DaVinci Code rant

I have had it up to here (imagine my horizontal hand making a cutting motion across my throat) with the discussions, books, questions, "news" segments, and interviews regarding the "controversies" surrounding The DaVinci Code. If anything they only serve to validate what I tell my students about what happens when we "de-mythologize" a myth or story; that a culture's construction and (more importantly in this case), response to a story reveal more about that culture than the story itself reveals about its subject. Case in point, Genesis, which really tells us nothing about the creation of the universe, but only tells us about how the Canaanite cultures of the first millennia BCE perceived the universe. Is there really a dome over the sky? Do snakes really talk? Do God and Adam really have to check out all the other animals first to figure out that none of them is suitable as a partner for the man?

 

Another case in point: Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, which is filled with as many "lies" (and in this context that would mean contrary to the Biblical accounts), historical inaccuracies, (and by this I mean NOT Biblical, but what would be judged as historically reasonable given 1st century Roman-occupied Palestine), fanciful and imaginative creative license (Pontius Pilate speaking Aramaic and offering Jesus a cup of water), and just your plain ole' made up stuff (Jesus' "invention" of the bar stool in one scene) . The popular Christian response to this movie was to embrace it as "truth." I had students who commented that this movie was "beautiful"; students who, when I de-constructed it from an academic point of view were offended that I would criticize a movie that depicts the graphic (and "realistic") savage torture of their god. I heard accounts of movie-viewers at the Citadel Mall movie theater who would stride into the aisle and kneel during the crucifixion scene. The movie was hailed as "true to the Gospels" and an accurate account of Jesus' last hours.

 

The popular reaction to these two fictional stories when juxtaposed, offers us a glimpse into Christian culture, but adds nothing to the "history" of Jesus of Nazareth. So, what kinds of things does this analysis possibly reflect of the culture that rejects or embraces The DaVinci Code or The Passion of the Christ respectively? Perhaps, that:

 

** the "traditional" Christian story has nothing to do with (and never has) historical accuracy.

** and everything to do with the particularities of relative geographical and cultural perceptions of "reality," moral and otherwise

**and that the Christian story is shaped and formed to accommodate these perceptions. 

** in other words, the "Christian story" will reflect the historical contexts out of which it emerges (and out of which it continues to be constructed)

** that the Vatican is a "culture" that operates out of fear and a paranoiac neurosis, which sees itself as a constantly threatened authority

** that American Christian culture views death and suffering as intrinsically noble and virtuous

** that Jesus' "divinity" is elevated (pardon the obvious dualistic pun) over and against his humanity

** that American Christian popular culture views sex as perverse and shameful (certainly something in which their GOD would not engage)

**that American Christianity needs to "get a grip."