The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown

Sooner or Later

Brown is now facing not one, but two plagiarism lawsuits

Link

Can't say I've heard of Perdue's book, but he does seem to have a case

Link

Cactus Col

It was all a bit of silliness really, Tom Clancy does this kind of stuff in his sleep, just without all the religous crap thrown in....

.... the Preacher books by Garth Ennis touched on some of this stuff ... (Jesus not been killed and having a family ... a secret society taking care of His descendants) ... but is a much better, funnier, exciting read ... and much, much more intelligent ... especially liked the last descendant of Christ in it.

OfflerCrocGod

Cactus Col wrote:

It was all a bit of silliness really, Tom Clancy does this kind of stuff in his sleep, just without all the religous crap thrown in....

That's not the main thing that interested me while reading the book ( "religous crap" - being deeply religious myself though it did add an extra bit of interest for me* ). The main factor was the history woven into the book - I love history.



*I'm a militant atheist - stop believing or I'll blow all of us up

Cactus Col

But surely it's only history when it's true, which much of it isn't. There's some distorted history, and probably a couple of hard facts.

comet

Its a really enjoyable thriller, the best I've read in years but its only a novel anyone trying to extract a history lesson or the meaning of life from it is barking up the wrong tree.

NightStrike

There is a book out at the moment called The Da Vinci Code Uncoded which discusses all the "facts" in the book. Worth a read.

Illkillya

The thriller storyline was poor imo, and having read some other similarly themed books, such as Holy Blood, Holy Grail, a lot of the supposedly astonishing facts were nothing new. It was still worth reading because of the few interesting bits that were new to me. I suppose I'd read his other books, but I wouldn't buy them.

BEAT

well, this is a subject I was interested in before I read the book and the subjects within are those that I have been researching myself.
After reading the book I was very excited to know I was on the right path. I took the info I got and researched some more. I read the books he referenced and am researching Da Vinci more indepth.
I see no where in my research that can prove him wrong.

There are going to be skeptics on both sides, and those who dont want to believe the "big picture" are ofcourse going to have negative replies and arguments of disbelief.

It is up to the individual on what to believe and what they want to find out for themselves. The information is out there if you want to find out the truth you will. It is a scary thing knowing the truth,
it isnt for everyone...infact I would not suggest someone delve into as deeply as myself or other historians if they overly religious or shaky in that area, as it could destroy thier own little world.

All I need to know is that I have found what I was looking for and I am okay with what I have found.

The book itself was excellent, I enjoyed the story very much. I went through it a second time and highlighted all of the facts that were thrown in, so Beruthiel if you want I will bring my copy to the beer in November and you can see what in the book is fact or fiction

OfflerCrocGod

Cactus Col wrote:

But surely it's only history when it's true, which much of it isn't. There's some distorted history, and probably a couple of hard facts.

Nope, sorry the majority of what he wrote is true, it wasn't new to me at all. It's just the way that he puts together all the facts into a very enjoyable story is what, to me, makes it an excellent read. The history side bits are true, it's just the plot that was fiction.

BEAT wrote:

it isnt for everyone...infact I would not suggest someone delve into as deeply as myself or other historians if they overly religious or shaky in that area, as it could destroy thier own little world.

I wonder if thats the reason why some people seem to find a need to attack a work of fiction It's The Da Vince Code Decoded by the way NightStrike.

Spalk0

Yeah the first Dan brown i read was angels and Demons and i read it in a day i got that into it!.....i decided to get the other 3 books and read them in just over a week after it!Not normally a reader but i enjoyed them all!

Cant wait for the sequel to Da Vinci Code in 2005!(thats apparently what it is anyways!)

Sleepy

Talliesin wrote:

Really, alleging that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene is just for authors that fear controversy and avoid suggesting that he was seeing St. John on the side too.

Which author's down that? And where can I buy the book?!

Cactus Col wrote:

.... the Preacher books by Garth Ennis touched on some of this stuff ... (Jesus not been killed and having a family ... a secret society taking care of His descendants) ... but is a much better, funnier, exciting read ... and much, much more intelligent ... especially liked the last descendant of Christ in it.

Yeah, that gave me a fit of laughing in the middle of leaving cert Irish alright...

Personally I enjoyed the book. Again, there was very little new to me in terms of the larger themes. I already knew the the Priory of Scion had been a hoax, however most of the rest of it is reasonably accurate to my knowledge. The stuff about Da Vinci was new to me, but it only figures that one of the greatest geniuses of all time would disagree with the Catholic church and it's tall tales, doesn't it?

I don't think Opus Dei were given a necessarily hard time. They *are* a truly terrifying group of zealots. What isn't scary about blind adherence to any belief structure?

The one thing I found slightly irritating was that most of the "puzzles" were far too easily solved, and that you'd have them worked out five pages ahead of the hero. Otherwise, an enjoyable yarn. The only reason I could think of someone disliking it is if they were a religeous zealot, a member of Opus Dei, or expecting a fictitional novel to be entirely truthful in it's use of history.

Mr E

Needless to say, Hollywood have jumped on the DaVinci code bandwagon, and shooting begins next Spring. Robert Langdon to be played by Tom Hanks...

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2004/11/15/story175999.html

oceanclub

Robert Langdon to be played by Tom Hanks...

That's particularly amusing, since the writing-by-numbers
author described the hero as "Harrison Ford in tweeds".

P.

Housi

I'm pretty sure that Dan Browne is familiar with the game Broken Sword. All the way through I kept thinking: 'Hey! That's George and Nico you're talking about.'

Stupidity at its best: Robert sees the diaries of Leonardo da Vinci for the first time, a professor who lectures on his work, and forgets that da Vinci coded his writings through mirror script. Oh, Danny boy.....

A leisurely read. The one-dimensional characters were enough to turn me off though. No meat around the bones.

Flamingfud

Housi wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Dan Browne is familiar with the game Broken Sword. All the way through I kept thinking: 'Hey! That's George and Nico you're talking about.'

Stupidity at its best: Robert sees the diaries of Leonardo da Vinci for the first time, a professor who lectures on his work, and forgets that da Vinci coded his writings through mirror script. Oh, Danny boy.....

A leisurely read. The one-dimensional characters were enough to turn me off though. No meat around the bones.

I've got to agree with that. Viewing the book as I'd view any work of fiction, I found it predictable, unsatisfying, and thoroughly non-gripping.

While the attempt to work historical fact into fiction is a commendable one, it's all too obvious (to anyone who's read books along these lines before) that Brown read Perdue's novel, and some of the many others of the same ilk, and proceeded to distort the facts, then fit a truly one-dimensional story around them.

Does anyone else slightly suspect that the popularity of this book is not because of it's writing quality, or plotline, but the plethora of oh-so-quotable, dinner-party quality facts that are strewn between the pages.


And Angels And Demons is even worse!

doh.ie

Flamingfud wrote:

And Angels And Demons is even worse!

Gah! I quite enjoyed Angels & Demons! Though maybe that had more to do with my mind's eye vision of his Italian sidekick...

Cactus Col

TmB wrote:

Needless to say, Hollywood have jumped on the DaVinci code bandwagon, and shooting begins next Spring. Robert Langdon to be played by Tom Hanks...

No need to wait so long

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041118/REVIEWS/411180308/1023

ixoy

Flamingfud wrote:

Does anyone else slightly suspect that the popularity of this book is not because of it's writing quality, or plotline, but the plethora of oh-so-quotable, dinner-party quality facts that are strewn between the pages.

Completely. I'm quite befuddled as to its success. Sure, it's easy and accessible but the standard of writing isn't very high - flat characters, repeating concepts ad nauseaum, etc. I'll have to assume it's the way he ties in all the "facts" (debatable ones!) into the storyline. Most of them I'd heard here and there but not gathered into one plot line. I guess you get to feel more aggreived when you can think of all the other more skilled writers who'll never get this recognition and who also perform such laborious research (Neal Stephenson's "Cryptonomicon" immediately springs to mind).

ObeyGiant

ixoy wrote:

I guess you get to feel more aggreived when you can think of all the other more skilled writers who'll never get this recognition and who also perform such laborious research (Neal Stephenson's "Cryptonomicon" immediately springs to mind).

I think a better comparison would be Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum, which deals with much the same subjects as Dan Brown's book, except in a much more professionally-written fashion.

And noone is reading it.

RuggieBear

ixoy wrote:

Neal Stephenson's "Cryptonomicon" immediately springs to mind.

Books from Neal Stephenson are much to intelligent and literary for the mass market. Most people don't want to read a book that needs some level of thinking to really enjoy (their loss ). They'd rather get the instant fix of books like the DVC.....I happened to enjoy both books but would never really compare them....The DVC is the Bigmac to the Cryptonomicon's four course meal with quality wine.


The "enjoyable pap" that is the DVC does well, as the storyline doesn't force you to think (altho it does give you that illusion) and everybody knows the stock characters and their roles (again no mental challenge as our Hollywood-socialised brains immediately picture Harrison Ford and some starlet).

Cactus Col

RuggieBear wrote:

Books from Neal Stephenson are much to intelligent and literary for the mass market.

Is that ironic? (What with the mistake in it and all)

RuggieBear

Cactus Col wrote:

Is that ironic? (What with the mistake in it and all)

I wish it was....bloody typo

DapperGent

Sleepy wrote:

The only reason I could think of someone disliking it is if they were a religeous zealot, a member of Opus Dei, or expecting a fictitional novel to be entirely truthful in it's use of history.

I didn't like it because it was a crap book.

Still finished it though.

growler

strange really, one dimensional characters, the occassional incredible stupidity of the hero, the unoriginal plot, abuse of historical fact , only one candidate for the Dr. Evil role....... .... and I still couldn't put it down.

funky penguin

Thats the kind of novelist I dislike with jealousy.

By the way, theres plans for a movie. Sorry if its already been mentioned.

Next inevitable stage I suppose.

Flamingfud

DapperGent wrote:

I didn't like it because it was a crap book.

Still finished it though.

As succinctly put as possible. Frankly, terrible, but I finished it anyway. It was the literary equivalent of watching blind man walk down a dual carriageway. You know what's going to happen, you know it's gonna be messy, but you've got to watch it to the bitter end. Bitter being the taste left in my mouth after turning the last page.

Capt'n Midnight

I read it and "angels and deamons" and "deception point" and the impression got was someone surfing conspiracy sites/ watching discovery and taking notes...

just nit picking on aircraft...

CERN don't do research on hypersonic planes do they ??

And in Deception Point it seems that standard supersonic fighters can go flat out for thier full range when in reality kicking in the afterburner litterly means pouring fuel straight into the jet exhaust and fuel economy falls through the floor.

If you are going to quote technical details then at least do a bit more research than regurgitating barely understood facts.

===============================

I've read two Umberto Eco books. (translations)
The name of the rose is very well done.
Now the other one, Foucault's Pendulum I just couldn't get into, not an easy read, but I'd be sure that it was much better researched than TDVC
ROFL - found this .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umberto_Eco

Eco's second novel, ("the thinking man's The Da Vinci Code") also sold well. In Foucault's Pendulum, under-employed historians decide, as a joke, to weave together the juicy bits of all the conspiratorial histories. They pretend to have uncovered the master plot, the ultimate in nefarious schemes. However, their derisive joke is believed by their readers, and they find themselves caught in a reality made by their fiction.

solas

I thought it was enjoyable, but then again I'm a woman!
[sarcasm]Although I was waiting for a spectacular ending, where he finds the heir to the seat of David is Prince William and locates him on Loch Ness where he was performing the annual walking on water rite. [sarcasm]

Does anyone know if Dan browne is actually a woman, I this his writing style apeals more to the female genre.

DapperGent

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Now the other one, Foucault's Pendulum I just couldn't get into, not an easy read[/url]

It isn't but it's worth the effort. It actually starts to flow enjoyably once you're a bit in I found.

I'd spoiler that bit you have quoted. I'd be pissed off having read that if I'd never read Foucalt's Pendulum, gives away a little too much.

ObeyGiant

DapperGent wrote:

I'd spoiler that bit you have quoted. I'd be pissed off having read that if I'd never read Foucalt's Pendulum, gives away a little too much.

That's almost the blurb from the back of the book, taken verbatim. So I don't think spoilers were too necessary.