A Normative Analysis on the Condemnation of the Da Vinci Code in Some Countries

Well, in this posting, I reposted my old writing of the same title which has previously been posted here

This is simply because the other blog of mine was hacked and I could not log in :(


INTRODUCTION
Art is something that is hard to define since one can never have a single definition about arts that can successfully satisfy all people defining art. Thus, different people may have different definitions, depending on their need. However, the thing to know then is the goal of defining art. Why defining art is importantly needed? And one of the answers is that it is to distinguish ‘art’ from ‘non-art’.
It is undeniable that people have agreed that there are some things which belong to art such as music, painting, film, architecture, poetry, and novel. In surface, what people may get from those kinds of art is, of course, pleasure. However, the fact records that there is something so called condemnation towards several kinds of art. The example is the condemnation of the movie The Da Vinci Code in many places in the world such as in Australia, and others countries in which Christians abound: from India to China, South Africa to Ghana, and Mexico to Brazil. Not only condemnation, in Philippine also occurs the banning of the show of that controversial movie.
Finally, that very fact leads to questions of what actually become the reasons behind the condemnation and whether or not the condemnation is necessary, regarding The Da Vinci Code is a form of art. Right in this paper, the writer is interested in answering those questions by relating the movie, as an example of art, and art’s values: aestheticism, expressivism, and cognitivism.
From all the approaches available in conducting art analysis, the writer chooses to use the normative one. The normative approach is the only approach which discusses the values of art. In distinguishing art from non-art, this approach sees the distinction normatively, not descriptively. It is, again, the way of interpreting arts by placing the art’s values as its focus. Therefore, the normative approach suits the expectation of the writer, since the very first place, to analyze the movie, as a form of art, based on the values it has.
Going deeper into the theory, art may have three values. The first is aestheticism in which it believes that art can give pleasure. The next is expressivism where it argues that art can be a means of transferring emotion. And the last one is cognitivism which says that art can enhance people’s understanding by illuminating people’s experiences of their everyday life. From those three values, in analyzing the film, the writer focuses on the cognitivism and expressivism in order to get more focus analysis. Expressivism is chosen regarding what happens to the film in the reality: world-wide condemnation, in which it occurs upon the role of emotion. However, they have the emotion due to their understanding that there is a violation towards religious teaching. In other words, those two values are, in this film, inter-related. Finally, in this paper, the writer gives some analysis, based on normative approach focusing on cognitivism and expressivism, as the answer of what actually become the reasons of the condemnation.
DISCUSSION
The Da Vinci Code is a film whose story is brought from a novel with the same title written by Dan Brown. The setting mostly happens in Paris, France. However, it also sets in London where the Chatolic Church in which Sir Isaac Newton was buried is. The main conflict in the film is between the sympathizer and non-sympathizer of Opus Dei. They fight to get Holy Grail which is important for Christianity. The sympathizer of Opus Dei is represented by Silac, an ex-criminal who repents what he has done by doing full-service to Jesus including to do physical punishment to his body as an action of sin redemption. He chases the Holy Grail upon the order of a ‘teacher’ who guides him. He believes that the ‘teacher’ is a holy man and that what he says is never wrong. In fact, the ‘teacher’ is only a man hired by Leigh, a crippled old man who is the main antagonist of the film. Leigh even fools a bishop in conducting his plan.
Meanwhile, the non-sympathizers of Opus Dei, who serve the priory, chase the grail to reveal the hidden ‘truth’. They are represented by the protagonists of this film, Sophie Neveu, with the help of Robert Langdon, an expert of interpreting symbols. Sophie is the granddaughter of Jacques Sauniere, an important man in the priory who gets killed by Silac. During the hunting for the grail that is full of symbols and signs, Sophie and Langdon reveal many hidden ‘truths’. The ‘truths’ are, for example, that Jesus has children from his marriage with Maria Magdalena, a woman who is considered as a prostitute. As a matter of fact in the film, Jacques and Sophie are descendants from them.
The other ‘truth’ is that in the painting entitled The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci, Maria Magdalena is showed. However, in a glance she is not clearly painted; people in the painting look like all men. However, there are Maria Magdalena and the Holy Grail in it, though to be able to see them, one has to be really careful. And Sophie’s last duty from Jacques is to find the grail to show the world the ‘truth’ that Maria Magdalena is not a prostitute; she is Jesus’ wife instead, and people should pray for her. However, though they find the place where the Holy Grail is buried, they do not find the grail since it is told to be none of real thing. The story ends there.
After knowing the main story of the film, it is the time to go directly on the analysis of why that kind of story attracts people’s condemnation and banning. The first thing to discuss is the condemnation. Why that can happen towards the film with such a story? The answer may be simple: it is because the government of the countries in which the condemnation occurs is afraid of the effect that may emerge after the film is watched. That kind of answer leads to another question: why can the effect, if there is any, be that frightening while film is just an art? To be able to answer this, we need to go back to the theory, that art has values. The Da Vinci Code also has values: pleasure, emotion, and understanding. The third one, from the film, is what the people are afraid of.
Film can be a means of understanding by illuminating people’s experience of their life. By watching The Da Vinci Code, people can enhance their understanding on, for example, the history of Christian religion. However, since the film is an art, the understanding it contains is stated implicitly, not explicitly like a book. The information is asserted in the story. Thus, as the story goes, people who watch figure out the information unintentionally. They figure out that, for example, Jesus marries Maria Magdalena and has children from her; Maria Magdalena is not a prostitute; etc.
Art is imaginative work, but it can enhance the understanding. When people have knowledge on, for example, religion, art brings religion as its topic by showing, for example, the implementation of it. The way the art is made, though it is imaginative, is bound by the truth of reality. It means that no matter how free the artist is, they are bound by the sense of logic based on the fact. Thus, the understanding is not against the truth of reality since it goes together with it. In The Da Vinci Code, the freedom of the artist to play his imagination is in the way he sets the story, the scenes, the characters, the places, etc. Meanwhile, the way he is bound by the reality is that he brings Christian religion as its topic, so that he should tell story according to what is believed to be true in Christian religious teaching. The example is that he cannot at all say that Jesus asks Christian people to do five times prayer, like Moslems do, since five times prayer does not exist in Christian teaching.
This next paragraph is the answer of “What will happen if those rules are ignored in creating an art?” In fact, The Da Vinci Code is condemned because it ignores the reality binding. Even the fact shows that the condemning countries are those where Christian abounds. It means that the people know quite well how and what the teaching of Christian religion is. Meanwhile, in The Da Vinci Code, they see that there is a violation towards the truth of reality. What they believe to be true is that Jesus is never married and never has any child. Jesus is Christian’s God. In reality, when there is ‘blasphemy’ towards their God to whom they pray every single time, it is not surprising that they get angry. The way they get angry through watching the film is a way in which film can be a means of transferring emotion. And they express their anger by the condemnation towards the film itself. However, that is for those who know the teaching quite well. For those who do not really know about the teaching, they may take the information contained in the film for granted. Therefore, by doing the condemnation, it is as a way to show the world that there is ‘something wrong’ with the film, so that they do not take it for granted and do not receive the wrong understanding on the teaching.
After discussing the condemnation towards The Da Vinci Code, we eventually come to its banning in Philippine. The government prohibits the show of the film in all Philippine cinemas just before the formal day of the film release, in that country, comes. Here, it may have no direct-relation with the film since they do not watch it yet. However, it has something to do with the novel which is also a form of art. Before the movie is produced in 2006, the novel spreads all over the world, including in Philippine, since it is written in 2003. It is highly possible to be that the people of Philippine get angry after reading the novel. Thus, when they know that the story is brought into a movie, they spontaneously reject it since they believe that the adapted film is of no significant different with the original novel, especially the main basic story. Moreover, they realize that film is more interesting than novel. People watch film more than reading novel. Therefore, preventive action needs to be done before there are more people who know The Da Vinci Code and get wrong impression or understanding on the religion (read: Christian).
CONCLUSION
Finally, the rule is that art can enhance understanding since, though it is free and imaginative, it contains information that is bound by the truth of fact. When that rule is violated, the balance in the art’s values is also violated. As a result, it may lead to a misunderstanding in the society. To prevent that, the aware people may do ‘rude’ action towards it such as condemnation or banning as a real action of ‘protest’ towards it. The condemnation or banning is an example of the expression of negative emotion towards the related art. In the case of The Da Vinci Code, the people who condemn and ban feel that this film violates that rule. It can be dangerous since it brings ‘facts’ in religion teaching as its basic story. The violation towards the rule can be considered as religious blasphemy and can lead to a misunderstanding on the teaching among people either with the same or with different religion. Therefore, some actions are done to it to show how The Da Vinci Code violates the rule, to express the negative feeling towards it, and to avoid the so-called misunderstanding in the society.
REFERENCES
Akwani, Obi. 2006. “Planting Dinosaurs: Much Ado About The Da Vinci Code Nothing” / a review. http://www.imdiversity.com/Villages/global/arts_culture_media/archives/DaVinciCode.asp retrieved on 20 January 2010
Graham, Gordon. 1997. Philosophy of the Arts. London: Routledge.