Below the Belt

i was raised in a conservative Christian family. an only girl. an only child, in fact. all attention was on me and my brain and upbringing was, well, more or less "ok" to the standard of the society. i understood the society, too. the do's and don't's in gatherings, how i should respect the elders, how i should be this and that. i grew up normally, in front of books and the television set. i had Bananas in Pajamas Fever. but later on, i didn't seem to notice that society has been welcoming this new trend... the women's printed underwear. *smirks* since when did people care about what you wear under your pants except in beach and summer settings? sure, there are ads for the endless comfort, the perfect fit. that was then, though. now, they have to come with statements written all over your behind. think kiss marks printed on your ass. talk about subliminal. or maybe not. i asked a friend about it, long before. "ano bang point nyan? e hindi naman nakikita kung stripes ba o polka dotted?!" "ano ka ba?! confidence lang yan!" "ha?" "wala lang. pangpataas lang ng lebel ng kumpiyansa!" so i tried to buy a pair. and i tell you, it does work. i didn't buy one because the society said so. i did because i chose to. the difference? i didn't follow because i had to. in fact, i didn't follow. what to these advertisements and printed underwears have to do with what i have to wear below the belt? it is always a personal choice. self-defined.

Was Dan Wrong?

"You know, Sophie, what matters in the end is what you believe in.", said Langdon. But most people didn't seem to notice. The feedbacks were rather odd to me. I wasn't fed of any idea what the book was. I thought it was some kind of an encyclopedia or something because friends would tell and retell the oh-so-unbelievably-cool-did-you-know's but not the context of the novel itself. I knew there was something more to that from reading Brown's other novel, "Angels & Demons." I was more or less intrigued. So, Valentine's of 2006, I asked for a paperback copy of Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" and "Memoirs of a Geisha" by Arthur Golden from my parents. I set aside the Japanese controversies and chose to find out what the Catholic Church was busy about. So, I took my book, stared at the front cover, said a prayer (to keep my faith intact) and flipped through page one with a note that says all information in the novel are authentic. And the rest was unwritten history. It wasn't bad in my opinion. It's rather good, in fact. The structure was undeniably irresistable. The twist was complex but relative. The morals were a bit unnoticed. But all in all, it's a good buy. For real. Still I thought to myself: What's the fuzz all about? Why was the Church totally against this book? Why was Dan Brown accused of this and that and threatened of other things? Was he wrong? Was Dan Wrong? What was the Church so afraid of? Or why were they mad? Outraged? Why and What? If I were part of the Church, as in a nun or such, I guess I wouldn't mind reading it. But I'm not any of that. I am not religious but I am faithful. (I believe that has nothing to do with my love for reading, right?) Did they ever consider their faith, not their reputation as a Universal Church? The thing is, they don't have much authority anymore to tell people that the book was a total lie. Why? Maybe because it's not a lie or maybe because they couldn't make the people listen. The Church has weakened. And this book, I think, made them more inferior (which shouldn't be the case). Should they blame mass media for not prohibiting a book as such? Should they sue Dan Brown for making a living and entertaining avid readers through his writing? Maybe Brown was wrong. Maybe. I respect the Church (and other people siding them). I do. All I am saying is, the book shouldn't bother them much, if, in all caps, THEY TRUST THEIR FAITH.