DECODING DA VINCI
I think I’ve unraveled the se=
cret
of the smile that has baffled many- that of La Jaconde=
,
more commonly known as Mona Lisa. Although Dan Brown interprets her as a fu=
sion
of the Egyptian God and Goddess Amon and Lisa, =
thereby
making it Da Vinci’s dirty little androgy=
nous secret
(therefore the enigmatic expression), I feel there is nothing mystifying ab=
out
it. Her tragic smile is deliberate. Sadly, it mocks the future.
&n=
bsp;
‘Da Vinci Code’ is the vicio=
us
hand that recently rocked the Christian cradle. The book created waves. The
film was supposed to create a splash. Before that, the protests and the
propaganda began. The author, Dan Brown, first held responsible for plagiar=
ism
and for distortion of facts, was threatened. Next Ron Howard, who was held =
in
contempt for making a movie many feared, would hurt the religious sentiment=
s of
the devout while brainwashing the gullible, was also threatened. Despite
everything the film was released.
Joining in the bandwagon of the
blasphemous, I saw the movie. It was terribly disappointing. Forget about t=
he
waves and the splash, it did not even create a ripple. The movie needed an
exposition not only to be shown=
but
also to be said.
This made for monotonous dialogues in ambiguous Anglo/ American/ French/ ac=
cents.
And the most intriguing part of the book- the decrypting and decoding of the
fascinating symbols was totally overlooked. Even Tom Hanks, who is so much =
more
capable than just running around with long hair and a bored expression, was
totally wasted. A ten episode TV serial would have done more justice to the
book.
To the general public,=
I
suggest reading the book instead of seeing the film. To our Christian breth=
ren
I recommend watching the movie, instead of reading the book. That way the
former would get to ‘think’. And think how! And the latter̵=
7;s faith
would remain unshaken- because if you’ve read the book you might not =
like
the movie, but if you haven’t, you might not understand anything. Not
unless you have a direct consultation with Dan Brown and Ron Howard. Or pos=
sess
a fair amount of biblical knowledge. Or have studied Egyptology and Cryptol=
ogy.
Or know a bit about the Renaissance movement. Or are familiar with the Prio=
ry
of Sion and Opus Dei and what they stand for. O=
r are totally
well versed with the facts of Art History!
Leonardo Da
Vinci, with his playful insinuations, probably knew that one day a certain =
Dan
Brown would grasp his (Vinci’s) unique abilities of double entendres =
and decode
it to a modern and baffled world. Thus creating a cloud=
of
doubt amongst the credulous creed. Thus showerin=
g a
rain of insecurity amongst the clued-up clan. Thus creating chaos! He
also possibly knew that then would start a war of words and of actions- bet=
ween
people incapable of filtering fact from fiction. Between people incapable o=
f understanding
art or the psyche of any artiste. Perhaps that is what Mona Lisa’s sa=
rdonic
expression suggests. So the next time you see this sfumato painting, look closely. The smile isn’t a smile at all. =
It
is a smirk!