Welcome to the forum.
I don't see the link between the age of a theory and the question of its validity (or otherwise).Deborah B wrote:Sorry, but is there only me in the whole world who thinks that as 'The holy Blood and the Holy Grail' was published more than 25 years ago its "controversial" aspects are now somewhat old hat
Dunno. Never read it.Deborah B wrote:and that "The Da Vinci Code" was the biggest load of (badly written) twaddle that I have had the misfortune to read in almost as long?
It may be cynical, but it may also be a valid point! On the other hand, if Boris Johnson is right (see previous post) more than 10% of the U.K. population now believes the Bloodline theory. The church would not want Christians to adopt heretical beliefs.Deborah B wrote:Am I cynical in thinking that Dan Brown and various members of the clergy have been fueling each others' publicity machines and all controversy is greeted eagerly by both sides?
If it was that bad, how come you got to the end in five hours flat? How come you got to the end at all, for that matter?Deborah B wrote:I can hardly believe that people are actually sitting here discussing the "implications" of what is just a painfully bad novel. I wasted money and time on the thing. There went Ã‚Â£6.99 and five hours of my life that I'll never get back again!
But the hype played on the controversial issues raised by the book.Deborah B wrote:Surely the hype which convinces unsuspecting members of the public into parting with hard earned cash for this sort of rubbish is the most controversial aspect of this whole sorry mess.