DaVInci code

On the DaVinci controversy, the New Yorker has a very astute critique of the film, with a detailed description of the marketing behind it. To quote"Renaissance art expert Bruce Boucher, ... gently mocked Brown’s “shaky” grasp of the historical Leonardo (pointing out, for example, that the artist’s name was not “Da Vinci”). Boucher concluded his article by suggesting that “The Da Vinci Code” might make a better opera than a film, offering the old advice that “if it’s too silly to be said, it can always be sung.”
Having read the book, I'de love to understand what the fuss is about. Feminist contentions of early Christianity are abundantly silly, as is the contention that DaVinci was a proto-feminist. In fact any evidence would point to the opposite. There were many victims of the Inquisition but they were as likely to be Jews, political dissenters, epileptics or even scientific heretics (think Giordanno Bruno or even Galileo who spared himself by going against his convictions) as they were to be women bruxas or healers.
Any Christian who comes out of a movie theatre convinced they just saw a documentary should not call themselves such. As for the Prelature of Opus Dei, they are another anti intellectual force within the Catholic Church, hence their "antagonism " with the Jesuits. Their version of the Gospels is like the fundamentalists version of the Koran or the creationist version of the American Christian fundamentalists. Retrograde movements attempting to recapture a idyllic Christian world with Christian values that was never there in the first place.
Beware Ye of too much fear of the future, lest what happened to Islam after the 12th century befall you...
On a different note, I just noticed on Technorati that the number one blog is chinese, censored chinese no doubt, but chinese nonetheless...
davinci code, christianity, chinese blogs