Dan Brown: The Da Vinci Code

[Anonymous]

The success of The Da Vinci Code is certainly a literary anomaly. Both unexpected and unexplainable, the sheer volume of sales is surprising as the book is not, in my opinion, well written, intelligent, or original.

It begins in Le Louvre, Paris, with some of the clumsiest writing I've ever seen. Classics such as describing the eyes and hair colour of a silhouette are par for the course here as a museum curator of considerable renown (and how many curators have you heard of?) is murdered. From there, enter our cardboard hero, Robert Langdon, who will solve the mystery armed only with a similarly cardboard French girl and the author's help. Off he goes solving puzzles you and I solved pages ago (sometimes even chapters) despite us laymen not being schooled in his esoteric field. Throw in a couple of lame baddies, a historical secret, and the 'thrill' of the chase and you have The Da Vinci Code.

The book is fast paced, its 500 plus pages are quickly digested, although this is because the author writes such short chapters that there's a lot of blank space when one chapter ends a few lines into the page. Throughout, it uses one plot device: the cliffhanger. Fair enough, it gets you reading through the book but the author could have used more literary tactics in order to develop his story.

There are a number of places, however, where the book falls down: the writing, the characters, and the history. At times, it seems, Brown has raided a factbook of dubious authenticity and tried to cram as much of its content into his book without even deliberating over its relevance to the story at hand.

Firstly, the writing: It's simple and unemotional. There are many clumsy instances where the author says something which is simply not possible (see the silhouette comments above) or jars i.e. 'Silas prayed for a miracle and little did he know that in two hours he would get one'. You are left wondering if the author is, in parallel to the dubious facts, trying to squeeze in as much content as possible from his Little Book of Bad Cliches.

The characters, despite travelling with them for the duration of the book, never developed. They 'ooh-ed and ah-ed' their way through the startling revelations and that's about it. Their dialogue was intolerable, at times, and there were occasions when you just couldn't believe what was coming out of their mouths: Englishman saying 'soccer', French girl saying 'spring break'. It's Americanism after Americanism with these people despite only one character being American; surely, if you do as much research as Dan Brown claims to have done, you would find out how your characters speak. Another ‘joy’ is the utter shock on one character's face - who has just been told a stream of pseudo-history where she hardly flinched- as she learns that 'rose' is an anagram of 'Eros'. Stone the crows...

It's the facts, however, that really let this book down. It claims from the start that a number of things (such as art, documents, locations) are accurate which, with the author's supposed research, you hope to believe. And then you are inundated with Paris the wrong way around, the wrong police forces running about, French cops commanding the British cops, England being the only country in Europe where they drive on the left (conveniently forgetting Scotland, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Cyprus, and Malta), and other such nonsense as British knights carrying ID cards which pronounce them above the law.

That's the errors (well, a tiny percenage of them) but, as I've said before, there are times when you feel the author is just including stuff to pad the book. Common sentences are 'Robert Langdon was surprised how many people didn't actually know...this or that' or 'Robert Langdon often smiled when he thought about how few people knew...this or that'. Place descriptions don't fare much better, unfortunately, as they are out of the story's context and read like 'copy and pastes' from tourist websites.

The pace, I enjoyed. The book, I didn't. Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco covered this topic back in the 1980s - it's nothing new. Brown is just recycling the ridiculous The Holy Blood & The Holy Grail as fiction. Bad history meets bad fiction - it's a marriage made in Heaven.

If you want some no-brain beach reading - and haven't read this yet, although who hasn't? - then give it a try; it's airport tat! Don't, however, believe a word of it, as it is, for the most part, nonsense. If, however, you are looking for a great novel that deals with similar topics, and has a great reread potential, then read the aforementioned Foucault's Pendulum - it's superior in every way.

[Inanna]

The success of The Da Vinci Code is certainly a literary anomaly. Both unexpected and unexplainable, the sheer volume of sales is surprising as the book is not, in my opinion, well written, intelligent, or original.



Gotta disagree with you there, I thought it was well written, gripping and very thought provoking, definitely gets top marks from me. :D

[Lilywhite]

I agree Inanna, I liked all the Dan Brown books. The fact he managed to keep my interest through topics I previously thought were 'above me' is just proof of what a great story writer he is.

[Anonymous]

The success of The Da Vinci Code is certainly a literary anomaly. Both unexpected and unexplainable, the sheer volume of sales is surprising as the book is not, in my opinion, well written, intelligent, or original.



Gotta disagree with you there, I thought it was well written...

I suppose it depends on your definition of well-written. I give a stuff about the laying out of words on a page and how they work together. Skimming over your list of books (http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=621), you seem more interested in plot-driven genre fiction. The spice of life, and all that.

I just thought the prose was clunky, the choice of words weak.

[Freewheeling Andy]

I've refused to read this precisely because of the two previously mentioned books. I read Holy Blood & Holy Grail, which is worth reading just for the spectacular comedy value - I read it first as a 14 year old with no critical faculties and took it at face value. I then re-read it about 5 years ago and could hardly stop myself laughing. It's up there with von Danicken.

And then Foucault's Pendulum, which I enjoyed but is perhaps a bit too over-wrought largely rehashed the same stuff. I think I was disappointed by Foucault's Pendulum because it wasn't as good as Name Of The Rose, but it satisfied my need for novels about rosicrucians, templars, cathars, secret societies, the elders of zion, and so on.

I will say, though, that people who've read the Dan Brown say that the religius conspiracy nonsense really just acts as a backdrop for the thriller. So really, you're just reading a thriller with a backdrop of rosicrucians rather than with a backdrop of nazis or aircraft, or whatever.

On that basis, apparently, it works perfectly well. It's "just" a thriller.

[Louiseog]

I will say, though, that people who've read the Dan Brown say that the religius conspiracy nonsense really just acts as a backdrop for the thriller. So really, you're just reading a thriller with a backdrop of rosicrucians rather than with a backdrop of nazis or aircraft, or whatever.

On that basis, apparently, it works perfectly well. It's "just" a thriller.
Precisely, its a good story!!

[Sarahrob]

On that basis, apparently, it works perfectly well. It's "just" a thriller.

Absolutely - it is not particularly well written in the same was as Agatha Christie books aren't. Like Agatha Christie it still had me turning the pages, and I still went on to read Brown's other books.

It is silly in places, and the constant cliffhanger endings on chapters grated after a while, but I still found it entertaining and have re-read it with pleasure.

[Anonymous]

I read Holy Blood & Holy Grail, which is worth reading just for the spectacular comedy value - I read it first as a 14 year old with no critical faculties and took it at face value. I then re-read it about 5 years ago and could hardly stop myself laughing.

I'm in the same boat there, Andy. I read it years ago - probably some tattered library copy - and took much of it to be factual rather than supposition. Looking at it later, it does make a mockery of concluding a historical investigation by jumping from A to Z, missing out B through Y.

And then Foucault's Pendulum, which I enjoyed but is perhaps a bit too over-wrought largely rehashed the same stuff. I think I was disappointed by Foucault's Pendulum because it wasn't as good as Name Of The Rose, but it satisfied my need for novels about rosicrucians, templars, cathars, secret societies, the elders of zion, and so on.

I'm the other way round, preferring Foucault's Pendulum to The Name Of The Rose. Perhaps it's because I read the former as my introduction to Eco; and partly because it was set in a more recognisable world. All the conspiracy stuff and pseudo-religious stuff in Foucault's Pendulum I'd read about in dribs and drabs, whereas, with The Name Of The Rose I had yet to read Jorge Luis Borges to form a complete appreciation of the text. One day, I suppose, I should read it again.

I will say, though, that people who've read the Dan Brown say that the religius conspiracy nonsense really just acts as a backdrop for the thriller. So really, you're just reading a thriller with a backdrop of rosicrucians rather than with a backdrop of nazis or aircraft, or whatever.

Yeah, that's right. The strange interpretation of Opus Dei - with monks! - is no different to Indiana Jones being chased by Nazis. All the guff between is just filler, with some really dodgy puzzles that a five year old could solve within seconds never mind our top team of symbologists and cryptographers taking a few chapters at a time. Painting by numbers is the obvious comparison.

[Michelle]

Interesting discussion... the thing about books is that there are so many genres and types of books, that there's something for everyone. Personally, I don't think any one of us can define what makes a 'well-written' book - what works for one won't work for the next person.

If some people find that they enjoy the book, and it holds their attention, then to them it's a 'well written' book.

As admin, I would like to say that we have members on here who enjoy all sorts of books, and I want to keep it that way. I also expect you all to express your own views, and discuss them.. but it's not necessary to belittle what another member thinks, or reads. Thank you! :)

[Inanna]

I suppose it depends on your definition of well-written. I give a stuff about the laying out of words on a page and how they work together. Skimming over your list of books (http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=621), you seem more interested in plot-driven genre fiction. The spice of life, and all that.



My version of well-written, is just that, my version.

I am hoping that you are not saying that because I read books by the likes of Jodi Picoult, Tess Gerritsen and Dean Koontz that I wouldn't know what a well-written book is like!

Ahhh just out of curiousity how many of the books on my list have you read?

[Anonymous]

My version of well-written, is just that, my version.

I am hoping that you are not saying that because I read books by the likes of Jodi Picoult, Tess Gerritsen and Dean Koontz that I wouldn't know what a well-written book is like!

No, I'm not saying that. I'm just saying I believe well-written applies to the words on the page and how they work together regardless of what the story is about. I know that many of the more (shall we say popular?) authors are not what I like because for them the words only serve to push the plot along.

Ahhh just out of curiousity how many of the books on my list have you read?

Just three. Koontz, Herbert, and Laymon. That was in my teens though and I feel that as a reader I've outgrown them as writers. Just to be a pedant, though, the Richard Laymon novel you list as The Island is just called Island.

[Michelle]

I do agree with you about Laymon.. but I still enjoy the other two.

So it would appear that some people like the way the words are put together, whereas some look for a good storyline / characters etc. To me, a 'well written' book is one that holds you, and you enjoy.

[Anonymous]

So it would appear that some people like the way the words are put together, whereas some look for a good storyline / characters etc.

Heaven forbid we shouldn't expect both in the one book. :wink:

[Inanna]

Everything has to just right for me, from the characters and plot, to the wording and way its presented.

If the characters are brilliant, yet its written all higgotty piggotty then its not well-written.

A far-fetched plot is good, if its written in a way that even if you can't quite believe it, you enjoy reading it anyway. :wink:

[Anonymous]

Do we agree that a character should develop?

[Inanna]

To me, a 'well written' book is one that holds you, and you enjoy.

Amen!


LOLOL

[Margo]

I also thought it was a good book. :wink:

[Maureen]

A lot of people are making this novel famous, just because it is not totally 100% accurate. And I bet Mr Brown is loving it!

[wiccibat]

It's a ripping yarn, like Indiana Jones,a bit of fun,made Mr. Brown rich. Nothing wrong with that. :flowers:

[Maureen]

That's what I think Wiccibat...I enjoyed it as I found it entertaining, but I never forgot that it is a novel.

[Anonymous]

A lot of people are making this novel famous, just because it is not totally 100% accurate. And I bet Mr Brown is loving it!

Mr Brown can love it all he wants, and fair play to him. But I don't believe for one minute that the inaccuracies are the sum total of the criticism. Religious groups, also, seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill with respect to it as it doesn't really tackle any questions of faith, just mentions an already debunked theory in passing.

The biggest criticism is just how bad a wordsmith that Brown is - clumsy stuff (like the silhouette with eyes I've previously mentioned) and the tired archetype of giving the "baddies" physical disabilities so as to differentiate them from you or I. Is that really fulfilling? Is such turgid prose substantial enough to be called entertaining?

[jake]

I think most people read Dan Brown's books for a bit of light entertainment before moving onto something else, probably again, for light entertainment.

[Anonymous]

I think most people read Dan Brown's books for a bit of light entertainment before moving onto something else, probably again, for light entertainment.

Bruce Forsyth; now that's light entertainment. :)

At least you mention moving on; you should see the people on a certain Dan Brown forum. They just read his four novels over and over and over! again. :shock:

[jake]

I never intentionally read a book twice, I don't see the point. I enjoyed Deception Point from an entertainment point of view, but I'm not interested in reading anything with a religious slant, hence I tried but failed with his other books.

[Anonymous]

I never intentionally read a book twice, I don't see the point.

I'm like that too, as I hate reading over something and getting that obvious deja vu feeling. Even when I've lost a bookmark and I'm reading where I thought I'd left off only to discover I'd already made it past that chapter.

There are, of course, books out there that reward multiple reads; I'm led to believe my current read, Lolita, is one such book. These books tend to be literature wherein the fun of rereading comes from clues left in the text that you can only pick up the second time around or increased knowledge that explains references further. I can't help but let the alarms go off when someone mentions they reread something plot driven as the whole charm of them is read once, know what happens, throw it away.

[Kell]

No I have to admit I love re-reading old favourites. Especially when 'm feeling ill - it's comfort reading rather than comfort eating. ;)

[Sarahrob]

No I have to admit I love re-reading old favourites. Especially when 'm feeling ill - it's comfort reading rather than comfort eating. ;)

Me too. There are certain books I will always go back to as they are completely undemanding and have the comfortable familiarity of a pair of old slippers :D

[jake]

My 15 year old saw the Da Vinci Code at the cinema last night and absolutely loved it. She's off to read the book now.

[MsBint]

There are, of course, books out there that reward multiple reads; I'm led to believe my current read, Lolita, is one such book.
Absolutely. :wink:

No I have to admit I love re-reading old favourites. Especially when 'm feeling ill - it's comfort reading rather than comfort eating. Wink
Me too. There are certain books I will always go back to as they are completely undemanding and have the comfortable familiarity of a pair of old slippers
Me three. I get overwhelmed with lots of new material to digest sometimes, and so going back to a familiar book is very comforting, I feel.

[southernlady]

Kell, I agree with you about re-reading old favorites, esp well-written ones.

There have been times I have read a book a second time and realized a missed a particular point in the plot the first time that ended up making a difference in the book.

No, I have not read any of Dan Brown's books so I will not comment on his ability as an author but I do know that far more is being made out of this than need be.

To all esp in this thread:

The written word, AS WE ALL KNOW can be miscontrued. And the tone used by someone can be misunderstood as well.

Remember, there is another person talking at the other end of the computer with feelings and opinions that matter to them. With anonymous communication through a computer, it's easy to lose sight of this as interaction with people' not just with a machine. People have feelings. Your comments may mean something different to a different person.

Liz (the almost absent admin)

[Mamacita]

Very good points, Liz!

I, too, enjoy reading certain books more than once. Mainly b/c revisiting the characters or where the book takes place is like visiting an old friend. :D :reading:

And after reading this thread from the beginning, I find it rather disheartening to see how snippy some of the comments have been...which is the main reason why I've avoided coming here for so long.

No one should have to defend their choice of reading material...(the exception being kiddie porn or something equally icky.)

Just because you choose to read "genre fiction" doesn't mean you're lacking in gray matter.

And reading "highbrow" books, searching for "the deeper meaning of life" doesn't make you better than anyone else.

Michelle has tried to make this "the friendliest book forum on the net", and I applaud her efforts...it's very sad when she and the other admins have to play "Playground monitor".

[southernlady]

One of my favorite quotes:
I would sooner read a timetable or a catalog than nothing at all.
—W. Somerset Maugham

So it really shouldn't matter what you read but the simple fact that you do. Liz

[wiccibat]

Actually, Liz I recall introducing myself as reading the label off a sauce bottle,How clean is your house, Wound Management,and How to do anything on a computer.
I'm honoured to be in the company of such a literary giant!
Now, where's that Argos Catalogue?

[Anonymous]

No one should have to defend their choice of reading material...(the exception being kiddie porn or something equally icky.)

First issue: why should child pornography be exempt from fiction? We've had books cause outrage over the years for the content (Lady Chatterley's Lover, Lolita, Giovanni's Room, etc.) and we should be glad that the subsequent court cases found in favour of the author and in favour of fiction. If a book on child pornography were to be written I would have no issue with that; what I'd take issue with was if the author were to be naive or useless in their treatment. This would be fiction and not real life child pornography, so there would be no crime being done and no child being abused. Unless of course, that reading material you refer to is a glossy coffee table book filled with lewd and abusive photographs, but I don't see that ever making the shelves.

Just because you choose to read "genre fiction" doesn't mean you're lacking in gray matter.

Can you quote me where someone said you were?

And reading "highbrow" books, searching for "the deeper meaning of life" doesn't make you better than anyone else.

Do you know that the minute someone cries elitist or "highbrow" or pretentious it is usually a sign that the person posting it has a certain inferiority complex or some deep guilt about knowing they could do better but don't?

You will not find one of your "highbrow" (your word) readers saying they are better than anyone else - they will say that a book is better than another and, as some pigs once said, "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others", and this can be applied to the judgement of readers.

Michelle has tried to make this "the friendliest book forum on the net", and I applaud her efforts...it's very sad when she and the other admins have to play "Playground monitor".

I seen that tag. A bold claim and uncorroborated, but I digress. The top of the forum also says "Love Books? Talk Books" and I am an avid book lover. I talk about them all the time - they are a passion. Should I limit myself to only talking about books I like? Should we all just agree? No, that would never work. The notion of discussion (which does include argument) would die immediately.

[Maureen]

Stewart, once again you are missing the point - it being that different views are very welcome, once expressed in a way that will not feel rude to others.

[Kell]

I think Mamacita meant actual child pornography, not a work of fiction that included an aspect of it.

[southernlady]

I seen that tag. A bold claim and uncorroborated, but I digress.

Most of us, as forum owners, us a tag line borrowed from somewhere. And as a TAG line, it usually does not have the space to give credit. If you can find the credit line I am sure Michelle would be glad to include it.

Now this thread is starting to act like a flame war...a you said/I said and that is NOT what a REVIEW of the book should be. Can we either go BACK to reviewing the book in question or close this thread and say the review is finished? Liz

[Mamacita]

I haven't read the book...but I've seen many, many reviews and they varied from one end of the spectrum to the other.

Any of you who've read and seen it, what do you think? Is the book better than the movie? or vice versa?

In the movie, as creepy as he was, I liked Silas. I could see that he honestly believed in what he was doing...he wasn't being mean, just for the sake of it.

Aringarosa was the truly villainous character! LOL! You just knew he had another agenda than the one he showed to his fellow Opus Dei members.

The movie was a little predictable in that I knew from early on that ******* was the rose. But that didn't spoil my enjoyment of it in the least.

Langdon was a great character...this poor guy who was dragged unwillingly into a situation. I could "feel" his terror when confronted with closed in spaces.

All in all, I would give the movie a 8 out of a 10 rating. :)

[Michelle]

And reading "highbrow" books, searching for "the deeper meaning of life" doesn't make you better than anyone else.

Do you know that the minute someone cries elitist or "highbrow" or pretentious it is usually a sign that the person posting it has a certain inferiority complex or some deep guilt about knowing they could do better but don't?

Stewart, I will say quite publicly that I will not have anyone coming here and attacking another member. If you can't be more considerate, I will ask you not to post.

In addition, this thread has gone well beyond a review, and so I am closing it.