. Now that you've read The Da Vinci Code, are there any aspects of life/history/faith that you are seeing in a different light?
2. Langdon and Teabing disagree as to whether the Sangreal documents should be released to the world. If you were the Grand Master of the Priory of Sion, would you release the documents? If so, what do you think their effect would be?
3. What observations does this novel make about our past? How do these ideas relate to our future?
4. Other than his fear of being framed for murder, what motivates Langdon to follow this perilous quest? Do his motivations change?
5. The novel's "quest" involves numerous puzzles and codes. Did you enjoy trying to solve these puzzles along with the characters? Did you solve any of the puzzles before the characters did?
6. If you could spend a day in any of the places described in this novel, where would it be, and why? The Louvre? Westminster Abbey? Rosslyn Chapel? The Temple Church? Somewhere else?
7. Historian Leigh Teabing claims the founding fathers of Christianity hijacked the good name of Jesus for political reasons. Do you agree? Does the historical evidence support Teabing's claim?
8. Has this book changed your ideas about faith, religion, or history in any way?
9. Would you rather live in a world without religion...or a world without science?
10. Saunière placed a lot of confidence in Langdon. Was this confidence well-placed? What other options might Saunière have had? Did Saunière make the right decision separating Sophie from the rest of her family?
11. Do you imagine Langdon should forgive Teabing for his misguided actions? On the other hand, do you think Teabing should forgive Langdon for refusing to release the Sangreal documents?
12. Does the world have a right to know all aspects of its history, or can an argument be made for keeping certain information secret?
13. What is interesting about the way this story is told? How are the episodes of the novel arranged and linked? In your discussion, you might want to identify where the turning points in the action are where those moments are after which everything is different. Did you anticipate them?
14. What is the novel's theme? What central message or idea links all the other components of the novel together?
15. For most people, the word "God" feels holy, while the word "Goddess" feels mythical. What are your thoughts on this? Do you imagine those perceptions will ever change?
16. Will you look at the artwork of Da Vinci any differently now that you know more about his "secret life?"
17. Does The Da Vinci Code opens doors to discussion about religion, as Dan Brown has said, or does it close them?
18. Is the depiction of women in this novel a tribute to their intelligence, or does it subtly uphold the patriarchal structures it purports to rail against?
19. In what ways is The Da Vinci Code similar to other popular novels in the thriller genre? In what ways does it depart from them?
20. How does The Da Vinci Code juxtapose ancient and modern worlds?
21. How do Langdon’s flashbacks to his teaching work in the States contribute to the narrative?
Please enjoy these questions!! And I hope everyone enjoyed The Da Vinci Code! :)
-Brianna
Here's the questions that I had originally, since Brianna felt like making another post.
ReplyDelete1. What are your thoughts about the ending? Like or Dislike?
2. Were Teabing's actions justified? or is he simply a cold-hearted man?
3. If the book was to continue, what would happen next?
4. Can Silas be forgiven for his actions?
5. What makes this book so appealing to readers?
For Brianna's questions:
ReplyDelete10. I think that Sauniere's trust in Langdon was well placed. He may not have known that Langdon would keep the documents secret, but he must have trusted that Langdon would not do anything for greed. It was also important that he pass on the secret to another person. If he had simply given Sophie the task of discovering the path, she would not have had enough background information on the history of the Holy Grail. Langdon and Teabing were the one's that had to fill her in. There were few others that Sauniere could have enough confidence in, and if he hadn't passed on the information to Langdon and Sophie, that secret would have been lost forever. It was also how Sauniere was able to reunite Sophie with the rest of her family and save her from being lonely.
I think it was important that Sauniere did separate the family. Even though there wasn't complete evidence that someone had fixed the car accident, their lives had been in enough danger that they had to hide in order to save the royal blood line. While it was wise to separate the family at the time, I think that Sauniere should have told Sophie the truth much earlier, rather than waiting for his death to force the information on her. It's true that she ignored his letters and calls, but Sophie was in college before she witnessed the ritual and she was old enough then to be told of her ancestry.
16. It would be hard not to look at his work differently. Especially for the works mentioned throughout this book such as the Mona Lisa, Madonna of the Rocks, and The Last Supper, I will end up looking for the secrets mentioned in the book like Mary Magdalene.
For Ben's questions:
ReplyDelete2/4. I think that Teabing and Silas had similar characters. While they were both considered "bad" people, they were also working for what they believed to be right. Teabing thought that the documents should be revealed because the Church should not be allowed to manipulate history in the way they did. Silas, as mentioned by both Ben and Ally before, only thought that he was doing the work of God to benefit religion. In both cases, they simply followed their beliefs, although to an extreme. I think that Teabing's motivation to release the documents was justified to a certain extent, but killing so many people simply to find the Holy Grail was too much. While he may have had a good intention, his way of getting the documents is not justifiable. At least to us, Silas seems less involved in the plans to murder and is simply following orders he believes are beneficial to his faith. I think it would be easier to forgive Silas since this life with Opus Dei is the best life he knew and he hadn't been the one planning out the killings.
In response to Stacy. So is this book saying that religion is bad then? If someone's belief has caused them to do horrific things that were solely based on religion, should religion considered to be a bad thing? In especially in Silas' case where the Teacher says to him, "You have done a great service to God" (Brown 14). When just a few hours ago, Silas had killed Sauniere in the Louvre. In addition, the Opus Dei was considered by the media to be "God's Mafia" and the "Cult of Christ" (Brown 33). The negative view of the congregation would surely support the possibility that this book sees religion as a harmful part of society. The book even attacks the Catholic Church as Langdon points out the only reason the Catholic Church was able to gain such wealth and power was through Constantine as he "backed the winning horse" (Brown 251). Even Leonardo da Vinci quotes himself, "Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!" (Brown 250). So doesn't it seem possible that due to religion, people have not been able to advance as far. Mr. Cheney said that during a certain point in history when the Catholic Church lost creditability, people were able to learn more and create their own independent ideas rather than listening to the Church. Thus, this book could be supporting an anti-religion view because it narrows the abilities of the human mind.
ReplyDeleteTo be continued...
I think this book is very very similar to the move National Treasure. I know its not a book, but while reading thats all I thought about. In National Treasure the main characters (I forgot their names) are on a hunt to find important parts of history. They are expected to know a great deal of background knowledge, just like Teabing and Langdon help Sophie with. In both the movie and the book there is also competition to reach the "prize" first. In National Treasure two groups of people are racing to get to the Declaration of Independence first because it is believed that there is a map on the back. This is similar to the Opus Dei trying to find the Holy Grail at the same time Sophie and Langdon are. In both works the good guys are wanted men/ women. In National Treasure the main characters are wanted because they took the Declaration and they continue to run away from the authorities. In The Da Vinci Code, Langdon is wanted for murder and Sophie is wanted because she helped Langdon escape from the Louvre.In both works the good guys end up being set free and the historical object ends up in the right hands. Yay!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSHOOT!!! I had a issue with a sentence and i thought I copied my whole long post before deleting it... but I guess I didn't. Yay >.<
ReplyDelete14) The idea that connect everything in the book is discovery. The whole book is based on the Holy Grail, the thing that so many people for so long have searched for and wanted to discover, for whatever it may be. Langdon, Sophie, Silas and the rest of Opus Dei, and Teabing are all in search of the Grail. Fache is in search of Langdon/the real killer. Opus Dei wants to discover the keystone. Everyone is in search of something that they really want to discover.
12) The argument can most definitely be made that the world should not know the truth. This argument can be made because of all the chaos the truth would create. The world has always been at war for religious reasons. I may be misspeaking here... but for the most part the world is at peace (with religious issues), with the exception of the Middle East. If Landgon and Sophie went and opened up the truth to the world, the world would be at war with everyone. There would be people super mad that the secrets just got out, for one. There would also be people that would not know what to do anymore. As I believe Langdon said, the Bible is a guide to the way to live life for most people, as the Torah and Koran are for other religions. If half the Bible was wiped out, most of the world would not know what to do. Everything they believed in would be turned upside down. If that was not true, you would have people disbelieving the rest of the Bible too. Laws are basically based on the Bible, so if you took out the essential laws of the Bible by revealing this truth, you would also be creating havoc of people not following the laws anymore. Keeping the information secret would be the way to go.
12.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nicole in saying that the world does not necessarily need to know the truth about all aspects of history; too much information would cause conflicts. The phrase "ignorance is bliss" applies here. To release all "controversial" documents into the limelight would immediately draw attention to such issues. This could possibly spark debate amongst people who do not truly care for the issue, and are only interested in it as a part of mob mentality. But more often than not, the revelation of some truth allows a nation or party to progress.
...
...
ReplyDeleteFor instance, before the Civil War, Harriet Beecher Stowe published "Uncle Tom's Cabin", which described all of the cruelties of slavery. this book quickly became influential in the Northern states. This book eventually led to the Civil War but it also led to the eventual abolition of slavery. Now, I'm not condoning bloodshed to solve conflicts or the lives lost during the Civil War; I'm just pointing out that by revealing the truth about slavery, Stowe prompted a more equal America. Thus, some truths need to be revealed, in order to form a better society.
(Ben's)3.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I feel that although Langon's mission was to find the Holy Grail, he would not actually reveal it to the world. He believes that it is not his secret to tell. Langdon also respects the divinity of the Grail too much to push it into public opinion. In the last scene of the text, where Langdon is at the Louvre again, Brown states, "With a sudden upwelling of reverence, Robert Langdon fell to his knees. For a moment, he thought he heard a woman's voice...the wisdom of the ages...whispering up from the chasms of the earth" (Brown 454). The delicate and graceful description of Langon's emotions reveal that he has no intentions to unearth the Holy Grail; he only wants to bask in its perfection. He has succeeded in completing the quest and kneeling before Mary, and his goal is complete.
18. I think the Da Vinci Code does not make a tribute to women. Sophie is portrayed as a headstrong woman at the beginning, but by the middle of the book, Sophie's only role is being the granddaughter of Sauniere and a burden to Langdon as he tries to save her from Teabing and trouble in general. Also, the Opus Dei completely destroy the reputation of women, the nun in the beginning of the novel dies after only having a few chapters, and there really are no other women mentioned in the novel until Sophie meets her grandmother in the end. All the men do the hard work and the women are somewhat shunned. For as much talk as there is about the sacred feminine, the actually females of the novel are not honored or strong as they are supposed to be.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Brianna (Dan Brown):
ReplyDeleteThough the overal story may not involve female characters have you have already pointed out. There is still a sense of female respect in the historical referances made by the book. The constant involvements of the "sacred feminine" and the historical actions of the Catholic Church that demoralized the meaning does seem to place a tribute on women. Though, the author, Dan Brown, may not have used many female characters to show his support, the book itself along with its facts and referances do instead.
In response to Ally:
I would agree with your statement that Langdon would not reveal the true location of the Holy Grail due to all the things that he had went through a few hours earlier. He even tells Teabing when he gets arrested, "Only the worthy finds the Grail, Leigh. You taught me that" (Brown 458). Thus, Langdon would not have told anyone else and would continue to keep it a secret.
Unfortunately, the tomb of Mary is not under the pyramid. Take a look online, and there's a picture of the small pyramid being moved.
i feel like you cannot just reveal the partial truth. I think its either you reveal the entire truth, like in Uncle Tom's Cabin Stowe did not add in little anecdotes that made slavery seem enjoyable, or omit the hardships that made it depredating: she told the truth. That led to the successful abolition of slavery I agree, but thats only tue because she told the entire story. The adage "ignorance is bliss" only works for complete ignorance, because when somebody says, "Oh! did you hear about what he did to him yesterday?!" and then they say, "oh nevermind," aren't you rather interested and preoccupied. You arent in a blissful state then, so the partial story reveals nothing, it's all or nothing.
ReplyDeleteBrianna's number 17 question: What the Da Vinci Code does is helps distinguish the faiths. There are many sides to the faith argument as we all know, but for these purposes lets just say there are two sides: fatalism and coincidence (which byao cleared up for me). After reading this book, my side of the argument feels renewed in me, i feel more confident about my beliefs, and I'm further away from the other belief now. The Da Vinci Code essentially closes the doors in that sense because (for me at least) the gray area has been completely eliminated. One could also argue because of this, it opened up doors in support of one's current belief, but all in all i think it eliminated the neutral territory betweeen faiths.
ReplyDelete16. I don't know about everybody else but when I was reading the book I had my laptop open next to me and was looking up the paintings as they came up in the book... SO CREEPY. The Madonna of the Rocks was just disturbing and the Virgin of the Rocks wasn't much better. Also, the whole Mona Lisa thing is strange too. The way that these paintings are explained in the book seem to make sense, but I find myself questioning if Da Vinci actually had these intentions. Like, was he really changing the horizon of the Mona Lisa to accentuate her left side because of the sacred feminine?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I have problems distinguishing between what is real and what is fake in the book. Everything that they said makes sense. Like, if the Holy Grail really is Mary Magdalene's bones and the documents, then I think the stories really do make sense. If they're not real.. then I question things like why there isn't a chalice on the table in the Last Supper. Also, if it's not definitely real, why would Da Vinci have painted such a sacred scene in that way? But if it is real, why doesn't everybody know about these stories? And, why hasn't the Holy Grail been found and exposed? Or more people come out and say that they're the descendants of Jesus? I don't think I'd be able to keep that to myself.