Da Vinci Code Reaction paper
The movie intro led in a murder scene inside the Louvre museum and clues in Da Vinci paintings lead to the discovery of a religious mystery protected by a secret society for two thousand years which could shake the foundations of Christianity. The Novel itself received both positive and negative reviews from critics, and it has been the subject of negative appraisals concerning its portrayal of history. It’s writing and historical accuracy were reviewed negatively by “The New Yorker” When I first saw it in 2006 I was amazed how the movie made so much sense specially the scene where they talk about the secret of the Holy Grail.
In the novel Leigh Teabing explains to Sophie Neveu that the figure at the right hand of Jesus in Leonardo da Vinci’s painting of “The Last Supper” is not the apostle John, but actually Mary Magdalene. Leigh Teabing says that the absence of a chalice in Leonardo’s painting means Leonardo knew that Mary Magdalene was the actual Holy Grail and the bearer of Jesus’ blood. Leigh Teabing goes on to explain that this idea is supported by the shape of the letter “V” that is formed by the bodily positions of Jesus and Mary, as “V” is the symbol for the sacred feminine.
The absence of the Apostle John in the painting is explained by knowing that John is also referred to as “the Disciple Jesus loved”, code for Mary Magdalene. The book also notes that the color scheme of their garments are inverted: Jesus wears a red tunic with royal blue cloak; Mary Magdalene wears the opposite. In my personal opinion as a believer of God, I think Dan Brown is a genius. The Da Vinci Code is one of the greatest stories ever told. The real draw for Brown’s novel is how his highly polemical basis… that Christianity is not what it is purported to be, little more than an age-old instrument of oppression.