Now even with my reputation for cynicisms I still cant believe that the world contains so many people willing to be lead by the nose by yet another (desperate for a bit of history) American.
Every time one of these School of Billy Graham fast talking, wildly gesticulating, I spent a couple of years at Harvard, so I must be right con-man pops up, your otherwise average cynical b****rd suddenly turns all hush voiced and awestruck.
In the movie based on this piece of nonsense the hero, a Harvard Symbologist (surprise, surprise!) called Robert Langdon is played by Forest Gump, whose previous finest moment was as skipper of the Bubba Gump Shrimp Corporation boat. But life Being like a box of chocolates or as Mumma should have said A box of Oscars Hollywood actors are very like Harvard graduates and any old piece of c**p with enough fiscal reward attached will do nicely thank you.
The plot seems to centre around an Albino guy, the obligatory Totty and Forest Gump all racing around trying to work out clues left in a bunch of old paintings that will ultimately lead them to the Meaning of Life or something like that.
Now I am no expert, but I once read a Real book about Leonardo Da Vinci and it would seem at the time that the learned gentleman was painting, it was common practice to paint over an old canvas or to paint out mistakes (canvas being an expensive commodity at the time), modern science has via the use of X-ray discovered that this practice of Over painting was quite prevalent. The Mona Lisa itself shows signs of an earlier work underneath the famous one that sits on the top; I mention The Mona Lisa because, apart from the fact that she is really Sonia Jackson from Eastenders, that particular painting turns up in the book as a clue. Again I am no expert, but all that strikes me as a little too convenient and more then a bit fishy; talking of fishy, lets take a look at the most famous Fish supper in history.
Much is made, not only by Dan Brown himself, but by plenty of witch hunters over the years, of Leonardo Da Vincis Last supper and according to these so called experts, the painting is positively riddled with Clues the most outstanding and the one on which the whole Code seems to hang, is that the person on Jesus' right hand side isnt St John the Evangelist but Mary Magdalene and this startling piece of heterosexual behaviour on the part of Jesus who usually preferred to hang out with 12 guys, has thrown millions of gullible conspiracy freaks into a right two and eight.
What these people have missed is that Leonardo Da Vinci was a painter of the Florentine School and it was a preference (in more ways then one) of that particular school of painters to depict young men as sweet, pretty and outrageously effeminate. So much was this a characteristic of the Florentine school, that a 16th century German dictionary gives definitions for Florenzer (A descriptive noun, meaning Buggerer) and the verb Florenzen (To Bugger), it is maybe therefore not surprising that the final line up for the last supper does indeed look a bit like The Village people without the hats.
There could of course be a far simpler explanation and the person sitting on Jesus right hand side is none other
then popular childrens entertainer Wee Jimmy Krankie, drafted in to add a much needed bit of light relief, on what must have been after all, a very solemn occasion.
Dan Brown will make a lot of money from the book and film and there is nothing wrong with that; good luck to him I say. It is the constant selfjustification that goes hand in hand with overnight success that I find irritating and as an example here's a quote from Dan Brown himself: My hope in writing this novel was that the story would serve as a catalyst and springboard for people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion and history. So you are not remotely interested in the sh*t load of cash coming your way then Dan, are you?