BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom

Subject: Folklore: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,Bastard child of Jesus & Mary
Date: 13 May 06 - 09:42 PM

So, "Christians" are getting VERY up in arms about the premiere this week of the film "Da Vinci Code".

Not just the Vatican, mind. But Megachurch Christendom. TVangelical Christendom. Xtian archaeologists, apologists, you name it, they are ready to sing their Battle Hymn for the Fundamental Right to a Xtian Republic.

I mean, how could anyone have a bad word to say about Opus Dei? That just PROVES Dan Brown wrong, does it not?

Subject: RE: Folklore: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 13 May 06 - 09:47 PM

And isn't it wonderful that you can go watch it in spite of them all?

Subject: RE: Folklore: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,BC
Date: 13 May 06 - 10:02 PM

It is. The Fisher Kings as feminists should be a real hoot.

Talk about the grandaddy of urban legends.

Subject: RE: Folklore: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,BC
Date: 13 May 06 - 10:07 PM

Another thing. How does Kryptos figure in to Hooker Gate? Does only W know?

It's all kinda ironic-like ain't it?

Like Princess Di taking Heather's leg, and then her going on to marry Rock Royalty, Sir Paul.

Subject: RE: Folklore: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:27 PM

Can someone put this garbage in BS.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:53 PM

Yeah, I can't figure out what this subject has to do with folklore, and it certainly doesn't belong in the music section - so I changed the thread category to "BS."
I get riled up by some of my fellow Christians and how they go crazy in their opposition to "Da Vinci Code." I heard one Catholic talking head say the success of Da Vinci Code was all the fault of liberal Catholics and other liberal Christians who had not been steadfast in their faith. On the other hand, the book does seem to legitimize anti-Christian bigotry, and to give credence to a lot of anti-Christian stuff that just isn't true.
So, I don't know what to think - but I sure know it ain't folklore. So, who are Ron & Tom?
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 May 06 - 12:12 AM

Ron Howard - director

Tom Hanks - actor

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,BC
Date: 14 May 06 - 12:37 AM

All religion is folklore, and if you weren't so obviously ignorant of the subject, you would have left it alone.

Yet, since Joe Offer is God around here, when He sayeth it is BS, BS it shall be.

Power over others means not having to please anyone but yourself, eh Joe?

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 14 May 06 - 03:30 AM

I had to smile at your first sentence, GUEST,BS - clearly you are unaware of Joe's background. Your second and third sentence say more about yourself anyway.

As for the Code story: I read the book late in the game and found Dan Brown's writing style crude and boring - John Le Carre or Patricia Cornwell he definitely isn't. Even Tom Clancy's writing is better than Brown's. So he took an interesting urban myth and turned it to mush, as far as I am concerned. As for the plot, after the third iteration of "you think you cracked it, ah but here comes another bit" it got so samey in structure that I really had to try hard to keep an interest till the end of the book. So: good story, crap writer.

After that I lost interest, and will not be watching the film. Shame, because Tom Hanks is my all time favourite actor (Tim Robbins a close second); but as I found the original book annoying, I cannot imagine that the film-of-the-book will grip me.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 14 May 06 - 07:02 AM

GUEST,BC. before you star slagging off well respected people on this forum, you should give some thought as to why you and your friendly contributors remain anonymous, when most members know who Joe Offer, katlaughing, El Greko and myself are, you are the ones who are hiding your identities.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,J&MBC
Date: 14 May 06 - 10:27 AM

Oh, I'm not supposed to know he is a conservative Catholic, for instance, which is why he can't handle the very premise that all religion is folklore?

The book is based on centuries old folklore about Mary Magdalene. But in Joe Offer's world, that makes it BS.

And BTW, I don't respect Joe Offer, largely because of his petty tyrannical behavior like changing the prefix from Folklore to BS. I don't care it was moved below the line (when you use the Folklore prefix to start threads, the thread automatically goes above the line, just as it does with the OBIT and TECH prefixes). But to change the prefix to BS from Folklore is a political act of censorship, based upon Joe Offer's conservative Catholic beliefs.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 14 May 06 - 10:38 AM

You talking out of your arse makes it BS, and I asked for it to be moved.

Why don't you come out of the closet and tell us WHO you really are ?
anf WHY you post here which is mainly a MUSIC site.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 06 - 10:39 AM

Damn. Usually I get reported to the bishop for being a liberal.

And yes, I have taught classes on the folklore in religion, and I've done a lot of study of religious folklore - particularly all the fascinating and fantastic folklore surrounding the lives of the saints, and the folklore that is part of both the Old and New Testaments. And I've had lots of bad words to say about Opus Dei. Many of us "liberal" Christians do.

But major aspects of the Da Vinci Code are fakelore and bigotry - a horse of a different color.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,BC
Date: 14 May 06 - 11:33 AM

No Joe, you don't get it.

I'm not talking about the folklore IN religion.

What I am saying is ALL religious belief is mythology and folklore.

What I am saying is YOUR religion is fakelore.

YOUR religion is bigoted.

But then, that's the part of disagreement you won't tolerate here, right Mr. I'm In Charge Here?

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 May 06 - 12:08 PM

"So, "Christians" are getting VERY up in arms about"

Who cares what they get up in arms about.....

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 May 06 - 01:03 PM

Here we go once more:
"Over the rickety rackety bridge!"

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 May 06 - 01:51 PM

Some Christians are getting up in arms over this book and movie--most aren't.   Some--probably most-- see it for what it is--historical fiction. And in fact Dan Brown makes no other claim for it--even if others might. The Christians that are up in arms are probably in the Catholic wing of the Christian Right. Which, as you know, is neither.

But there are a lot of Christians not on the Right.

But evidently some non-Christians have never heard this--or of live and let live.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 14 May 06 - 01:53 PM

Yes, GUEST BC, you're absolutly right. Mudcat is a vast conspiricy, that has been running for 2000 years, and contains many strange people with mysterious and ancient knowledge, and many dire weapons ( insert banjo/bodhran joke here...)

Joe Offer is the head of us on earth, whilst Max decreed 'Let there be servers' and the was Mudcat, although many people regard that as a load of superstitions and nonsense.

Now we'll see if they're American, or if they understand sarcasm....

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 14 May 06 - 02:10 PM

"Another thing. How does Kryptos figure in to Hooker Gate? Does only W know?"

Anyone who has read the book, followed the trilogy, and has even a superficial knowledge of US current evnts should easily "get" the above statement.

Kryptos = CIA folklore mentioned in the book

Hooker Gate = latest CIA scandal

Does only W know?

W = Dubya

a word play on the WW "secret" codes & messages on the book's jacket, and linked to what is on the author's website

Also, the book is based upon another work (that is what the lawsuit was about), which drew liberally from Gnostic works.

Ask Joe if he "gets it" now.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 14 May 06 - 02:12 PM

Nah. On second thought, Joe won't ever get it. Too cryptex for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 May 06 - 02:15 PM

Some Americans have heard of sarcasm. But, of course, not me.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Peter T.
Date: 14 May 06 - 04:01 PM

You fail to understand. Joe is the mastermind behind all the curtains. He has been implanting secret messages in Mudcat since Day One.   If you turn your computer sideways and look at it in a blue light it says:

WILL WE TALK ABOUT THE BLACK BIRD?

(it all has to do with the Knights of Malta.....)

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 06 - 05:07 PM

Well, I gotta say the Da Vinci Code puts us liberal Christians in a bit of a quandary. The fundamentalists have driven us nuts forever with all the stuff they read into Scripture and religious tradition with their so-called "literal" interpretation - what they do with the Book of Revelation in the Left Behind series is pretty frightening.

Generally, I feel far more comfortable with atheists and pagans and agnostics, but now some of them being just as looney as the fundamentalists and reading all sorts of things into the history of Christianity, that just aren't there. In a different way, they are just as addicted to demagoguery as the Christian fundamentalists, and both sides are scary.

Certainly, religious beliefs have strong roots in mythology - but there can be profound goodness and truth in myth. It's a way of reaching into mysteries that cannot be defined or completely understood. Yes, those beliefs can be twisted into horrible injustices - but they can also lead to extraordinary good.

I'm open to seeing what comes of Da Vinci Code, and I'm not ready to condemn it. I do see that it has inspired some pretty nasty and unfair anti-Christian bigotry - bigotry that "Bastard Child" has expressed so clearly.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,the real me
Date: 14 May 06 - 05:29 PM

Isn't it time someone put out a fatwa on someone here? (Just trying to be helpful).

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,PEDUNT
Date: 14 May 06 - 05:43 PM

(Just trying to be helpful).

The period belongs inside the closing parenthesis: (Just trying to be helpful.).

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 14 May 06 - 05:54 PM

It is a thriller novel, Joe. A whodunnit that incorporates all the sexy stuff: Gnosticism, Arthurian legend, contemporary women studies pablum of the "sacred feminine" sort.

But bottom line, it's a trashy novel, good enough for a page turner you can leave at the beach when you come home book.

The fatwa has already been put on Dan Brown, Rushdie style, by the fundies.

PeterT, damn, and I thought it was a Kabbalah code, fed to Joe Offer by M.L. Ciccone (I heard he was a card carrying member of the Poison Penn Secret Admiration Society).

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 May 06 - 10:01 PM

Yeah, and I understand it's a very good novel. The premises are a bit shaky, from what I understand - but I don't particularly object to that. What I object to, is when people take those premises as fact, and use them as an excuse for bigotry. And yeah, that's exactly what fundamentalists do on the other side of the coin - but I don't like them, either.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 15 May 06 - 10:04 AM

Right, but if the book challenged the supremacy of Pythagoras by doing some historical revision, I sincerely doubt you'd give a shit.

But the hysteria mongering around the challenges to the supremacy of the Official Catholic History (tm)is just another chance for you to claim victim status for being Catholic.

Which is completely bogus. You aren't discriminated against for being Catholic by any measure. To claim such just denigrates the Catholics in the world who ARE discriminated against all the time, in ways that cost them their homes, their livelihoods, and their lives.

Get a grip.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Amos
Date: 15 May 06 - 11:10 AM

You are soooooo nasty, Guest. Joe made no such claim. So you are lashing out at some imaginary target. O)r someone else from your own past.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: alf ackoffshalla
Date: 15 May 06 - 11:23 AM

paparindi lucu, fides mundum vincit
I came looking for tunes but what do i get.
I hear penguins i feel birch
no dont touch your penis.
there lies madness i tell you
Bastards!

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,DB
Date: 15 May 06 - 03:21 PM

There has been a lot of stuff, on UK TV, recently, about the background to the 'Da Vinci Code'.
There was also a programme about Leonardo Da Vinci's 'wall-painting' (I think that the programme stated that it wasn't, strictly speaking, a 'fresco') of 'The Last Supper'. It seemed pretty obvious to me that the figure to Jesus's left is a woman. Many critics and 'Art Historians' (gissa job - I could do that!) lined up to state "rubbish - it's a man" - but it isn't a man, is it? Perhaps Dan Brown (whose other books I'm definitely not going to read!) has got a point ...

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,Peter T.
Date: 15 May 06 - 04:31 PM

I would have thought that one of the main reasons why the Da Vinci Code is so popular is the general resurgent of the suppression of women in the early church. The DVC is pretty looney and horribly written, but I personally have always thought that Mary Magdalene and the rest of the women got a raw deal (and are still getting a raw deal).

I presume that people assume the figure to Jesus' left is a woman, so as to avoid the obvious fact that it represents John, and John was the one Jesus loved with a special love, which (given Leonardo's proclivities) tells its own tale.

The only people who really saw Jesus' empty tomb were the women. The rest of the courageous menfolk had fled. It is reasonably clear that St. Peter was patched on later so as to give the story some credibility, as who could believe a bunch of women.

Queen Victoria: "And when they found the Grail, Lord Tennyson, what were they going to do with it?"

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: freda underhill
Date: 15 May 06 - 05:39 PM

In Sydney, a lot of churches have taken the opportunity to have private screenings for up to 200 people at a sitting. They figure that anything that makes people interested in Jesus and the origins of the Church has its advantages, and are using the film to generate discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 15 May 06 - 08:24 PM

Same thing being done in the states as freda mentions. Was also done with that Mel Gibson religious masterpiece, 'Passion of the Christ'.

Still surpised Mel didn't cast himself as Christ in that one, wouldn't have been much of a stretch for him at all.

The loonies are the people who flock to this shit, or take any of it seriously.

It is ALL folklore.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 15 May 06 - 10:50 PM

So guest - why do you care what other folks believe ? The majority of the worlds population believe in a higher power of some sort or other. So why not live and let live ? In what way do the beliefs of others interfear with your life ? Has someone been draging you to church on Sunday morning against your will ?

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: harpmolly
Date: 15 May 06 - 10:58 PM

I had a lot of fun reading DVC. I also had a lot of fun reading its prequel, "Angels & Demons". More religious conspiracy, drama, antimatter, people jumping out of airplanes without parachutes. Wheee. That's no call to *take it seriously*. Good grief, people! Although the fact that Dan Brown tends to list some rather specious things at the beginning of the books and write "FACT:" in big bold letters next to them is a bit off-putting. If it weren't for that, I think a lot of this breast-beating and hand-wringing could have been avoided.

Ummmm...I think our Guest needs to stock up on his dried frog pills. He(?) seems to be having both sides of the same conversation with himself. And Joe, well done for knowing when to ignore such obvious and clumsy trolling. But then, you've probably had lots of practice. Sigh.

Cheers,

Molly

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Donuel
Date: 15 May 06 - 11:56 PM

unseen out takes

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/passionparo1.jpg

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/passionparo2.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 May 06 - 02:55 AM

I guess the main cause of distress for me is that the fundamentalists are cashing in on Da Vinci Code as a rallying point. This book and movie are adding millions to their coffers, and they'll use it all on right-wing propaganda. I guess it's kind of like Mudcat - it's impossible to carry on an intelligent discussion of the book and movie because the loonies on both sides get in a feeding frenzy over it.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 16 May 06 - 04:39 AM

When the film ' The Exorcist ' was released in the UK, cinemas were picketed by catholic priests thereby guaranteeing it a success, the same thing is happenning with the Da Vinci Code [ Bishop of Birmingham decrys it ] can't they see, the more they protest, the bigger the success it will be.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:02 AM

The reason for me expressing disgust with Joe Offer, is the fact he hijacked the thread right off the bat.

If I, as the thread originator, had wanted to discuss the book & movie in the context of the fundamentalist manufactured controversy, I would have started a BS thread about it.

However, that wasn't my interest. My interest was in discussing the folklore in the book, and what folklore the film might take from book.

It should be readily apparent, but isn't to most Mudcatters, that this sort of thread hijacking being practiced by Joe & the clones through their subjective editing, is causing some consternation among the people who post here.

A lot of people are dissatisfied with the hijacking of threads that goes on around here, and feel it is out of control. But people get especially upset when the thread is hijacked by petty tyrants with admin privleges.

What harm would there have been with just leaving the FOLKLORE prefix alone, and moving the thread to the BS section?

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:11 AM

And the fact that Joe doesn't even know what the folklore in the book is about, speaks volumes. Or that posters didn't get the tongue in cheek guest name I originated the thread with means they likely haven't even read the damn book?

Why oh why do so many people think that the people with Mudcat admin privleges should be allowed to arbitrarily and subjectively judge/edit CONTENT they know nothing about?

Was the original post to this thread a personal attack on anyone?

No.

Was it in the music section when it belonged in BS?

Yes, but through no fault of the thread originator. All threads started with a FOLKLORE prefix automatically show up above the line.

Did the thread being above the line require action by a clone?

Yes, but all that was required was it be moved below the line, without the clone (Joe in this case) making commentary about it.

As many others have noted here recently, passing judgment on posters/content while you make simple, basic, no remarks required admin changes is just plain bad moderating.

Joe Offer is probably the worst moderator of the bunch, because he can't keep his damn mouth shut when he edits.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:12 AM

Just because this is your opinion doesn't neccessarily make it correct, or can't you see that also ?

What is or isn't folklore is subjective.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:17 AM

No, what is or isn't folklore isn't subjective, people's beliefs are subjective. What is or isn't folklore is actually very easy to discern if you know anything at all about it.

And while any asshole has an opinion, it doesn't mean that the moderators should be standing in judgment on posters and/or their choices of subject matter, and expressing those judgments when doing simple edit changes.

Bad moderating is bad moderating. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: freda underhill
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:18 AM

that previous comment could be seen as hijacking the thread to pursue an anti-JO comment.

Meanwhile, back at the film, I won't be able to see it til I get back to Sydney in June. I look forward to seeing it and to thinking about the whole thing again. Despite all the critics complaints, I was fascinated to read the book, having read the Holy Blood & the Holy Grail years earlier.

I think both books are a bit like the Paradise Papers, (published in the US as 'When God was a Woman') a book by Merlin Stone which writes about an earlier time in the history of Judaism and sister ancient religions, when a Goddess was the principal deity.

Academics and historians didnt like the book because it didnt conform to academic standards, particularly among those academics who would not consider art history to be "real" history

Pierre Plantard, supposed descendent of Jesus and head of the line of the Priory of Sion confessed in 1993 that the Priory of Sion was a hoax and that he had developed a long pseudohistory about the organisation and had never taken it seriously.

In 2005, UK TV archaeologist Tony Robinson edited and narrated a detailed rebuttal of the main arguments of Dan Brown and those of Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln, "The Real Da Vinci Code", shown on Channel 4. The programme featured lengthy interviews with many of the main protagonists. Arnaud de Sède, son of Gérard de Sède, stated categorically that his father and Plantard had made up the existence of the Prieuré de Sion. The programme also cast severe doubt on the alleged expatriation of Mary Magdalene to France.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: GUEST
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:27 AM

Sorry freda, but I'll be blunt. The suggestion I posted just to offend Joe Offer to hijack a thread I started myself is just plain stupid.

I refuse to get into some idiotic tit for tat flame war with those of you who stalk threads, flamethrowers at the ready.

Nice try trying to suddenly bring the thread back on topic so Joe won't look bad, but it's too little, too late.

Go argue with yourselves, I'm outta here.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: jacqui.c
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:53 AM

Freda - I read the book and am looking forward to seeing what they do with the film.

Whether or not the premise of the book has any basis in fact or whether it can be considered as a good or bad novel it has generated a lot of discussion. anything that makes people start examining the reasons for their thinking can't be all bad.

Up to the time I read the book I had not given much thought to religion but this book made me start thinking about my own beliefs and about the basis for those beliefs. That makes the book important to me even if it is purely fiction.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: freda underhill
Date: 16 May 06 - 08:57 AM

that's exactly the effect it had on me, Jacqui.
I look forward to posts from people when they've seen it.

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 May 06 - 11:42 AM

Comment to the Minnesota Monster. I find it hilarious and ironic that you would complain about thread hijacking. I have seen you hijack so many threads, for exactly the reason that you now complain about. Shall we talk Veterans and Memorial Day "Thank You" threads? As ye sow, and all that.

I think the clergy makes much ado about nothing. They actually are assisting with the success of this film, just as those that protested against the brutality of Gibson's film helped turn it into such a success.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 May 06 - 11:54 AM

Mick, I am sure you do not mean to make a blanket statement about clergy, as I assume you would not mean one about any group of human beings.

In our parish, "the clergy" (your fellow Mudcatter and sometime host, Hardiman the Fiddler) is arranging an evening to talk about the film-- a place of peace and calm where people who feel there is some controversy can meet together to reflect on their thoughts and feelings about the film and the upsets people are having over it.

Hardi is one of "the clergy" in our Episcopal Diocese who is recognized for Scripture and Church History expertise as well as conflict reduction.

I imagine that once Hardi has facilitated and listened to the group discussion, he will offer his perspective about how the film's premise, promotion, and controversies stack up against the living faith of our congregation and the bases for this faith that we share.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Da Code According to Ron & Tom
From: Amos
Date: 16 May 06 - 01:00 PM

As I recall, the core of the book hinges on the notion that a certain young lady is descended from a prophet who wandered the earth 2000 years back, who was always thought to have been single, but who is now discovered to have gotten married and had a child. To me this is about as world-shaking as the fate of the Blue Meanies in Smurfville, or the zipcode of Oscar's home can. (How does he get his mail, anyway?)

I guess some folks will make a controversy out of anything at all -- including the M.M. cited above.

What I really enjoy about folk music -- among other things -- is that even at its most bitter, it seeks, by its nature, an aesthetic balance. There's a lot to be said for going to the trouble of making songs out of your diatribes!! Rap notwithstanding.

A