Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

OT: Shekinah; some spoilers: was: THE DAVINCI CODE

From:Sally Caves <scaves@...>
Date:Thursday, June 5, 2003, 5:19
----- Original Message -----
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@...>

> Czhang: > > In a message dated 2003:06:03 05:41:17 PM, a.rosta@LYCOS.CO.UK writes: > > > > >Sally: > > >> The DaVinci Code > > >> Read it and tell me what you think.. > > > > > >There's no way I'm going to read it now, after the slagging off you've > > >given it > > > > In a message dated 2003:06:03 05:56:28 PM, markjreed@MAIL.COM writes: > > > > >Your comments aren't really filling me with a burning desire to > > >read this book, Sally. :) > > > > ROTFLMAOSHIHLH ouch that's rich... *gigglespasm!* "Caution: the
> > email list may be dangerous to your reading, TV and movie watching > > habits..." > > I wish and wish the exchange of positive and negative word-of-mouth > played a greater role in our culture. Going by the recommendations from > like-minded people seems to be the only solution to the problem of how > to find stuff that's worth reading/seeing and how not to waste time and > spiritual energy on stuff that isn't.
I've been hard on DaVinci Code, but I see, from reading, that I'm not alone. I wanted to find fellow readers, though, so that I could discuss some of the issues he brings up in it.'s publisher's remarks TOTALLY give away the secret of the book. Even though I suspected it was leaning towards the Holy Blood Holy Grail premise, I would have been infuriated if I'd read that blurb before I'd finished the novel. What's wrong with these editors and writers? They can't bank on anyone being patient enough to let the drumroll of suspense do its work. Dan Brown can't "bank" on anybody knowing anything about Western culture and history and languge, but idiot-like, and in the most condescending way, he has to translate every f**king French phrase for us. Or: "you mean it's like an anagram?" And if that's not clear enough, "like the Jumble in the newspapers?" I've come to distrust his scholarship so much that I'd be very eager to discuss with someone who has read the book how the hell he derives the notion that the Shekinah, which I always thought meant "God's Presence" or "Dwelling Place," is, and I quote, "the powerful female equal to YHWH" (I presume that it's referred to in the feminine somewhere in the Hebrew Bible?) or how he finds in the words Yah Weh "an androgynous physical union between the masculine Jah and the pre-Hebraic name for Eve, Havah." Okay, the cat's outta the bag... the book is about a search, among other things I won't disclose, for the "Sacred Feminine," the major research area of the dashing Harvard don Robert Langdon. He seems to misrepresent Judaism completely in trying to oppose its essential "matriarchic" thrust to Christianity's evil "patriarchy." Both strike me as being forcefully patriarchic. Am I wrong? And he completely misuses the word "pagan." There were many pagans. Which pagan? Sofia in some of the Nag Hammadi material is represented as the divine Mother to the "jealous god" who defies her, a detail he completely ignores (he has read ABOUT the Nag Hammadi materials, clearly, without, it seems, reading them), but that's Gnostic. Is there anything in the Pseudepigrapha or the Midrash materials that supports his claims about the Shekinah as the powerful female equal to YHWH? He doesn't give a bibliography, obviously. Some of this stuff I can really grok, but most of it seems filtered through a dim conception of scholarly rigor. Sally Caves Eskkoat ol ai sendran, rohsan nuehra celyil takrem bomai nakuo. "My shadow follows me, putting strange, new roses into the world."


Sally Caves <scaves@...>