# The Da Vinci Code - What did you think?



## krazyklassykat

:5stars: 
I REALLY liked it.  But, it was bound to offend someone, and invoke a lot of different emotions in people.  What did you think?


----------



## blademasterzzz

It didn't offend me because of any religious issues. 

It offended me because the author was a downright idiot who couldn't get a single fact right, who wrote the worst characters I've ever read and seemed to have used almost every cliche imaginable, as well as written the cheesiest dialogue I've seen to this day along with utter contempt for the reader's intelligence.


----------



## Rob

I heard it on audio CD, as I tend to travel quite a lot on business. I enjoyed it.


----------



## blademasterzzz

I suppose it is enjoyable on the lowest level, but it certainly isn't anything special, other than the fact that it was written to appeal to less gifted individuals.


----------



## krazyklassykat

> It offended me because the author was a downright idiot who couldn't get a single fact right, who wrote the worst characters I've ever read and seemed to have used almost every cliché imaginable, as well as written the cheesiest dialogue I've seen to this day along with utter contempt for the reader's intelligence.


 
I would have expected nothing more from you, blademasterz.  Do you really ENJOY expressing yourself so violently?  YOU'RE the offending one.  And as for getting facts straight, it WAS a novel you know.  Did it ever occur to you that maybe it was meant to invoke thoughts, instead of criticism??  Look, I don't know what kind of writer has to resort to such awful use of language to express himself, but it certainly isn't an "adept" one.  People would probably respect your opinions more if you presented them in a mature manner.  If you're incapable of that, you really shouldn't be on a writing forum.
Because it's not about grammar and semantics and all that!  It's the ideas that lie beneath, that's what writing is about.  If you want to be so nasty, you should be a CRITIC, not a writer.


----------



## Cady

Eh, it was ok... Very overated. I cant say too much because he was published, I havent been...yet


----------



## Selorian

As far as excellent writing, it leaves a lot to be desired. I have seen many writers who can do better, but it was well enough done to be published, so that says something.

As far as story is concerned, I think he did a good job of tying things together to make them plausible. It makes a person want to stop and wonder at times. As I like that sort of thing anyway, it appealed to me more than it possibly does to others though. To each his own. Suppose that makes me one of the less gifted individuals, eh?

The story moved along and drew the reader in, making them have to read more. In that he succeeded. That is what writing and storytelling is about at the simplest level. If you don't make the reader want to continue, it doesn't matter how well you write, the book will be put down.

Just my two cents, but kudos to him for creating a bestseller. That is something all writers probably strive for.


----------



## blademasterzzz

> would have expected nothing more from you, blademasterz. Do you really ENJOY expressing yourself so violently? YOU'RE the offending one. And as for getting facts straight, it WAS a novel you know. Did it ever occur to you that maybe it was meant to invoke thoughts, instead of criticism?? Look, I don't know what kind of writer has to resort to such awful use of language to express himself, but it certainly isn't an "adept" one. People would probably respect your opinions more if you presented them in a mature manner. If you're incapable of that, you really shouldn't be on a writing forum.
> Because it's not about grammar and semantics and all that! It's the ideas that lie beneath, that's what writing is about. If you want to be so nasty, you should be a CRITIC, not a writer.



Alright, no need to get angry. 

Look, the Da Vinci Code is a horse beaten to death, and I simply summed up what was already said over and over and over and over in other threads. 

I am prefectly capable of writing extensive reviews on awful literature, it's not my fault you can't take your time to search the forum. How can you tell what my posts are like, anyway? I've been here two years. How long have you been here, a month?

I don't post hateful posts unless in very rare instances. In one instance I simply had a crappy day, and the "lol" guy got to me. I spend half the day arguing with an illiterate teenager who was the most arrogant kid I've ever seen, and he "lol" ed on every page an official project. The fact that I had to work with him didn't make it any better. 

I think the DaVinci code IS a dumb book, it's my honest opinion. I simply didn't like it because the author is was pretentious, because the style was VERY formulaic, and so was the story. I found it predictable. The characters just weren't interesting, had no depth. The whole book was such a dissapointment, I was horrified by how everyone I knew raved about it. That's why I was harsh on it. 

I saw no real message, just a cheap way to make a buck. Which is ultimately why I snapped. The author has no love for literature or writing, he just sees it as a way to make money.

Okay? Can we have peace now, please?


----------



## bobothegoat

krazyklassykat said:
			
		

> I would have expected nothing more from you, blademasterz.  Do you really ENJOY expressing yourself so violently?  YOU'RE the offending one.  And as for getting facts straight, it WAS a novel you know.  Did it ever occur to you that maybe it was meant to invoke thoughts, instead of criticism??  Look, I don't know what kind of writer has to resort to such awful use of language to express himself, but it certainly isn't an "adept" one.  People would probably respect your opinions more if you presented them in a mature manner.  If you're incapable of that, you really shouldn't be on a writing forum.
> Because it's not about grammar and semantics and all that!  It's the ideas that lie beneath, that's what writing is about.  If you want to be so nasty, you should be a CRITIC, not a writer.



Ironic that you are really doing the exact same thing as you're accusing Blademasterzzz of doing.  Of course, Blademasterzzz was displaying an opinion of the book while you were presenting an opinion on him.  It really just makes your position look that much weaker.  I'd suggest you argue the merits of _the book_ rather than those of whom you disagree with.

That said, I've never read the whole thing.  I did read the prolouge once but thought the writing was terrible, so I shied away from it.


----------



## jk7070436

I didn't like it much. It wasn't my type of read. It was rather boring, I had to force myself to read it. And I didn't like that Langdon fellow, nor that woman he was with. I forgot her name, something like Sophie. Anyways, that's all I have to say. It was boring and the characters were unlikable. The chapters were incredibly short(not necessarily a bad thing).


----------



## Anarkos

Dan Brown is illiterate.


----------



## Stewart

Personally, I'm offended by the poll options on display. The poll option about religion is ridiculous. 

I found the book dull and the author to be a talentless rookie who got lucky. Based on other books edited by Kaufman - who seems to have no literary standards or knowledge and is culturally inept - I'd say Brown's success with _The Da Vinci Code_ (the title itself a shocking misnomer!) is a product of both heavy financial backing and an audience of dumbed down non-readers who now think they are smart because they have read a book. 



			
				krazyklassykat said:
			
		

> As for getting facts straight, it WAS a novel you know.  Did it ever occur to you that maybe it was meant to invoke thoughts, instead of criticism?



Oh krazyklassykat, don't you get it? I'm sure there would have been little fuss with this literary turdlet if it did not contain an opening disclaimer. The fact that Dan Brown has stated things in the book are as they are in real life - and continues to do so in speeches and rare interviews (from the early days) - has opened his work up for investigation and that investigation has found it to be, in almost _all_ cases, either inept, implausible, confused, supposed, or completely fictional. If a low-fat food said it had 1g of fat on its ingredients and it actually contained 10g of fat then that would be a candidate for investigation. When an author asserts that he has done research and backs it up then he has opened himself up for criticism, which brings me to your second question...

...The book was not meant to invoke thoughts. It's a (cheap ass) thriller and it's purpose is to provide a plot, a means of getting from A to B and to excite the reader. If you think there's any sort of religious agenda at play here then you are, like Mr Brown's research, confused. The religious aspect of this book is nothing more than a vehicle for the plot. There is no real theme to the book, it challenges no religious conceps; in fact, the plot - for what it is - _is_ the theme! The religion is Brown's way of getting from A to B. Anyway, regarding your point about the book not being written for criticism: no writer wants criticism (once the work is in print) but who do you think the people who write the dissected quotes on books are? Oh, yeah! *Critics!* 




> I don't know what kind of writer has to resort to such awful use of language to express himself, but it certainly isn't an "adept" one.



Well, with Dan Brown as an example, you are correct in that assumption. 



> Because it's not about grammar and semantics and all that!  It's the ideas that lie beneath, that's what writing is about.



Well, I ask what you are doing on a writing forum if you care so little for grammar and semantics? As a fan of contemporary literature I would hope the authors I read - and indeed, those in print that I don't or haven't read - have an understanding of literary form and the language in which they choose to express that. Otherwise, we'd be getting Charles Dickens written in chatroom parlance:



			
				CharlesDickens69 said:
			
		

> _*CharlesDickens69* has entered the room._
> *xxxBookMasterxxx*: hey chuck
> *CharlesDickens69*: this iz da l8est from ma new bk, da xmas carl
> *ChickLitDiva*: kewl, lets c it!!!!!!
> *CharlesDickens69*: Marli woz ded: 2 begin wit.  der iz no dowt woteva bout dat da regista ov hz burial woz sined y da clergyman, da clark, da utakr, n da cheef morner.  $crooge sined it: n $crooges name woz gd pon 'Change, 4 nefing he chose 2 put hs hand 2.  Old Marli woz as ded as a door-nail.
> *ChickLitDiva*: %$£!ing gr8 chuck, got ne mo?????
> *xxxBookMasterxxx*: w00t
> *Oliver4534560932*: gr8!!!!!!!!!
> _*BookerGuy* has left the room._
> *CharlesDickens69*: brb
> *HOTGUY4545*: hey charlesdickens69, a/s/l?????



I do note, however, that krazyklassykat is fifteen and, as such, won't have a great deal of reading behind her so, starting at the bottom of the pile is a good way to appreciate how bad _The Da Vinci Code_ is after reading anything else.

Anyway, my review, which I can't be bothered to find at the moment and shall thus replicate here, illustrates my overall thoughts on the book:



			
				Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> 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_ - a children's novel marketed at adults.
> 
> 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 wher she hardly flinched- as she learns that 'rose' is an anagram of 'Eros'.
> 
> 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 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.
> 
> All in all, I've found the book to be like marmite; there are those that love it and those that hate it. I proudly place myself in the latter camp.
> 
> 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 poor '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 - 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.


----------



## Anarkos

Connor...you finished it?  I'm impressed.  I couldn't stomach it after 50 pages or so.


----------



## teflon

We have discussed the topic here already. The majority thought the book and movie was made to dazzle those who knew zilch about history and religion. A mediocre detective fiction. The movie, an episode of _TJ Hooker_.


----------



## krazyklassykat

. . .It would take forever to reply individually to all the accusations I now have against me.  Well, I'm off to a great start here....  All I can say is that (in regards to one of bobothegoat's comments), in my little outburst towards blademasterzzz, it was no longer about the book.  This just happened to be the second time I'd been put off in the middle of a thread by a not-so-lovely comment by blademasterzzz.  I'm an open-minded person, and if someone just says "I just didn't like the book."  and states their reasoning (or even doesn't) I'd be just fine with that.  But the way blademasterzzz stated his case was so aggressive and insulting, I found it very disrespectful, considering that he already knew that I liked the book.  
That said, compared to the standards of many people here, I guess I'm easy to please.  I have read ONE book that I distinctly remember not liking.  No wait, two.  _The Witch of Blackbird Pond_, and _Ethan Frome_.  But oh well.  Peace, peace is fine by me.  Sorry for the outburst, blademasterzzz.  

Oh, and Connor Wolf, believe it or not, I know far too many people who would have been offended by _The Da Vinci Code_ due to religion.  If I am to assume that very few of them visit this board, then I am immensely relieved.  I just thought I'd leave that option open.  

Maybe I ought to change the subject now, though, seeing how few people liked _The Da Vinci Code_.  

Just one last comment, I really hope I haven't made a bad impression so soon, because I really enjoy being part of something more sophisticated than your average forum.


----------



## Stewart

krazyklassykat said:
			
		

> I really hope I haven't made a bad impression so soon, because I really enjoy being part of something more sophisticated than your average forum.



I shouldn't have thought so. People can argue passionately in different directions.


----------



## epone

Good information, crap (Hollywood-esque) ending.


----------



## Stewart

epone said:
			
		

> Good information


Such as?


----------



## Ruben

teflon said:
			
		

> We have discussed the topic here already. The majority thought the book and movie was made to dazzle those who knew zilch about history and religion. A mediocre detective fiction. The movie, an episode of _TJ Hooker_.


 
http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/da_vinci_code/large.html

Oh... Dear... Jezus... Christ... Of... God...

*tries to burn trailer*

BTW: A congrats toward Connor for her(or his?) humongous post of justice


----------



## Stewart

Ruben said:
			
		

> A congrats toward Connor for her(or his?) humongous post of justice



His, or its!


----------



## Rhea

I choosed the second answer. In terms of plot line, it was GREAT. It was really interesting in that aspect.

But in terms of character and style of writing? Not so great. In fact, the lack of character-ness of the characters is downright bad, at least in my opinion. The characters were so flat, they weren't real at ALL.

And he even started 'The da Vinci Code' and 'Angels and Demons' the same way: with Robert Langdon getting woken up by a phonecall. And then he looks into the mirror and his features are described. I mean, there are other ways of starting your novel...and other ways of describing your character...


----------



## invisible_ink

I never read past the second chapter; the book was so poorly written, I actually felt embarrassed for the author.


----------



## Anarkos

Damn right.  If you like the Da Vinci code, you are probably illiterate.


----------



## bobothegoat

I couldn't get past the prologue.  I couldn't even get past it a second time, though I did decide to put my own comments in.  My comments are in purple.  Hopefully, this will show why I didn't read the whole the thing.



> Renowned curator Jacques Saunière staggered through the vaulted archway of the museum's Grand Gallery. Perhaps I don't get out enough... I honestly can't name one curator. He lunged for the nearest painting he could see, a Carravagio. Grabbing the gilded frame, the seventy-three-year-old man heaved the masterpiece toward himself until it tore from the wall and Saunière collapsed backward in a heap beneath the canvas.
> 
> As he anticipated, a thundering iron gate fell nearby, barricading the entrance to the suite. The parquet floor shook. Far off, an alarm began to ring.
> 
> The curator lay a moment, gasping for breath, taking stock._ I am still alive. _He crawled out from under the canvas and scanned the cavernous space for someplace to hide.
> 
> A voice spoke, chillingly close. "Do not move."
> 
> On his hands and knees, the curator froze, turning his head slowly.
> 
> Only fifteen feet away, outside the sealed gate, the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red pupils.If all he sees is the silhouette of his attacker, he cannot see his pale skin or thinning white hair, much less his... irises. The albino drew a pistol from his coat and aimed the long silencer through the bars, directly at the curator. "You should not have run." His accent was not easy to place.I couldn't tell. "Now tell me where it is."
> 
> "I told you already," the curator stammered, kneeling defenseless on the floor of the gallery. "I have no idea what you are talking about!"
> 
> "You are lying." The man stared at him, perfectly immobile except for the glint in his ghostly eyes. "You and your brethren possess something that is not yours."
> 
> The curator felt a surge of adrenaline. How could he possibly know this?
> 
> "Tonight the rightful guardians will be restored. Tell me where it is hidden, and you will live." The man leveled his gun at the curator's head. "Is it a secret you will die for?"
> 
> Saunière could not breathe.
> 
> The man tilted his head and closed one eye, peering down the barrel of his gun. peering _down?  _From fifteen feet away?
> 
> Saunière held up his hands in defense. "Wait," he said slowly. "I will tell you what you need to know." The curator spoke his next words carefully. The lie he told was one he had rehearsed many times…each time praying he would never have to use it.
> 
> When the curator had finished speaking, his assailant smiled smugly. "Yes. This is exactly what the others told me."
> 
> Saunière recoiled. _The others?_
> 
> "I found them, too," the huge man taunted. Said would have sufficed.  "Taunt" brings to mind an exaggerated, comical image. "All three of them. They confirmed what you have just said."
> 
> _It cannot be!_ The curator's true identity, along with the identities of his three sénéchaux, was almost as sacred as the ancient secret they protected.
> 
> Saunière now realized his sénéchaux, following strict procedure, had told the same lie before their own deaths. It was part of the protocol.
> 
> The attacker aimed his gun again. "When you are gone, I will be the only one who knows the truth."
> 
> The truth. In an instant, the curator grasped the true horror of the situation. _If I die, the truth will be lost forever._ Instinctively, he tried to scramble for cover.
> 
> The silencer spat, and the curator felt a searing heat as the bullet lodged in his stomach. He fell forward…struggling against the pain. Slowly, Saunière rolled over and stared back through the bars at his attacker.
> 
> The man was now taking dead aim at Saunière's head.
> 
> Saunière closed his eyes, his thoughts a swirling tempest of fear and regret.
> 
> The click of an empty chamber echoed through the corridor.
> 
> The curator's eyes flew open.
> 
> The man glanced down at his weapon, looking almost amused. He reached for a second clip, but then seemed to reconsider, smirking calmly at Saunière's gut. "My work here is done."  how convienant.
> 
> The curator looked down and saw the bullet hole in his white linen shirt. It was framed by a small circle of blood a few inches below his breastbone. _My stomach_. Almost cruelly, the bullet had missed his heart. As a veteran of La Guerre d'Algérie, the curator had witnessed this horribly drawn out death before. For fifteen minutes, he would survive as his stomach acids seeped into his chest cavity, slowly poisoning him from within.
> 
> "Pain is good, monsieur," the man said.
> 
> Then he was gone.
> 
> Alone now, Jacques Saunière turned his gaze again to the iron gate. He was trapped, and the doors could not be reopened for at least twenty minutes. By the time anyone got to him, he would be dead. Even so, the fear that now gripped him was a fear far greater than that of his own death.
> 
> _I must pass on the secret._
> 
> Staggering to his feet, he pictured his three murdered brethren. He thought of the generations who had come before them…of the mission with which they had all been entrusted.
> 
> An unbroken chain of knowledge.  Does this really need to be a separate paragraph?
> 
> Suddenly, now, despite all the precautions…despite all the fail safes…Jacques Saunière was the only remaining link, the sole guardian of one of the most powerful secrets ever kept. We get it!  The secret's big.  Get on with it.
> 
> Shivering, he pulled himself to his feet. Wait...  What did you say a few paragraphs back?  "Staggering to his feet, he pictured his three murdered brethren."  So he stood up twice and yet doesn't appear to have ever fallen down.
> 
> _I must find some way….
> _
> He was trapped inside the Grand Gallery, and there existed only one person on earth to whom he could pass the torch. Saunière gazed up at the walls of his opulent prison. A collection of the world's most famous paintings seemed to smile down on him like old friends.
> 
> Wincing in pain, he summoned all of his faculties and strength. The desperate task before him, he knew, would require every remaining second of his life.



Damn, I'm good.  I should be Dan Brown's editor.  And I wasn't even trying very hard.  Now I'm going to go find a way to make up for the time I just wasted. ](*,)

(some italics may have been missed in the above adaption of Dan Brown's work.)


----------



## teflon

Yes, those who do not feel these technical inconsistencies, are already enamored with the equally amateurishly-mixed up subject matter.


----------



## gohn67

> The curator felt a surge of adrenaline


Actually I think it's correct without the "e"


----------



## bobothegoat

gohn67 said:
			
		

> Actually I think it's correct without the "e"



I've never seen it like that before, but I looked it up just now.



			
				dictionary.com said:
			
		

> A trademark used for a medicinal preparation of epinephrine.



Unless he has a syringe injecting it into him, I think he meant:

adrenaline: A hormone secreted by the adrenal medulla that is released into the bloodstream in response to physical or mental stress, as from fear or injury.


----------



## gohn67

^:lol: You're right.  I should learn to read. 



			
				dictionary.com said:
			
		

> adrenalin
> 
> n : a catecholamine secreted by the adrenal medulla in response to stress (trade name Adrenalin); stimulates autonomic nerve action [syn: epinephrine, epinephrin, adrenaline,


But in my defense at least the fourth of the four definitions listed in dictionary.com says I'm right.


----------



## Ben

I remember reading the prologue when my mum borrowed the DaVinci Code from the library...



> Grabbing the gilded frame, the seventy-three-year-old man heaved the masterpiece toward himself until it tore from the wall and Saunière collapsed backward in a heap beneath the canvas.



One of the clumsiest sentences I've ever read. 

... I didn't read on.


----------



## Anarkos

bobothegoat said:
			
		

> Damn, I'm good.  I should be Dan Brown's editor.  And I wasn't even trying very hard.  Now I'm going to go find a way to make up for the time I just wasted.



No, if you were Dan Brown's editor, the prologue would have ended up like this:



			
				Dan Brown said:
			
		

> I am an illiterate moron.  Kill me now.


----------



## bobothegoat

Dan Brown said:
			
		

> I am an illiterate moron.  Kill me now.



Is that an insult to my editing skills?  :lol:


----------



## Anarkos

Well, uh, yeah, I guess so.  Anyone who could edit a Dan Brown book without the aid of a chainsaw probably isn't any good at it...


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

What some of you stuck up little bastards need to realize is that this book is FICTION. Who gives a fuck if some of the facts are wrong, accept whatever truth the book holds, enjoy the action, and stop bitching. I mean seriously, who really gives a shit is this description wasn't 100% accurate, or if this wasn't 100% true?!?!? It's not an insult to anyone's intelligence unless you are the dolt who lets stupid shit ruin a great story, because even if you are the harsh critic lets admit it, aside from "mistakes" it was a good story. Story. I don't give a fuck how literate some of you are and how good you are with your punctuation and grammar, if you can't conceive a compelling story than NO ONE CARES!

And to Bobthegoat or whoever wrote that bullshit, you are an idiot. I'd just love to see you write a best seller, then we can all critique your petty "mistakes." You're the type who likes to critique because it gives you a sense of being high and mighty, like what you said was actually worthwhile to anyone other than your own ego anyway. Why don't you go ahead and give us an A+ physics review on your comment _"peering down?  From fifteen feet away?"_ detailing the approx. speed, position, impact and everything else it takes a bullet to travel down a hallway while you're at it? Then in the middle of the report you can remember that no one cares. No one cares because you're a moron. The type who would critisize his girlfriend for smelling like oranges instead of apples. Duuuhh


----------



## Stewart

Yes, fans are always the worst. :roll:


----------



## bobothegoat

Fine with me, Jesus Strangler.  I've got stuff posted here, and have no problem with people pointing out mistakes in my writing, or the writing of authors I enjoy.  In fact, if I'm getting a book published, I'd hold my own work to much more severe standards.  Glaring technical mistakes and inept writing saps the enjoyment out of a book.  I mean, at least other main-stream, best-selling authors can manage to write stuff with some decent prose.  To me, there's a huge difference between pedestrian and just plain old bad prose.

But whatever.  Rather than trying to boost _your_ ego by throwing insults at me (or any other member) why not instead give a stronger argument for why the book deserves merit.  Your current reasons are weak.



> Who gives a fuck if some of the facts are wrong, accept whatever truth the book holds, enjoy the action, and stop bitching.


 I don't really care about false information driving a story.  Most people don't mind it, in fact.  But part of the problem is this:


			
				dan brown said:
			
		

> All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.


Need I say more?



> aside from "mistakes" it was a good story. Story.


 Aside from the inept writing and the lame characters, it'd be a good story.  Unfortunately, the lame characters and inept writing are there, and therefor it's not a good story.



> I don't give a fuck how literate some of you are and how good you are with your punctuation and grammar if you can't conceive a compelling story than NO ONE CARES!


 I pointed out one minor spelling issue.  That's it.  And I don't even care about that.   A chimp can be taught how to use grammar (Dan Brown's proved it to me).  But just like you said, if the author can't concieve [and communicate] a good story, nobody cares.

The rest of what I pointed out was just poor writing.  It was correct grammar and spelling, but it was just poor writing.


----------



## TSMaloy

Dan Brown is awesome! If you like his work, then who gives a shit what any of these other people think. I wonder if half of them have even read the book, or if they are just going off of what is being said in the media. 

If they don't appreciate talent then that is their loss. They need to shut up! I want to see their credential before I will even consider half of what they have to say. When was the last time any of you wrote a best seller? Hmmmm?

Just because his novel didn't have any space ships or wizards in it (which seems to be the favorite of the middle schoolers who dominate this forum), didn't mean it was bad book! 

Has anyone read Angels and Demons? The Da Vinci Code is actually the sequel to Angels and Demons and it would probably help most people to have read that book to appreciate the characters in TDVC. Not only that, but I honestly think that it was the better book of the two. Try it! 

DAN BROWN RULES!


----------



## Stewart

TSMaloy said:
			
		

> If you like his work, then who gives a shit what any of these other people think.


 
A good point, but is there any need to be so bratty about it? 



> I wonder if half of them have even read the book, or if they are just going off of what is being said in the media.


 
Given that we are picking up on specific points within the book, with quotes, I would say we have read the book. I even took the time to write a lengthy review of it. What I don't see, however, is the Dan Brown fundamentalists quoting all the good bits to counter the naysayers.



> If they don't appreciate talent then that is their loss.


 
If you can state, with examples, what talent Dan Brown has then I will be impressed. And if you think talent is selling a multitude of throwaway books, then you have a very sad understanding of literature. 



> They need to shut up! I want to see their credential before I will even consider half of what they have to say.


 
I have a piece of writing available in the Workshop forum; go pick it apart.



> When was the last time any of you wrote a best seller? Hmmmm?


 
Now, I would almost suspect you of being a self-publisher with a comment like that. They are usually the people who retaliate to their work being called poor and shoddy by asking the critic where their books are. But, as the old adage goes, you don't need to be a carpenter to test the comfort of a chair; and you don't need to be a chef to know food taste bad. The process of reading is much different from writing - why do you think they go hand in hand?



> Just because his novel didn't have any space ships or wizards in it (which seems to be the favorite of the middle schoolers who dominate this forum), didn't mean it was bad book!


 
Oh dear. The lack of spaceships and wizards, for which I was thankful, has nothing to do with why people didn't like it. The fact that the guy doesn't know how to pick the right word and put it next to another right word is the problem. As a result, the reader is treated to about five hundred pages of turgid prose that comes in extremely short chapters; a small mercy for readers with attention deficit disorder.



> Has anyone read Angels and Demons?


 
I most certainly have not. One Dan Brown was enough to know I will never fritter money away on his careless outpourings ever again.



> The Da Vinci Code is actually the sequel to Angels and Demons and it would probably help most people to have read that book to appreciate the characters in TDVC.


 
As far as I'm aware, the only consistent character between both books is Robert Langdon. Given that he had no personality and no redeeming features, I would doubt there is any depth to him from the previous novel. Afterall, writers improve with each book - so how bad must _Angels & Demons_ be?



> DAN BROWN RULES!


 
The first rule of Dan Brown Club is that there is no such thing as ability.
The second rule of Dan Brown Club: there is no such thing as ability.


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> I have a piece of writing available in the Workshop forum; go pick it apart.



Second (maybe third) sentence and I already see a mistake: "By naming the boys after myself my wife and I hoped that when I was no longer able they would assume my duties and look after their families"

Can you spot it?


----------



## Beardedtroll

THE JESUS STRANGLER said:
			
		

> Second (maybe third) sentence and I already see a mistake: "By naming the boys after myself my wife and I hoped that when I was no longer able they would assume my duties and look after their families"
> 
> Can you spot it?



Hmm. Looks kosher to me. What do think is wrong with it?


----------



## Ben

There should be a comma after myself, I think.


----------



## TSMaloy

Hey, how is this? 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Brown

Now it says that as of 2005 Dan Brown sold more than 25 million hard cover copies and that it helped push the sales of his earlier novels. Hmmm. Must be an awful lot of people out there who "fritter" their money away like yon Mr. Conner Wolf (and yes, there should be a comma after myself, but even if you change that it doesn't save the sentence from being awkward. PLEASE do not rely solely on spell check!). 

And if you like that bit, try going to danbrown.com and read some of the things people have said about his work. 

"One of the most intelligent and dynamic authors in the genre" -- Library Journal. 

I am sure they, of all people, do not know what they are talking about.


----------



## Beardedtroll

Besh said:
			
		

> There should be a comma after myself, I think.



Hmm. Possible, but isn't that more a matter of style?



			
				TSMaloy said:
			
		

> Now it says that as of 2005 Dan Brown sold more than 25 million hard cover copies and that it helped push the sales of his earlier novels. Hmmm. Must be an awful lot of people out there who "fritter" their money away like yon Mr. Conner Wolf



There is.



> (and yes, there should be a comma after myself, but even if you change that it doesn't save the sentence from being awkward. PLEASE do not rely solely on spell check!).



*blinks* You honestly think Connor Wolf's sentence was awkward? Next to such travesties as "He reached for a second clip, but then seemed to reconsider, smirking calmly at Saunière's gut" and "Only fifteen feet away, outside the sealed gate, the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars"?


----------



## TSMaloy

Beardedtroll said:
			
		

> "He reached for a second clip, but then seemed to reconsider, smirking calmly at Saunière's gut" and "Only fifteen feet away, outside the sealed gate, the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars"?



Coming from the person who thought Connor Wolf's sentence was "kosher"?

There is NOTHING wrong with either of those sentences. If you took the commas away, then yes, there would be some problems. 

Good hell, I hope some of you don't have the intent to become editors.


----------



## Stewart

Beardedtroll said:
			
		

> Hmm. Possible, but isn't that more a matter of style?


I would say it was style, if I can say that without being accused of defending my work. That piece, anyway, has been hacked and rewritten since, and sent off. I remember when I read John Banville's _The Sea_ there were many occasions where I thought that a comma would be good but he didn't use one. John Banville is the literary editor of the _Irish Times_ and winner of the 2005 MAN Booker Prize. I'll bow to his knowledge and learn from him over Dan Brown.


Of course, if you want to pick my writing apart then I would appreciate it if you did so in the thread I created for that.



> There is NOTHING wrong with either of those sentences. If you took the commas away, then yes, there would be some problems.


Oh, those sentences aren't about the commas; they concern the logic of the subject.



> I hope some of you don't have the intent to become editors.


 If we did, I'm sure we would be on a forum for editors.


----------



## TSMaloy

Then let me say this: 

If some of you get anything published, your editors certainly have their work cut out for them.


----------



## Beardedtroll

TSMaloy said:
			
		

> Coming from the person who thought Connor Wolf's sentence was "kosher"?



Err, yes? Was that some grand crime against humanity for which I should be shameful?



> There is NOTHING wrong with either of those sentences.



I have to respectfully, but emphatically, disagree with you.


----------



## Stewart

TSMaloy said:
			
		

> Hey, how is this?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Brown
> 
> Now it says that as of 2005 Dan Brown sold more than 25 million hard cover copies and that it helped push the sales of his earlier novels.


It's fantastic. But what's it in response to?




> PLEASE do not rely solely on spell check!).


 PLEASE do not patronise me.




> And if you like that bit, try going to danbrown.com and read some of the things people have said about his work.
> 
> "One of the most intelligent and dynamic authors in the genre" -- Library Journal.


I'm afraid I don't care for selective praise on the home page of the author we are discussing. I would prefer a less biased source of information, one where negative comments sit alongside the positive.



> I am sure they, of all people, do not know what they are talking about.


I doubt it. I have an issue with Dan Brown being called intelligent. Intelligent doesn't mean being able to copy and paste a few extracts from tourist guides; it doesn't mean fictionalising the suppositions put forward in another book; and it doesn't mean getting your facts wrong. If that's what intelligence was, Umberto Eco would be asking himself why he wasted all that time reading books.


----------



## TSMaloy

Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> I doubt it. I have an issue with Dan Brown being called intelligent. Intelligent doesn't mean being able to copy and paste a few extracts from tourist guides; it doesn't mean fictionalising the suppositions put forward in another book; and it doesn't mean getting your facts wrong. If that's what intelligence was, Umberto Eco would be asking himself why he wasted all that time reading books.



What makes you the expert on whether or not he is wrong or right? How do you know if what he put in his FICTION book is fact or if he just pulled it out of his rear end?


----------



## Stewart

TSMaloy said:
			
		

> How do you know if what he put in his FICTION book is fact or if he just pulled it out of his rear end?


Because, according to Dan Brown, I drive on the right hand side of the road. Making such statements as England is the only nation in Europe where cars drive on the left is wrong because Scotland, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Malta, and Cyprus all share this quirk.

I also live about forty-five miles from Rosslyn. I've also been to Biggin Hill where he has the wrong police force in action. And no British police force would take commands from some French cop. All pulled out of his arse. And then on through the first Nicean Council and onto such nonsense as Emperor Constantine editing the modern day Bible. 

Anyway, I'm pulling examples out of the hat. If you are going to defend the man, then please show us why he is such a good writer. You just deflect the criticism, don your rose-tinted specs, and post more retaliatory questions. Where's the meat of your argument?


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

Besh said:
			
		

> There should be a comma after myself, I think.




Correct, not at all impressive coming from an up coming bestselling guru.


----------



## Ben

I assume it was just the first draft; and even if it wasn't, it's not a big deal. Just a comma.


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

He speaks as if he is some creative writing guru and he said to go pick his work apart and it only took me two sentences to find a mistake; I didn't even bother reading the rest. :yawn:


----------



## Ben

Maybe you should go read the whole thing, then, 'cause that's hardly picking it apart.


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

I don't have enough interest to "pick it [all] apart," I just wanted a hint of his credentials to size up with those bold words.


----------



## Mike C

Oh dear. Vitriol and Bile. How nice, it's the Stephen King thread all over again.

Brown is not the world's greatest writer, that's a fact (and Jesus strangler, if you want to get hysterical over other people's comma use, there's plenty of my published work on my site - go right ahead, knock yourself out).

What's also more worrying is his reliance on the distortion of history and presenting fiction as fact -  which was the whole hype behind the book's success in the first place - rather than relying on his story telling skills to sell the book.

Of even greater concern is that the story, it seems, may not even be his. He's in court in the UK currently over claims that he 'substantially borrowed' from someone else's work.


----------



## Stewart

THE JESUS STRANGLER said:
			
		

> not at all impressive coming from an up coming bestselling guru.



Right, remove those blinkers, and read what I said. It was stated that the people who naysay Brown should show their credentials; I was merely stating an example of my writing was on the forum. Never once have I claimed to be an "up coming" (that's up _and_ coming, by the way) bestselling guru. One, because I have no interest in mass market writing; two, in this day and age you need to be really poor with words to be a bestseller. Dan Brown is evidence of that.


----------



## Beardedtroll

THE JESUS STRANGLER said:
			
		

> I don't have enough interest to "pick it [all] apart," I just wanted a hint of his credentials to size up with those bold words.



In other words, because he left out a comma he has "no credentials"? Now you're just being inane. (And I still think that particular comma is a matter of style. Are you now going to jump all over me for starting a sentence with a conjunction?)


----------



## Mike C

I think maybe the strangler should ante up and show his own credentials - let's see something of yours, JS.


----------



## A_MacLaren

Man, I've seen some petty discussions on these forums (I've even been in a few myself), but this is a real killer. This thing degenerated into spite and malice exactly three posts in.
Now, I've never read Dan Brown, so I'm not defending or attacking him. I haven't read him because airport fiction isn't really my cup of tea. I might see the movie, because it sounds to me like The Da Vinci Code might be a better movie than book, but that's neither here nor there.

I just want to comment on some things because I'm nosy. Here we go.




> Renowned curator Jacques Saunière staggered through the vaulted archway of the museum's Grand Gallery. Perhaps I don't get out enough... I honestly can't name one curator.



This is just being anal. The word 'renowned' doesn't mean that everybody knows about it. You can be renowned in a field, if I'm not mistaken. This guy could very well be famous among museum curators, but not among the general public.



> The man tilted his head and closed one eye, peering down the barrel of his gun. peering down? From fifteen feet away?



Yes. Peering down. The gun doesn't have to be pointed down for you to peer down the barrel. 'Peer along' would be just as good, but this isn't a mistake.

Apart from that...

You've all just been dumb. We've got some fanboys raving maniacally with the age-old 'If you can't do it you can't hate it' logic, and we've got a group of elitist jerks being cruel about peoples choices because they wouldn't deign to read Brown (and I might point out the blademasterzzz started the King thread defending someone people find to be equally vapid).

Stop being such a bunch of pissants and write some decent criticism.

(Incidentally, props go out to mike c for being a reasonable human being)


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

Beardedtroll said:
			
		

> In other words, because he left out a comma he has "no credentials"? Now you're just being inane. (And I still think that particular comma is a matter of style. Are you now going to jump all over me for starting a sentence with a conjunction?)




Did I ever say that? Uhh no.

And hey if comma's are a matter of style, than I guess "poor" storytelling and the words that create it are too.


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

A_MacLaren said:
			
		

> Man, I've seen some petty discussions on these forums (I've even been in a few myself), but this is a real killer. This thing degenerated into spite and malice exactly three posts in.
> Now, I've never read Dan Brown, so I'm not defending or attacking him. I haven't read him because airport fiction isn't really my cup of tea. I might see the movie, because it sounds to me like The Da Vinci Code might be a better movie than book, but that's neither here nor there.
> 
> I just want to comment on some things because I'm nosy. Here we go.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is just being anal. The word 'renowned' doesn't mean that everybody knows about it. You can be renowned in a field, if I'm not mistaken. This guy could very well be famous among museum curators, but not among the general public.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. Peering down. The gun doesn't have to be pointed down for you to peer down the barrel. 'Peer along' would be just as good, but this isn't a mistake.
> 
> Apart from that...
> 
> You've all just been dumb. We've got some fanboys raving maniacally with the age-old 'If you can't do it you can't hate it' logic, and we've got a group of elitist jerks being cruel about peoples choices because they wouldn't deign to read Brown (and I might point out the blademasterzzz started the King thread defending someone people find to be equally vapid).
> 
> Stop being such a bunch of pissants and write some decent criticism.
> 
> (Incidentally, props go out to mike c for being a reasonable human being)




Heeeey tough guy how about you write some decent criticism. Right now you sound nothing more than a whining broad.


----------



## Stewart

THE JESUS STRANGLER said:
			
		

> I don't have enough interest to "pick it [all] apart," I just wanted a hint of his credentials to size up with those bold words.


 
Just reading over this again, I am forced to laugh. You are basing my "credentials" as a writer on a piece explicitly placed on this forum for workshopping. The whole purpose of it being here is to guage others' feelings to it and to mop up any errors I may be oblivious to. This is, after all, the purpose of this forum.

That you seem to think I - and others - are in no way permitted to comment upon how we view Dan Brown's ability to write just because we are no published is a joke. Nothing more, nothing less. 

But what really annoys me about your feeble points is that supposed errors are being pointed out in my piece (which was only in the drafting phase when posted) and these somehow invalidate my ability to comment upon the _finished piece_ of something that is in print and retailing.


----------



## Mike C

A_MacLaren said:
			
		

> (Incidentally, props go out to mike c for being a reasonable human being)



Sorry, that was unintentional.


----------



## THE JESUS STRANGLER

I was just joking John Connor don't let it get you down.


----------



## Stewart

You missed a comma. :wink:


----------



## Epiffany

I was more of an Angels and Demons fan than Da Vinci Code. I mean, its not being taken to court for plagerism like Code, right? Just kidding. I think Da Vinci code was well-written, somewhat well researched, but a good time-filler kind of book overall. Angels and Demons was much better. I've also read Deception Point, which I found to be very similar to his other books, but it was all right.


----------



## blademasterzzz

> they wouldn't deign to read Brown (and I might point out the blademasterzzz started the King thread defending someone people find to be equally vapid).




Well, if you can't tell the difference between what King write and what Brown writes: Possibly equally contrived plots, but ridiculous, paper characters on Brown's side, and pretty well developed characters on King's side. King may have written quite a bit of crap, but at least his books AREN'T from the same template, and at least he puts effort into his characters, which is far more than what I can say for Brown, whos only way of developing characters is retelling past events, usually through a flashback.(And it doesn't get more contrived than that.)

And stop with the elitist, snobby remarks, everyone. The saying "Nobody's Perfect" seems to have been forgotten. Although some people are less perfect than others.


----------



## G. Palmer

I voted it boring.

I hate the 'commercial thriller' for the typical reasons.


----------



## imrhati

I really loved the book. the fact that it is a fiction novel ok's the fact that he was off on a some facts. I personally have done extensive research on the freemason's so i thinik i understood things that Brown failed to explain that most reader's wouldn't know making my experience more enjoyable. It also explained things i didin't know very well too.

am i the only one who spotted the "secret message"?


----------



## dwellerofthedeep

I didn't like this book (or any Brown book I have read) because of it's lack of depth, irritating characters (incompetent villains really get to me, and the "good" guys were just dull.  Also, as some previous poster have mentioned, the book is fomulaic.  I think that statement is very true as the other Brown books I have read appear to have been built on the same template (they all have incompetent assassins as well).


----------



## Stewart

imrhati said:
			
		

> I personally have done extensive research on the freemason's so i thinik i understood things that Brown failed to explain that most reader's wouldn't know making my experience more enjoyable.



Why would you need to? Knowledge of Freemasonry isn't going to help much with this book given that it's Brown's next "novel" that deals with such content.




> am i the only one who spotted the "secret message"?



Which one?


----------



## Anarkos

Dan Brown is an illiterate idiot.


----------



## Wolfeyes

It was okay but not rememorable. I thought the author did a good job of tying things in but in the words of a friend "the theology's crap". Still, it really is one of those books that make you think. I was interested enough after reading it to look up the deep sea scrolls. Being truthful though, I recently read _Angels and Demons_ and it was a lot more interesting.
As for the matter of it being "offensive"? I really don't see how. It's a book, a book that's for entertainment, I doubt everything inside the book is meant to be taken seriously.


----------



## Spark

He treated us like morons. It was abrupt, and I felt like I was being jerked all over the place. Thumbs down from me.


----------



## Stewart

Wolfeyes said:
			
		

> I was interested enough after reading it to look up the deep sea scrolls.



But not interested enough to get their name right?



> As for the matter of it being "offensive"? I really don't see how.


Offensive not to Catholicism but to users of the English language.



> It's a book, a book that's for entertainment.



What else is a novel - _any_ novel - for but entertainment? It just happens that there are more literate entertainments out there but they go unnoticed in favour of this weak effort. It just seems, to make an analogy, that many people would rather chew on beef dripping instead of _foie gras_, which is a sad state of affairs and one that affects all those who would be writers in the future.


----------



## TinaD

I enjoyed The Da Vinci Code.  It was a captivating fictional read that explored and challenged some readers' ideas of religion: however it should not be forgotten that the book is a work of fiction and written for entertainment purposes (as stated by the Author). And entertain, it did.  I found that from the start the book grabbed my attention and kept it right up until the end, the description and dialogue were believeable and my imagination could easily create and give life to the scenes.  I don't usually read action or mysteries but I would recommend this one to anyone who wouldn't be offended by its questioning of the foundations of Christianity or its use of the Catholic church.

I have read three other Dan Brown books and I don't mind that he uses a similar recipe. His books are published and they sell. The formula  and style appear to work for him, and like many authors I am sure he will keep using it until he deems it no longer profitable. I found his writing in Digital Fortress to be a bit sloppy and inconsistent, however The Da Vinci Code was entertaining and thought provoking enough to keep me from being disturbed by any writing flaws it may have contained.


----------



## blademasterzzz

Connor, aren't you going a bit overboard with it? I don't harbour any love for it either, but to ridicule every person who says something the least bit positive about it...?

There are people who enjoy stupid things, cliche things, whatever. Deal with it. It's their entitlement.


----------



## Stewart

blademasterzzz said:
			
		

> Connor, aren't you going a bit overboard with it?



No.


----------



## imrhati

Yes.


----------



## Stewart

Nein.


----------



## IJS

Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> Nein.



Just a tad.


----------



## imrhati

Doi.


----------



## Brody

I enjoyed the pacing of the novel, but I found myself *guessing* (correctly) what was coming next - and the mystery villain's identity was telegraphed well before the reveal, which led to the ultimate let-down for me: The final cop out, where the author turns the Catholic Church and Opus Dei into patsies for a one-man scam. It just didn't ring very true.


----------



## discipleofWORD

Addicting. For me, if you could have various lengths of chapters and usually make them short, it encourages me to keep in reading...so finished that book in two days...

Glad I read it so I won't feel so left behind in this Da Vinci Code craze.


----------



## jr_jennifer

I personally thought the Da Vinci Code was a good book, it's a very controversial book, and the recent claim where one author claimed that the idea for the Da Vinci Code was stolen from him. 

I thought the book was creative and had a lot of mystery in it, enough that kept me from putting the book down.


----------



## Alecks

Well, it introduced me to the idea of Christ having a child, but as for the book itself? Poorly written, extremely poorly written. It was unengaging at the most basic level, and his constant inputs of latin and french drove all sense of interest from the book, and just shone a light on his contempt for literature.

As Blademasterzzz said, it was a cheap way of making a few bucks, and I bet he didn't haggle over the royalities. No, it was a rubbish book. Interesting story, but his writing destroyed it.

And the controversy surrounding it is idiotic too.
You can't copyright an idea.


----------



## writerprincess15

I thought it was very good. I enjoy books like that that keep you thinking and guessing and following clues. Also, its not just a mystery. Its a book that makes you think and maybe even question what you beleive. It has you step back and take a look at everything and all the possibilities there are. Alot of people think that if you like the book then you are turning your back on Christianity. Well i read the book, i loved it, and i am still a christian. Just with my own thoughts and beleifs. But who doesn't have their own thoughts and beleifs about their religion? Well anwyays, yeah, i thought it was a good book. I cant wait for the movie.


----------



## Anarkos

If you like Dan Brown's work, you probably don't speak good England.  The man plain cannot write.


----------



## imrhati

speak good ENGLISH i am hoping you mean. and if you do, wow how ironic.


----------



## blademasterzzz

Yes, people who misspell things are can't speak English at all!


----------



## Anarkos

imrhati said:
			
		

> speak good ENGLISH i am hoping you mean. and if you do, wow how ironic.



Haven't you ever heard people mocking people with poor English by saying things like "I no speak good England!"  It was intentional.  Of course English is correct..

=D&gt;


----------



## hirshmon

I loved the book. It had a compelling plot and the way that Dan Brown expressed myths as facts and more facts as facts kept me guessing as to what was real and what wasn't. I didn't care how the book was written - I was reading it to ENJOY the story, not to analyze the rhetorical strategies, diction, and syntax of someone who was a lawyer until a few years ago.

But I heard that he's being sued by some other author for stealing the ideas in the Da Vince Code from something else. That is what disconcerts me, not the poor writing. Is this true?


----------



## imrhati

no, you can't copyright an idea.


----------



## Ben

Actually, imrhati, he was taken to court.


----------



## imrhati

and he won becuase of what i said above.


----------



## hirshmon

Well, actually you can copyright an idea...just not that kind of idea. But they could sue him for plagiarism... like that girl who goes to Harvard and got a two-book deal at age 19. But she plagiarized her work off of another.


----------



## XandrilZaax

lol, I heard the Vatican is boycotting the movie now...


----------



## hirshmon

Pfffft, what haven't they boycotted?


----------



## wowzer77

It was very well written and kept me interested.  I am a Christian and didn't agree with the book but that shouldn't matter if you regard the text as pure fantasy.  The vatican shouldn't boycott the movie. That's just being intolerant and kind of close-minded in my opinion...I also heard that the Vatican didn't let the band Slipknot play a show in Italy because of their masks...this may be a rumor though.  Anyways..I voted the second choice.


----------



## Anarkos

wowzer77 said:
			
		

> It was very well written



Damn!  Where do people get these ideas?

Go read Spot the Dog!

Dan Brown would be a better author if he was literate and spoke english.


----------



## Elvenswordsman

By the way, the guy said that it isn't a novel, that it's all true except for some things he added. BS!!!


----------



## Kyle R

I haven't read it. I tend to avoid books with alot of mainstream hype. Is anyone else like that?


----------



## alex de las casas

its fairly horrific as a piece of literature, however the theme of the lost sacred feminine is an important one,..... although i feel it got lost under a mountain of duff prose and absurd conspiracy theories.


----------



## KeineAngst

In one word: Pablum. If you havent read it, dont.


----------



## AdrienneW

I am reading this book now and I am enjoying it.  I tend to have a very wide range of what I like.  Rowling, McCaffery, Stephen King, Dean Koontz, Weis and Hickman, Grisham, Mercedes Lackey, the list goes on.  I consider Brown's book an "easy read"...the kind of story that you don't have to stop and process...I think that the lack of character description and even scene details helps the book...letting the reader use their imagination more.  While I like detail, I don't like having nothing left to my imagination.
I think its very unfair to classify people who enjoy an easy read as dumb.  If you don't like the book fine.  But sometimes over running the reader with enormous amounts of trivial detail doesn't make the story work either. 
Not every writer is meant to be Stravinsky, Beethoven, or even Elvis Presley or the Beatles....rather more along the lines with Metallica, nine inch nails, or Garth brooks...meeting the needs of the masses while at the same time providing simple entertainment.


----------



## imrhati

respect Nine Inch Nails, they deserve to be capitalised!


----------



## AtlanteanTapir

Downright amazing. :5stars:


----------



## Kane

I haven't read this book, and don't intend to.  After reading the snippet that Connor provided, and assuming the rest of the book is written equally as poorly, it really depresses me to see so many people say how well it's written.  I can't say it shocks me, because I realize how many stupid people there are in the world, but it does depress me.  That the average Joe would call this book well-written is one thing, but when the members of a writing forum, who supposedly read quite a bit, and even do some writing of their own, extoll the virtues of some of the absolute worst prose I have ever read, it makes me want to put down my pen and stop writing altogether.  

Perhaps you did enjoy the premise of the story.  But, if the guy can't write, how can you call it well written?  And when he's writing a book that deals with history, don't you think it's important that he gets his facts straight?  I mean, obviously he has to twist some things here and there to get the plot, but shouldn't everything else be iron-clad in fact in order to make the plot more believable?  If he can't even keep simple facts straight -- what side of the road people drive on, the correct command structure of police departments, the proper police departments to begin with -- then how is one able to suspend one's sense of disbelief long enough to make it through a whole chapter, let alone the entire book?

Dan Brown's prose is worse than some of the stories I've critiqued harshly, only to find out they were written by non-native English speakers.  And his is a finished product, and not a piece up for critique on a writing forum.  If you think Dan Brown's work is well written, it is because you wouldn't know good writing if it smacked you in your face.  It is people like you who allow terrible writers to achieve national acclaim, while a horde of brilliant writers never get a single book published.  You are the reason Hollywood churns out one prefabricated, vacuous piece of trash after another, instead of spending all that money making great, thought provoking, idea challenging films.  And you are the reason that Metallica kept selling albums after they went from being the shit, to plain shit.


----------



## Daniel Malone

I can't believe some on this site would crush snd smash a man who wrote a book and got it published.

The book is good and written as well as any best seller.

I challenge anyone to show me a bestseller that is written better, and I will show you it is just your opinion.

It seems you can't write Stephen King or Shakespeare because you can't. People write in their own unique style and you can't say he is a poor writer just because you think it sucks or you don't like the content. You must have gramatical reasons.

*Also, calling something cliche' has become cliche' itself.* So, cliche sounds so gay.

Furthermore, if you hadn't noticed history, all languages change over time and become modified. Sometimes 
Furhter


----------



## Daniel Malone

I can't believe some on this site would crush snd smash a man who wrote a book and got it published.

The book is good and written as well as any best seller.

I challenge anyone to show me a bestseller that is written better, and I will show you it is just your opinion.

It seems you can't write Stephen King or Shakespeare because you can't. People write in their own unique style and you can't say he is a poor writer just because you think it sucks or you don't like the content. You must have gramatical reasons.

*Also, calling something cliche' has become cliche' itself.* So, cliche sounds so gay.

Furthermore, if you hadn't noticed history, all languages change over time and become modified. Sometimes becoming a 
Furhter


----------



## Daniel Malone

b


----------



## Daniel Malone

*I can't believe*

I can't believe some on this site would crush and smash a man who wrote a book and got it published.

The book is good and written as well as any best seller.

I challenge anyone to show me a bestseller that is written better, and I will show you it is just your opinion.

It seems you can't write Stephen King or Shakespeare because you can't. People write in their own unique style and you can't say he is a poor writer just because you think it sucks or you don't like the content. You must have grammatical reasons.

*Also, calling something cliché' has become cliché' itself.* So, cliché sounds so gay.

Furthermore, if you hadn't noticed history, all languages change over time and become modified, Sometimes becoming a different dialect. So why do some embrace the way they think their language should be? It will change no matter how you despise it.

I will agree if a sentence sound odd or wordy, I will agree if the grammar is bordering illiterate, and I will agree if words are spelled wrong beyond a typo. But I do not agree with bashing a book if you don't like the content or the method used to write.

People talk of how difficult editors can be on grammar, but the book evidently passed their ruthless inspection.

Some of you must understand, a modern book has to be written for the common reader. A common reader does not use perfect grammar and reads on a lower level than “grammar nazis”.

If you want publish a best seller than you must write to the level of the market.


----------



## AtlanteanTapir

well, i dont think he should be killed. if this was reallly all true, wouldnt he just write a documentary put in the NONFICTION section? really... christians and catholics shouldnt take it so seriously. its JUST A NORMAL NOVEL. there, thats how i feel about it.


----------



## blademasterzzz

> I can't believe some on this site would crush and smash a man who wrote a book and got it published.



Your point...? The book is crap. Publishing it doesn't make it any better. 



> The book is good and written as well as any best seller.



Fair enough. 90% of bestsellers are cheap crap, which really shows the average level of intelligence in mainstream readers today.



> I challenge anyone to show me a bestseller that is written better, and I will show you it is just your opinion.



Bestseller? Off the top of my head: 

To Kill a Mockingbird




> It seems you can't write Stephen King or Shakespeare because you can't. People write in their own unique style and you can't say he is a poor writer just because you think it sucks or you don't like the content. You must have grammatical reasons.




In other words: "Ur just jealous, and u CANT writte anyway!!11!!1 eleventy-one."

I said it a thousand times: To recognise a bad book you don't have to be a good writer. Just a good reader. 




> Furthermore, if you hadn't noticed history, all languages change over time and become modified, Sometimes becoming a different dialect. So why do some embrace the way they think their language should be? It will change no matter how you despise it.



I am not proposing Brown would write in Shakespearean english. But what he writes isn't dialect, it's heavily dumbed-down English for the masses. 




> But I do not agree with bashing a book if you don't like the content or the method used to write.



We can bash whomever we want. 




> Some of you must understand, a modern book has to be written for the common reader. A common reader does not use perfect grammar and reads on a lower level than “grammar nazis”.



Why not just write in in aol-speak? 

"ThA Hax0rrz w3nt into da MUSEUm, where, they, like, totally PWNED this GUY!!!"



> If you want publish a best seller than you must write to the level of the market



Amen. Which he did. Except some of us are more fussed about writing a good story rather than scoring a buck.


----------



## Daniel Malone

Well, I am not. I love well written stories, but I'm more into the concept of the story than how well it is written. 

I know that some of the literary giants of the past didn't write as good as there final works presents. Many had a lot of help because it was considered crucial at the time to appear perfect grammaticaly speaking.

Do you even know that most writers of today hire or make use of editors? Not many writers are good at editing their own work.

You proved my point perfectly when you provided and example of aol-speak. Our language is changing, and in the future people may write in this manner. It is more code-like and simpler.

I just don't understand "grammer nazis" standing on their high horse proclaiming their rule are what everyone else abides by or thier stupid. Yes, your a bunch of jealous gnats who can't stand others publishing work that you feel is much less than you own. 

It is obvious you think your a better master of words or you wouldn't be so bold as to make your claims. I wouls settle for 40 million copies sold and be illiterate than to be a grammer nazi and struggle to pay the bills.

You are jealous and care nothing for the evolution of language that will happen no matter how many times you wipe the tears from your crying.


----------



## Kane

It has nothing to do with jealousy, Daniel.  Most of us love writing because we love the use of the written language as a form of communication.  Because we are avid readers as well as writers, the subtleties of prose are something that we enjoy.  Writers like Dan Brown kill that for us.  It's like watching main-stream pop singers like Ashlee Simpson receive wide acclaim while true musicians always stay in the underground.  Our disgust with Dan Brown stems more from the imbalance of justice with regards to pop-art vs. true art.  It's no surprise that you like Dan Brown, however, or even that you hate grammar nazis, as your own writing is full of poor spelling and grammar.


----------



## Elvenswordsman

To let all ppl know, This book is categoried under fiction, it has managed to take things that have already been said by all others and has no real point other than to make money by "Compiling" works and scriptures written by others.


----------



## the_stand

I read it and found it quite entertaining. Which is exactly what I wanted it to do.

What I don't like however is all the snobbery attached. I've found that The Da Vinci Code in particular has brought out an ugly trait in a few of my friends who have jumped on the DVC-bashing bandwagon. I've found it to be quite pretentious, and patronising.

Someone who lets rip on a best-seller just because of it's fame and popularity will never be seen as one of the elite in my eyes!

What's wrong with a bit of entertaining, escapist, unbelievable nonsense?!

Steve.

P.S. One of my favourite modern novels is Jurassic Park by Michael Crichton. I guess this might anger some people...!


----------



## cellardoor

He didn't write a book. He wrote a movie in book form. The characters are so uninspired, anyone with a television could write those characters. The plot was ridiculous. Perfect cinema fodder, great way to make money.

The only original thing was the number of twists, and that grew boring after a while. "Oh wow... turns out it was THAT GUY the whole time..." can only be entertaining a certain number of times. And Dan Brown certainly exceeded that level.

And his dialogue is shit.

The information is presented in a factual way, even though this is a fictional book. Therefore people have taken it as truth. I wonder how Dan Brown intended it to be taken.

The codes were pretty sweet though.


----------



## blademasterzzz

> Someone who lets rip on a best-seller just because of it's fame and popularity will never be seen as one of the elite in my eyes!



The main problem is that such tripe is extremely popular, yet the great literature out there will never be published. It says a lot about the intellectual niveau of the readers.


----------



## the_stand

blademasterzzz said:
			
		

> It says a lot about the intellectual niveau of the readers.


 
Really?

Is it not possible to enjoy something even if it's a guilty pleasure?


----------



## A_MacLaren

Yeah, it is, but bad books should at least be acknowledged as bad but still entertaining. Most press coverage of the book equates to 'Best selling"="best writing".


----------



## Gazin

I thought it was a good romp....so was angels and Demons...what I thought made it so marketable was its clever story idea ( I went a bunch of new directions in learning due to the subject matter) and the fast pace of the story, almost to bare bones but effective in its page turning capabilities...I think the style he writes in suits a great deal of modern readers, easy and quick, easy to set down and easy to pick up...I tend to like a more in depth novel than Brown created, I agree that his characters were a bit flat, but the story wasnt really about the people so much as the events..the people were just a vehicle to tell teh story...and the story had me completly intrigued, I love history and religion studies so it was all a great trailer for factual info to come and books to be read...

I admit to being fascinated by the publics reaction to this novel..its nutty!


----------



## the_stand

I read recently that there was a possiblilty at one point that before the book made it big it was being considered for season 3 or 4 of 24. Which kind of says a lot about the style of the book as far as pacing and twists.


----------



## blademasterzzz

> Yeah, it is, but bad books should at least be acknowledged as bad but still entertaining.




That sums up absolutely everything in this thread. I have no problem with reading pulp - in fact, I enjoy it a lot - but the fact that this book is praised as extraordinary intelligent, clever and good literature is what gets me. 

If people just said, "It's really entertaining, but still, it's trash", I wouldn't have any kind of qualms. But a lot of people consider it to be the peak of intelligent writing, and most of all, good writing. 

I mean, fuck, I heard someone compare Dostoevsky to Brown. In a good way. Apart from the fact that they have nothing in common, it's rather sad.


----------



## poetrykid16

i liked the book it was Great. no i did not mean to make the G biG the computer only shows it that way. damn mac.


----------



## CrazyJill000

A_MacLaren said:
			
		

> Yeah, it is, but bad books should at least be acknowledged as bad but still entertaining. Most press coverage of the book equates to 'Best selling"="best writing".



If I was religious I would be pissed, but i'm agnostic so yeah. But even then, God wouldn't lie to his believers and hide something like Jesus having an affair with Mary so the book is utter bullcrap.


----------



## Stewart

Daniel Malone said:
			
		

> I challenge anyone to show me a bestseller that is written better, and I will show you it is just your opinion.




Vladimir Nabokov's _Lolita_ has sold fifty million copies. Would you say that the poetry of Humbert Humbert's mind is on a par with Brown's omniscient narrator?

Of course, it would seem that, taking page one of _The Da Vinci Code, _you think that describing a silhouette as having white hair and, er, eyes is good writing. I doubt even such schlock as Clive Cussler couldn't make such a mistake. Where were the editors then? Such errors occur throughout this book. It is clumsy to the point of farce.
 



> People write in their own unique style and you can't say he is a poor writer just because you think it sucks or you don't like the content.


Unique style? Tell that to the Lovecraftians.

And as for not being able to call someone a poor writer because he sucks, we sure can label Brown as such. It's called opinion. I know there are authors that I don't appreciate (Woolf, Winterson, Bellow) and would say I don't like the content but I can recognise the quality of their writing when I see it. With Brown, all you get is inferior prose by someone who really needs to learn his craft more if he wants to be respected as a writer. I daresay he couldn't give a shit, given the cash he has made, but just because he has gained considerable wealth doesn't make him good.




> *Also, calling something cliché' has become cliché' itself.*




I think the cliché is people saying _that._
 



> Furthermore, if you hadn't noticed history, all languages change over time and become modified, Sometimes becoming a different dialect. So why do some embrace the way they think their language should be? It will change no matter how you despise it.


 Are you actually suggesting that Dan Brown is advancing the English vocabulary?
 



> I do not agree with bashing a book if you don't like the content or the method used to write.


True, but the criticism (not bashing) is of the entire package; book as a product of its author. The content is silly, the method weak.
 



> People talk of how difficult editors can be on grammar, but the book evidently passed their ruthless inspection.


Editors don't just proofread books for spelling mistakes and grammatical errata. They are required to spot errors in the text, whether they be factual mistakes, naming problems, lingual translations, or just clumsy word choices (see silhouette with eyes above). The editors were probably smoking crack when this landed on their desk; either that or it was given to a group of twelve year olds on work experience at Random House to edit.
 



> Some of you must understand, a modern book has to be written for the common reader. A common reader does not use perfect grammar and reads on a lower level than “grammar nazis”.


Some of you? Are you up on some sort of pedestal, or something?

A modern book does not have to be written for a common reader (what is a common reader exactly?). The writer should just write - if they are aiming for a specific market then they are compromising their creativity. Let the readers decide what sells and what doesn't. And when the readers decide that Dan Brown sells you can't claim that it is because he is a good writer, which you seem to be asserting.




> If you want publish a best seller than you must write to the level of the market.


It's a shame, then, that the market in question for this book reads at the level of a twelve year old.


----------



## Stewart

Daniel Malone said:
			
		

> I love well written stories, but I'm more into the concept of the story than how well it is written.



I don't think there was much of a concept in _The Da Vinci Code_. Even the damn title is a mistake (those ruthless editors, eh?). It's a fiction-by-numbers attempt.



> I know that some of the literary giants of the past didn't write as good as there final works presents. Many had a lot of help because it was considered crucial at the time to appear perfect grammaticaly speaking.



I take it you don't require help? What literary giants were you thinking of? I would say that writers from yesteryear that are held in high regard wrote well because the quality of education was far better than it is today. 



> I just don't understand "grammer [_sic_] nazis [_sic_]" standing on their high horse proclaiming their rule [_sic_] are what everyone else abides by or thier [_sic_] stupid [_sic_]. Yes, your [_sic_] a bunch of jealous gnats who can't stand others publishing work that you feel is much less than you own.



A pedant (or a 'grammer [_sic_] nazi [_sic_]') writes: what the hell was that half written rant about. You will find that people who are critical of work are critical because they have a good range of reading under their belt and are able to discern good from bad. People who bandy in with cries of pretention, elitism, or 'grammer [_sic_] nazi [_sic_]' are those who have a problem with themselves, an inferiority complex, and lash out at others as a way of dealing with it.



> It is obvious you think your [_sic_] a better master of words or you wouldn't be so bold as to make your claims. I wouls [_sic_] settle for 40 million copies sold and be illiterate than to be a grammer [_sic_] nazi [_sic_] and struggle to pay the bills.



I would say that I am a better writer than Dan Brown because I feel that I understand the craft more than him. I mean, this is the guy who lists Jeffrey Archer's _Kane And Abel _as one of his top ten books and cites Robert Ludlum as one of his favourite writers. There's no appreciation for writers who truly write splendour.



> You are jealous and care nothing for the evolution of language that will happen no matter how many times you wipe the tears from your crying.



I don't think anyone is jealous of Brown's tawdry novel. If I'd written it I'd be ashamed; although I clearly have high literary standards and aspirations. Again, if you are claiming that Dan Brown is helping to evolve the English language then I think we might need to call the men in white coats to come and take you away.


----------



## Santa

I unfortunatly haven't gotten the time to read and look into its real core and all although I'm looking forward to it very very much. I've been reading comments on this topic and it seems like a mix. Hopefully I'll like itas much as some of you.


----------



## Kyle R

I find it impossible to be interested in this book, because I am an atheist. The whole concept of conspiracy theories around the Holy Grail and Jesus leaves me saying "eh... so what?"

I've already concluded long ago that Christianity is fiction.

If you're religious, more power to you. I'm not knocking you, just showing how an atheist like myself feels.


----------



## Stewart

KyleColorado said:
			
		

> I find it impossible to be interested in this book, because I am an atheist.



I find it impossible to believe that people would choose not to read a book because of their beliefs. This book is not out to preach any sort of religion to you.


----------



## Gazin

KyleColorado said:
			
		

> I find it impossible to be interested in this book, because I am an atheist. The whole concept of conspiracy theories around the Holy Grail and Jesus leaves me saying "eh... so what?"
> 
> I've already concluded long ago that Christianity is fiction.
> 
> If you're religious, more power to you. I'm not knocking you, just showing how an atheist like myself feels.


 
Try it! You might like it! Smile! Seriously, not reading a book for the above reasons sounds limiting, I dont believe in monsters but they make great stories, Christianity is not fiction, its just full of falacies and corruption to achieve desired results..its also full of facts and good, there is no black and white...


----------



## Kyle R

Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> I find it impossible to believe that people would choose not to read a book because of their beliefs.


I don't believe in the foundation of the conspiracy theories in the story (Christianity). Was Jesus Christ's wife Mary Magdolin(sp?) or not? I honestly can't force myself to care. The plot relies on an assumption that Jesus Christ is of significance to the reader, and to me, he's not. The plot, therefore, is weakened by my disbelief. The book, therefore, becomes unengaging. My beliefs, therefore, hinder me from choosing the book, because I know that I will not enjoy it.

And Gazin, sorry, I'm just one less reader of this book. 
Smile? Errmm.. Okay. 
I agree with you, there are no absolutes.


----------



## Stewart

KyleColorado said:
			
		

> The plot relies on an assumption that Jesus Christ is of significance to the reader



That's like saying you have to be gay to watch _Brokeback Mountain_. It doesn't wash. While I like the fact you don't want to read the book, you don't need to have a vested interest in Jesus; some, for example, have found the regurgitations in the book to enhance their own atheistic proclivities.


----------



## Kyle R

Connor Wolf said:
			
		

> That's like saying you have to be gay to watch _Brokeback Mountain_. It doesn't wash.


I think a more accurate analogy would be that I have to believe in gay love to watch Brokeback Mountain. But I see your point.


----------



## playstation60

Whether you believe in a particular religion, or feel that Jesus Christ is important to you or not is completely irrelevant.  There is no denying the importance Jesus Christ has played on history.  The plot of the book does not require you to be a believer of Jesus at all, just that you recognize the importance He has played in everything this world has gone through in the last 2000 years.


----------



## iwantegggs

I think Dan Brown is a genius, and I like all his books, so of course I like the Da Vinci Code. It was great! :cheers:


----------



## cdelling02

While it may not have been the most profound or thought provoking book I have ever read I found it interesting nonetheless.  As others stated previously, it was written with a level of diction appropriate for sixth graders but even as such I thought it was a fun read.  Religious zealots need to take a step back and realize that this book was placed in the fiction section for a reason though.  Dan Brown may be convinced of the veracity of his poorly researched facts but the rest of us can see the book for what it is: a highly marketable book that sates the appetites of conspiracy theorists everywhere.


----------



## Hakeem

The book was full of specifics and information until you get to to the level of not believing in some of them. It certainly drew my attention when he (Brown) started to talk about The Mona Lisa and The Last Supper, and also about The Priory of Sion during the continuity of the book (although it was known before and awfully discussed at political forums). The Anagrams in the beginning were not bad too; they were conveyed in a way to mark the reader's path. Aslo it would've made a wonderful proof if he mentioned a little bit more on the Assenian Scrolls found in Qumran.. But who am I to tell Mr Brown what to write... at least he got published 

All in all, the book was perfectly thought-out and well-written, although it isn't worthy of the media hurricane revolving around it.


----------



## blademasterzzz

Interesting, some people believe the book is bashed mainly on the religious front. Personally, I could care less about the religious aspects of it. I wouldn't care if it said Jesus was a hooker and a gay; What gets me is the blatant disrespect for writing Brown shows, and the screaming legions of fans who proclaim this book was the greatest thing ever written on this earth.


----------



## Oracle

It was alright. The history it's based on isn't all 100% fact though. It loosely sums up a bunch of information that came to light when the gnostic gospels were discovered. Mary Magdalene theories existed long before the Da Vinci Code. There's evidence to support that Mary Magdalene was alot more important that she was given credit for in the gospels of Mary and Philip, but it's a leap to suggest that she was married to Jesus.

Still, the Da Vinci Code is fiction, and it should be taken as fiction. If you read it looking for historical insight, you're going to be sorely disappointed and probably insulted. If you read it as fiction though, it's not too bad. I thought the villains were a little more realistic than the main characters, but I liked the puzzle-solving element. However, the Da Vinci Code is extremely overrated. All the hype about it is silly, since there have already been other books on the same subject. If anything though, it was fairly enjoyable and it opened the door for me to check out some other similar mystery books.

It probably helps that I'm interested in Art History, and Da Vinci particularily, so it appealed to my interests in that regard. And most of the things it said about christianity (ex: blowing the Jesus thing out of proportion, slandering women, attacking paganism) I had already believed to begin with. So that's why I was able to enjoy the book to the extent that I did. For others who aren't interested in any of that, it would be a pointless book to read, so I completely understand where you're coming from when you say it was a big "so what?"


----------



## Stewart

Oracle said:
			
		

> If you read it looking for historical insight, you're going to be sorely disappointed and probably insulted. If you read it as fiction though, it's not too bad.



If you read it as fiction (and have read widely within that bracket) then it's a piece of shit. Plain and simple. That's how I read it.


> It probably helps that I'm interested in Art History, and Da Vinci particularily, so it appealed to my interests in that regard.



If you were _really_ interested you would have said Leonardo. There's no such painter as Da Vinci.


----------



## ms. vodka

I wouldn't say it's a piece of shit.

I'm aware of the controversy surrounding the book, both in regard to the conspiracies and in regard to publication of the book itself...

In a few instances, the characters seemed to be a bit juvenile in their development but i didn't jump into the book expecting to be blown away... i looked at it as the same reason i watch prison break on monday nights... purely entertainment.

wondering about shit like that is simply fun.  what if's keep life interesting sometimes... 

vodka


----------



## Anarkos

It was a piece of shit. Dan Brown can't write.


----------



## ms. vodka

well, i guess you _do_ know everything.

i had forgotten.


----------



## Stewart

Hmmm, my response to ms vodka appears to have been removed.


----------



## ms. vodka

never saw it, Connor and I didn't remove it either.

don't see it in the trash.

usually if a mod removes a post they'll pm you and let you know who did it and why.

feel free to re-post.  i can take it.  

vodka


----------



## Anarkos

ms. vodka said:
			
		

> well, i guess you _do_ know everything.
> 
> i had forgotten.



I find it incredibly tedious to see people continually raving on about Dan Brown's virtues, despite his obvious ignorance of grammar and blatant abuse of the English language.  His prose is simply painful to read.  

Remember, I am the guy here who suggests that aspiring writers read the worst fiction they can find, and to go through it trying to work out why it's bad and see if they are making the same mistakes.  As a result, I've read a lot of awfully written novels.

And yet, I gave up on the Da Vinci code about five chapters in.  I just could not take his horrific rape and abuse of the language anymore.  It hurt to read.  Watching a horrific in-flight movie or three was less soul-destroying and mind-numbing.

On one of the first three pages of this thread, an excerpt from the book was posted, and several very, very elementary errors were picked up.  If I had the stamina, I imagine that I could do part of the job Brown's editor really should have, but did not, and removed most of the ugly, ungrammatical or plain nonsensical parts from his book.  Unfortunately, that would require that I try to read it again.

It hurt the first time.

I'm not an expert on grammar or literature.  I've read Strunk and White.  I've done up to high school scholarship level in it, but dropped English at uni in favour of the more practical law and poli sci.  I'm no expert, like I said.  However, I have a functional, albeit imperfect, grasp of grammar, style and the conventions of prose.

And that is enough to see just how obviously pathetic Dan Brown's prose is.  The man cannot write.  He piles error upon error.  

It is a sad indicator of the poor understanding of English grammar etc that so many people cannot see his errors, when even for someone as comparitively ignorant as I, they are horribly blatant.


----------



## ms. vodka

fahn-taaastic!


----------



## Anarosa

it really dissapoints me how connor and anarkos can be so judgemental of the people who hail the book as absolutely amazing, when in fact, they are doing the exact same thing, except in a different direction. for example. my brother rants and raves about how my southern babtist grandparents steryotype against other religions, while the entire time he bashes every devout christian he meets. Just like you are telling the original post on the thread (i cant remember her name) to talk about the book on its merits, and not on the person who posted the review, but at the same time you are calling her (or anyone who liked the book) a complete idiot.
you are both hypocrites.

im not saying i loved the book, and im not saying i hated it. 
what im saying is, im dissapointed in your narrowmindedness. and i post this as my opinion on this thread. not as an insult to anyone who posted.

ps - when whoever said that anyone who read and liked the book must be illiterate. i have only one thing to say to you. do you know the meaning of that word? you cant have read and liked the book if you cant *read.*

oh yeah, and dont say that just because someone is 15, or otherwise younger than you are, that they couldnt possibly have as much knowledge as you do. you'd have hated it if an adult said that to you when you were her age. im sure when einstien was 15 he had to deal with many adults who thought they were better than him simply because of their age. dont become on of those adults.

by the way. im still in middle school. and that doesnt mean a damn thing


----------



## Anarkos

People who think that all forms of judgment are exactly the same irritate me.  There is nothing wrong with judging things.  People do it continually.  The issue is whether they have good grounds for making such judgments.


----------



## Torpy

I must say that the Da Vinci Code was one of the best books I've read in quite a while. Despite being a Christain, I am not offended by the book in any way due to the fact that I'm open to new ideas. However, it doesn't mean that I believe the theory - many facts are incorrect and some pieces of key information that would eradicate some of the doubts I have are missing.

I believe the book is reasonably well written, but there are too many short, simple sentences in there for my liking and sometimes it doesn't flow as one would expect a bestseller to. However, in places, the writing style complements the plot, which, I find, is the best aspect of the book, and so I wouldn't deal out too much criticism to Dan Brown in this regard.


----------



## Stewart

Anarosa said:
			
		

> it really dissapoints me how connor and anarkos can be so judgemental of the people who hail the book as absolutely amazing, when in fact, they are doing the exact same thing, except in a different direction.



As a group of pigs once famously said: "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." The same can be said of readers. 

The twelve year old coming to _The Da Vinci Code_ may come to the book and think its the best thing since _Teletubbies_ (who were more literate) and that is purely because their language skills are still developing and they have not done a body of reading in their short existence. 

That's not to say that adults will immediately make better readers of such a book because part of the book's popularity is that it is easy for those who we would generally class as "non-readers" (or heathen). So, for those adults who read little to nothing it would be no surprise that they can find the book to be exceptional - like the twelve year old they have little reading experience.

The adult who reads within comfort zones can be a better judge of a book's worth although these people tend to read genre fiction after genre piece and genre work is rarely anything more than cheap titillation. The reader may notice that one book is better than another but they are more likely to apply their appreciation of a book more to its plot than to its overall composition.

And for those that read widely (contemporary, classics, world, bestsellers) their judgement is all that I would trust. They have a wide and varied body of work strengthening their ability to read and they are likely to understand chracter, plot, themes, etc. and so, when coming to _The Da Vinci Code_ they will definitely find it to be inferior as they have read so much and so widely that such a novel would pale in comparison and easily offer up its weaknesses to be seen.

The pigs got it right.

im not saying i loved the book, and im not saying i hated it. 
what im saying is, im dissapointed in your narrowmindedness. and i post this as my opinion on this thread. not as an insult to anyone who posted.

ps - when whoever said that anyone who read and liked the book must be illiterate. i have only one thing to say to you. do you know the meaning of that word? you cant have read and liked the book if you cant *read.*

oh yeah, and dont say that just because someone is 15, or otherwise younger than you are, that they couldnt possibly have as much knowledge as you do. you'd have hated it if an adult said that to you when you were her age. im sure when einstien was 15 he had to deal with many adults who thought they were better than him simply because of their age. dont become on of those adults.

by the way. im still in middle school. and that doesnt mean a damn thing[/quote]


----------



## Stewart

ms. vodka said:
			
		

> i didn't jump into the book expecting to be blown away... i looked at it as the same reason i watch prison break on monday nights... purely entertainment.



Shouldn't every piece of fiction be seen as entertaining? I certainly think so. It's just that it pales in comparison to so much more of the entertainment sitting on the shelves.


----------



## Anarosa

whos to say that i havent read widely. you couldnt possibly know whether or not i've read classics, or anything else for that matter. so stop assuming.

and i really didnt care for the book at all. thats not what bothers me. 

i completely agree that Dan Brown had no idea what he was doing when he wrote that book. 

But everyone is intitled to their own opinion.  it just bothers me when some people always think that their opinion is the right one. obviously people believe what they believe, but when it escalates into insulting someone's intelligence. then i think its alittle out of hand. You wouldn't tell a Buddist they were an idiot just because you were a Christian, would you?


----------



## Stewart

Anarosa said:
			
		

> whos to say that i havent read widely. you couldnt possibly know whether or not i've read classics, or anything else for that matter. so stop assuming.


Who's to say you can even read after that comment. I quoted you and made a point; I did not use your name or say you weren't widely read. That must be a chip on your shoulder, though, or you wouldn't say it.


----------



## Anarosa

looks like im the one who was assuming. 

sorry if i thought that was what you meant.

i do see you're point though.

But you shouldnt make the same mistake and assume that there is a chip on my shoulder.

although i do admit that i've had to deal with alot of adults in my life that refused to take me seriously because of my age.

sorry about the misunderstanding


----------



## Anarkos

Anarosa said:
			
		

> But everyone is intitled to their own opinion.



Well, yes.  That includes Connor and I being entitled to hold the opinion that claiming that Dan Brown is a master of prose is retarded.  

I also dislike the notion that everything is just opinions and opinions can't be proven so I can't claim that I'm right and others are wrong.  That's just plain silly.  

Opinions may be entirely subjective, or based on objective facts.  Some opinions may be more well grounded and more well reasoned than others.  Some, indeed, may be so well extablished that they cannot reasonably be faulted, and others may be so well disproven that to advance them is just plain stupid.



			
				Anarosa said:
			
		

> it just bothers me when some people always think that their opinion is the right one.



Of course I think my opinions are right; if I didn't, I wouldn't hold them, would I?  

There's a difference between thinking that one's own opinions are right (which is true by definition; if you didn't think something was right, it would not be your opinion) and thinking that all other opinions are wrong, and, most importantly, telling others that their opinions are wrong.

In this case, I feel that my opinion is very well grounded, and that the contradictory opinion is very poorly grounded.  Given that this is a forum about writing, and that presumably this means that most people here wish to improve their own prose, I see no reason to be quiet about this.

Dan Brown's use of the English language is appalling.  His sentence structures are ugly, and he often pens atrocities which are either grammatically plain wrong or outright nonsensical. Thus anyone who wishes to write well in the English language should not model themselves on Dan Brown.

Admittedly, I've probably been overly abusive and harsh.  I'm the same to myself.  I can be quite a cunt.  No excuses there.

However, I will restate: Plotting, themes and character aside, Dan Brown's work is appalling.  He simply does not understand the simple mechanics of the English language.  Given that I haven't read the whole book - due to my inability to plow on through his semantic and syntactical miscarriages - I can't pretend to comment on the plot, themes, characters or the controversy (although the assertion that Jesus was married etc is plain wrong and entirely unsupportable on the evidence).  However, it does not take a thorough reading of his work nor literary greatness to know that he skipped his remedial English classes at school.



			
				Anarosa said:
			
		

> obviously people believe what they believe, but when it escalates into insulting someone's intelligence. then i think its alittle out of hand.



You are probably right in that I have been overly cuntish.  Oh well.  I should try to be more tactful.

However, my argument is simple:

P1) Dan Brown does not understand the very basic mechanics of writing.
P2) If you compliment an author who does not understand said basics of writing, you probably don't understand them yourself.
P3) People compliment Dan Brown's writing style.
C1) These people do not understand the basic rules of writing in the English language.

P4) If you wish to be a writer, then you need to understand said rules.
P5) If you post on this forum, you probably want to be a writer.
C2) These people probably should take steps to correct their lack of understanding of basic grammatical rules etc etc.

Simple!



			
				Anarosa said:
			
		

> You wouldn't tell a Buddist they were an idiot just because you were a Christian, would you?



Yes, because even though I am Christian, I cannot prove my religion to be objectively true and others to be objectively false.  If, however, a Buddhist advanced a terrible argument for why my religion was false, then I would happily explain to him just how bad his argument was...


----------



## Astra

did it ever occur to u that brown could be a writer like u all when blademaster-whatever-sorry, but i don't remember ur name-started saying how he has no love for writing.  i liked it, though i do agree with the hole cliche thing.  i also admit that the beginning was a forceful journey, but the rest really kicked off.  Brown, i hope that guy is wrong about u writing possibly just for money.  if u are-if ur even reading this(idoubtit)-u will so be a dead #*$!*%@#!u-no-wat to me.  I hope we can just calm our butts down.  this is supposed to be a friendly forum.  if some of u keep critiquing so brutally whether it's a "terrible, gold digging, best seller" or each other, maybe u don't belong here.  And I mean that only due to what i've seen from ur responses.


----------



## blademasterzzz

> did it ever occur to u that brown could be a writer like u all when blademaster-whatever-sorry, but i don't remember ur name-started saying how he has no love for writing.




Blade. 



> i liked it, though i do agree with the hole cliche thing. i also admit that the beginning was a forceful journey, but the rest really kicked off. Brown, i hope that guy is wrong about u writing possibly just for money.



It's a fact that he writes for money. He said himself that it was just a "novel". Clearly, he does not hold literature in high regard. It also bothers me that most of the people arguing that the book is well written cannot be bothered to spell "ur" correctly throughout their argument, but go off if we make one single mistake in our posts. And I am not even an English-speaking person. 



> if u are-if ur even reading this(idoubtit)



I read a lot of post I do not choose to comment on. 



> -u will so be a dead #*$!*%@#!u-no-wat to me.



I don't usually insult people, just writers. The readers seem to take it as a personal affront. 



> I hope we can just calm our butts down. this is supposed to be a friendly forum. if some of u keep critiquing so brutally whether it's a "terrible, gold digging, best seller" or each other, maybe u don't belong here. And I mean that only due to what i've seen from ur responses.



I've written my share of good comments. I adore many books, and I say so. It is just that negative comments always leap out, blending out the positive ones. 


And above all, this is a writing forum. At least it was several years ago until it became filled with teenagers bitching about their life.


----------



## Anarkos

Astra said:
			
		

> did it ever occur to u that brown could be a writer like u all when blademaster-whatever-sorry, but i don't remember ur name-started saying how he has no love for writing.  i liked it, though i do agree with the hole cliche thing.  i also admit that the beginning was a forceful journey, but the rest really kicked off.  Brown, i hope that guy is wrong about u writing possibly just for money.  if u are-if ur even reading this(idoubtit)-u will so be a dead #*$!*%@#!u-no-wat to me.  I hope we can just calm our butts down.  this is supposed to be a friendly forum.  if some of u keep critiquing so brutally whether it's a "terrible, gold digging, best seller" or each other, maybe u don't belong here.  And I mean that only due to what i've seen from ur responses.



Did it ever occur to you that people might take you a little more seriously if you wrote you defence of our Mr. Brown according to some semblance of the usual rules of English spelling and grammar?  You know, so we can actually read it with resorting to guesswork?

And if you think we're being overly harsh or unfriendly, never, ever submit your work to an editor, agent or publisher.  They will make me at my worst seem angelic.


----------



## Anarosa

not all teenagers bitch about their life blade


----------



## blademasterzzz

I know, I'm a teenager. Fact remains that several years ago this forum was quite slower, but at least the lounge was full of intelligent and philosophical discussions. I don't know, maybe I'm just being nostalgic. I don't think people should share their personal problems on forums unless it's serious (and maybe not in that case). 

And again, it bothers me that now people are defending a badly written book as highly intelligent and well written. If they would acknowledge it as somewhat enjoyable pulp, fine by me. But it's just not a piece of literary mastery as some people seem to believe. 

In order to be a good writer, people have to recognise the level of English (or any other language for that matter) displayed in books they read.


----------



## Talia_Brie

Anarkos said:
			
		

> Did it ever occur to you that people might take you a little more seriously if you wrote you defence of our Mr. Brown according to some semblance of the usual rules of English spelling and grammar? You know, so we can actually read it with resorting to guesswork?
> 
> And if you think we're being overly harsh or unfriendly, never, ever submit your work to an editor, agent or publisher. They will make me at my worst seem angelic.


 
Ha!

Anarkos, no one cuts like you, mate. That's too well done.=D>


----------



## duberdurm

jk7070436 said:
			
		

> I didn't like it much. It wasn't my type of read. It was rather boring, I had to force myself to read it. And I didn't like that Langdon fellow, nor that woman he was with. I forgot her name, something like Sophie. Anyways, that's all I have to say. It was boring and the characters were unlikable. The chapters were incredibly short(not necessarily a bad thing).



Same here.  The story was boring and I kept waiting to see what everyone is finding so good about it.  I listened to it on audiobook and it almost put me to sleep.  It could have appeal because people seem to like ideas that challenge traidtion and religion, but as a story/idea I found it highly overrated.


----------



## Ennui

Lmfao at your "book beef"...

Honestly...

I thought it was boring. It was interesting enough to lead me into doing my own research, but the author's "evidence" is not even close to legit. DaVinci lived almost 1500 years after the death of Christ.

The book was pourly written, cliched, and also a very half-assed attempt at trying to destroy Christianity. And, the author just got a lucky break.


----------



## Anarkos

Talia_Brie said:
			
		

> Ha!
> 
> Anarkos, no one cuts like you, mate. That's too well done.=D>



Believe it or not, I'm actually almost a relatively nice guy most of the time.  Well, aside from at law school, at work (where I pretend really well to be friendly and nice and polite while reciting Promise of Bloodshed lyrics in my head), at any kind of debating thing, in any party or bar where bands aren't playing...

...um, okay, perhaps I'm not, haha.


----------



## BeautifulDisaster

The Da Vinci Code is an amazing book! The movie, on the other hand... is just okay.

It doesn't matter what anyone writes- somehow, people are gonna find something to be offended about.


----------



## Stewart

BeautifulDisaster said:
			
		

> The Da Vinci Code is an amazing book!



Your opinion holds little weight unless you back it up. As it stands, your commentary is superfluous. _Why_ do you think it is amazing? Convince us.


----------



## MarkINR

One word: 


BIGOTRY.


If I wrote a book that said black people were created after 10 monkeys had a huge orgy in a methane polluted bog I'd be ridiculed, punished, and ostricized from society. Mr. Brown is writing the equivalent about christians and recieving a standing ovation. I am opposed to the Da Vinci Code in the highest degree and believe it to be an abomination to writing in all it's forms.


 P.S. That isn't to say that I support those loons protesting outside the movie theater. No, the best course of action here is to ignore Mr. Brown's offensive and insensitive piece of fiction and let it gently fade away into obscurity.


----------



## NatureHoldsAnswers

well, i had a road trip and decided to get the audio cd, im on chapter 22, and i find it utterly annoying and i think its questioning my intelligence that it explains EVERYTHING, ugh. other than that, the story itself is interesting, just the way he is writing it is annoying, ill continue reading it for some unknown reason, just to get to the end to see how different it was fromt he movie. anyways, yeah. enjoy.


----------



## Addison

I'm not much of a prude, admittedly, but I do snub a novel that I believe to be lacking in literary merit, and this work was just such a case. Mr. Brown's command of the language was paltry, to be quite frank. I'm sure it made for a pleasantly quick read, but it is certainly undeserving of such great attention; this author's works will not survive him.


----------



## Hawkeye

*Lame, but not offensive*

Though I am a Christian, I do not get offended by things some people do. Some Christians fear God cannot take care of himself. Some Muslims fear any criticism of Islam. Some blacks see every action by whites as racist. I generally don't pass time with any such people, as their focus is fearful and hateful.

But the book, the very structure of the book, is weak and lame and the product of a person desperate to make money and with no concern for the skills of the craft. He collected a large assembly of previously concocted lies and mistruths and wove them together very poorly, and unconvincingly, into a ridiculous patchwork, using marginal grammar and wordsmithing skills. He repeatedly declared figments to be true, though the story is fiction, and surely enough, many of the lies declaring decendants of Jesus have been forged and salted into legitimate archives. His wording, however, is bent to declare the substance of the false documents to be true, which is just too lame to allow me to finish the book. I perused enough to be disgusted with the caliber of the writing, but must admit a degree of envy at the money he's making. When all is said and done, however, I confess that I would prefer not to be in his shoes when it's over, to be known worldwide as a cheap hack without hope of producing a truly literary manuscript.

I wouldn't let this moo-yak write an obituary for a goldfish.


----------



## Blossom

I've not actually read the Da Vinci Code, and I can't say I particularly want to, but my brother has and he said it was "airport fiction of the worst kind" and told me to read it just so I can have an opinion on it. He also said the book basically consists of "Puzzling problem - conviently useful flashback - puzzle solved". 

That aside, what annoys me when listening to people harp on about it is they way so many take it seriously. The key word is "fiction" - look it up. But again, I haven't read the book, so possibly they have good reason to take it seriously. 

I also get annoyed when people have a go at Catholics for being offended by it. I'm a Catholic, and while I'm not particularly offended by the insinuations Dan Brown makes about the Catholic Church (I know enough about the book to say that ^^) I'm angry that he's recieved such high praise for a book that claims Christianity is a con/part of a conspiracy, but if anyone dared to suggest such a thing about Islam, Judeaism or any other religion the world would be horrified. But people can say whatever they like about Catholicism or Christianity and noone cares. And Catholics have a perfect right to be upset that somone's badmouthing their religion. 

I think I might just read the book this summer so I can have my own say on its structure, grammar and characters.


----------



## Jukebox

attracted long enough attention for me to read it in couple of days with interesting facts about da vinci and the history of holy grail...
in some part i found it boring


----------

